I reviewed the links and note that the GC, NAD, and OC agreed in 2007 to proceed with the variance. Since then there has been turnover of officers and the initial transaction agreement was lost until it was discovered by the present OC officers. In summary the “tithes” were spread within a period of years and in reality the GC was obligated to inform the OC every time they received the “tithe” monies for deposit. Why they did not relay the transaction each time they received the monies to the OC escapes me. The preferred and “above board” would have been to notify the OC conference as a courtesy every time the GC received the “tithes” per policy. The burden was on the GC because they had to account for the bank deposit. For this reason my opinion still stands that the GC was negligent. Someone got hood-winked and it was not the GC. Why the OC apologized also escapes me. They did nothing wrong.
OREGON CONFERENCE CALLS ON GC TO COMPLY WITH TITHE POLICY
“When another large anonymous tithe contribution arrived at the General Conference more recently, the local conference and division were not even notified, in spite of the fact that Working Policy outlines how such a tithe payment is to be handled. North American Division personnel learned about it in committee conversations with the General Conference.”
As it turned out, the above reported conversation took place among GCAS people at the NAD and GC. None of them directed their inquiries to the Executive Officers since SOP did not allow the latter’s presence.
Please read again part of Juan Prestol-Puesan’s report to AC2018 I posted above.
GC Treasury provides regular financial statements disclosing application and activity.
Detailed report “Extraordinary Tithe” included and voted by General Conference Sessions 2010 and 2015 as part of the Treasurer’s Report. Etc.
Local conference/mission/field presidents are invited to attend Annual Council meetings of the GC Executive Committee when it is held within the territory of their Division.
I know of some conference presidents who can’t read financial statements intelligently. Sorry. I hope this wasn’t the case with the Oregon Conference chief executive. In my time, a BA in religion and history.curricular requirement, not optional, included 5 units of Basic Accounting plus 10 units of Management.
The policy clearly states ““GC Working Policy V 09 05 5.c defines the process that is to take place when an entity other than the local church or Conference (Union/Division/General Conference) receives a direct tithe contribution. The policy states: “Since tithe is returned to the Lord, not given , it is inappropriate for that tithe to come with stipulations as to how and where it is to be used. After being receipted by the treasury where it was received, such tithe is to be returned anonymously to the local conference /mission field/union of churches where the member holds membership .” (Italics added)”
So how is this responsibility best discharged? Not by printing financial statements and expecting officers to read and understand. It is best discharged by returning the tithe to OC. That is what the policy states and anything less than this is negligence worthy of being reviewed by GC Review Boards for non-compliance.
And that’s the problem, because it teaches local congregation to look to GC for answers, which actually validates much of the recent power-grab as legitimate.
We can’t assume that GC actions are intended to be sinister. From organizational perspective of “corporate policy” it’s actually expected. GC is “the brain”, and the job of the brain is to make sure the feet won’t inadvertently step into the proverbial manure, simply because it “feels warmer” to that particular foot that has no sense of smell or taste.
So, let’s face it, the video wouldn’t be better received if Ted Wilson and Co. would be explaining the decision and pleading for unity, and justifying their action as necessary to maintain hermeneutical coherence that was important to historical Adventism.
If it was a generic video that was detached from Compliance doctrine, people would likely cheer it as a great means to demonstrate our unity and diversity :). It’s actually fairly-well produced by typical SDA production standards (which are usually stuck in 80s), although it ran waaaay to long.
I think that the recent issue is simply the proverbial last straw for many people how are frustrate to see their local congregation stagnate, while they ship most of the resources “up the chain”. And to see these being use as a “marketing-driven response” to their concerns could be disheartening… but we should discuss these things as adult in order to send a message to CG to stop treating us like children.
I don’t think churches are looking to the GC for answers. They have had no answers despite their attempts to do “research,” assemble a TOSC to “study” the issue, issue threats, attempt to take away voice and vote in the Executive Council, create as a legal bypass the compliance committees to make coercive methods seem less hostile, and attempt to rush through documents that attorneys pronounced were “new territory.”
Local church members as a whole may not even be keeping up with corporate level actions, but functioning in their local church without taint of politics.
Meantime, women continue to be called of God to spiritual leadership, churches continue to recognize these gifts of the Spirit and ordain and commission them. The Gospel continues to be spread despite that political shenanigans and maneuvers to stop more than half of the members to participate. Their attempts to make women ineligible to lead are egregious and dangerous.
That is true. In Canada, many congregants shut down any discussion of women’s ordination, summarily sweeping the issue under the carpet. That is why I visit Spectrum because on this site, everyone is able to freely express his or her views whether they be pro- or anti- so.
"but we should discuss these things as adult in order to send a message to CG to stop treating us like children."
Sounds reasonable- but we have been discussing things for years now. I am positive that after all this time, they (GC officials) have had more than ample time to "understand/contemplate, etc.”. Their corporate behavior follows their thinking (that we ARE children). This type of leadership is more acceptable in some other countries and cultures that are used to Patriarchal behavior and control.