Sunday 18 January 2015

Groundhog Day in Grace Communion International

The year is 1997. These are the words of Joe Tkach Jr.

"Our denominational governance is yet another major change we are in the process of making. The hierarchy of church structure is being modified to feature a board vested with authority both to appoint and to remove the president/pastor general. We also plan to limit the length of the pastor general’s term to a specified number of years. Until now, the office of pastor general has been a lifetime appointment made by the previous pastor general."
Joseph Tkach. Transformed by Truth.

Eighteen long years have gone by since those fine intentions were voiced. 2015 is the twentieth year Joe has warmed the throne.  Twenty years. So a simple question for Joe and those he deigns to share leadership with in Grace Communion International as we enter 2015.

Where are we up to with this?

Back in the day - when I was still running the precursor website to Ambassador Watch (then named The Missing Dimension) - which in turn morphed into the blog of the same name (archived here) I editorialised on Joe's leadership in a piece called "The Apostolic Chair". This was probably written circa 2002 - but that's a guess. The quotes are dated, and I wouldn't write it quite this way now, but more to the point. what's really changed in the Tkach church? One thing seems clear: Joe still has a vice-like grip on the reins.

The Apostolic Chair 
A screenshot of the old Missing Dimension site
Americans elect their president every four years, and wisely limit any one incumbent to two terms. The same cautious approach is evident in the constitution of many churches. A church, like a nation, should not become the personal fiefdom of any individual, no matter how sincere or gifted they might be. Yet Pastor General Joe Tkach was appointed, not elected. Moreover he's already served a lengthy term as spiritual leader of the Worldwide Church of God, and apparently has "life tenure". Doesn't that sound more like a fringe cult than an evangelical denomination?
Almost all churches, including related movements like the Church of God (Seventh Day) and the United Church of God, have systems in place that hold their leaders accountable to the membership. Church presidents serve a limited term. Not so the WCG. Joe Jr. (he prefers to be addressed as Doctor Tkach these days) holds the very same title and office that Herbert W. Armstrong held. And while Joe is happy to trash any number of church traditions and doctrines from the past, he shows no enthusiasm for seeking endorsement for his position as the church's top dog. No General Conference exists to provide a counterbalance to the Pastor General's authority. The power of the ministry has been shown to be severely limited: stand up to Joe and Co. and you're likely to become a "pastor without portfolio".
The traditional argument that the Pastor General is accountable solely to Christ won't wash. The theology on which that particular bit of self-deception was based has long since been swept away in the flood waters of change. Has Joe heard about "the priesthood of all believers"? His friends in the wider evangelical community certainly have. In practice, "accountable to Christ" means not accountable at all.
But it gets worse.  Legally it appears that the Worldwide Church of God is still "privately owned", and Pastor General Tkach is "sole proprietor". Caught off guard in a radio interview, he was asked what would stop him from just taking the money and leaving. The only reply he could come up with was that his family would stop him.
While Tkach might deny that he "owns" the church, with the current legal structure of the organization the reality is that he can hire and fire all board members at his personal discretion with absolutely no reason given. That's in writing. He can do whatever he wants with the corporation as long as it complies with government rules for a non-profit organization.
That things don't have to be this way was demonstrated recently by an independent Church of God congregation in Tulsa. The Journal, May 2001, reports the ordination of new pastor Ray Kurr. These Sabbatarian Christians have decided to bring the terminology of ministry into line with the service-oriented function originally intended.  "Minister" refers to all church members, since ministry ("serving") is the responsibility of all Christians. "Elder" refers to mature members of the congregation. "Pastor" refers to the job of leading the congregation
Ray Kurr comments "I showed that a pastor does not get between members and Jesus Christ." The article continues "In other church groups... a pastor had to grant permission for the general membership to do many things. 'As a pastor I have no intentions to behave in such an oppressive manner. If the Holy Spirit is moving you to benefit other churches with special music or take a group of friends of the congregation to help at the local shelter, just do it.'"
Joe might regard the members of this local church group as "legalists" due to some of their doctrinal beliefs. Yet these people have a fuller grasp of the freedom of the gospel than the top leadership in Pasadena demonstrate. Here's what one member recently posted on a news board:
The ministers have their marching orders and you will see more and more of this coming up soon... the subject of "days" [to worship on] seems to show the most clearly how things are being done...
We were given the right [for local churches] to choose the days ourselves. No real restrictions were placed on us and I felt Wow! this is a real empowering of the people. Well, it hasn't turned out that way. The clear motive now is a complete move from our past traditions to mainstream ones. The people may have chosen to keep the older ones but the ministry are to move us along. So there really wasn't a choice after all.
This is not empowering the people. One leading evangelistic advisor, I believe he is from Australia, said that a church should be full of lots of "ministers" and one "enabler" [something Ray Kurr understands]. The level of control on the WCG members is not unlike the Roman Catholics or even the Mormons for that matter.
Empowering the people is a scary thing. It means that you will not be able to control everything the way you would like. But maybe what this produces is something wonderful for the people.
Here's what Michael Feazell said back in 1996, speaking to a conference of regional pastors.
"The church needs to be a priesthood of believers... It needs to be doing ministry. Everybody in the church has a stake in that--whether it's women, men, teens or children."
Stakeholders must have a voice. They are not powerless, passive observers.
The simple truth may well be that Joe doesn't trust the church he presumably serves. He won't risk relaxing the reins lest people come up with ideas he doesn't endorse. Perhaps Joe considers himself indispensable. Perhaps he's a control freak. Could it be that he is unwilling to lose his comfortable sinecure?
Pastor General Joe has been chief shepherd of his dwindling flock for far longer than is decent without, at the very least, endorsement from the membership. How long will he remain on his pontifical throne? (even the pope is elected by a college of cardinals). Will he be Pastor General for life - a religious version of Fidel Castro?
Michael Feazell writes in the July 2001 Worldwide News
"If your church is a spiritual detriment to you, then you should consider finding another one... When the leader of a church indicates that he is God’s unique messenger or special representative in comparison with other Christian ministers...  then you have another example of a church that is spiritually detrimental to its members." 
Wise words. But what about churches where the leaders have safely elevated themselves beyond the influence of the members? A church, for example, that permits only token involvement of it's members in governance at either local or denominational level? How can Feazell justify the office of Pastor General and the hierarchical structure of the church in light of his own statement?
Tkach is on record as saying: "This fellowship has always been Episcopal, which is hierarchical..." Perhaps so. But this fellowship had always been Sabbatarian too, but that wasn't allowed to stand in the way of change. Even if an "Episcopal" model is to be used, there would need to be a long hard look at the parliamentary procedures actually used by the groups like the Episcopal Church; procedures which do indeed involve representative bodies of lay members at all levels.  The Worldwide Church of God is out on a limb when it claims "episcopacy" as some kind of precedent for leadership by a clique or self appointed oligarchy. It is no such thing.
Joe has been single-minded in his efforts to inveigle his way into the evangelical mainstream. But despite cuddling up to evangelical leaders, his leadership style arguably has more in common with Louis Farrakhan than Billy Graham.
They used to say in Pasadena that the only thing that would topple Herbert Armstrong from his throne would be the Second Coming.
Apparently some things don't change.
Has it changed even yet? And if not, why not?


  1. Here's why not: Joe Jr. enjoys a good income and lots of perks as Pastor General. Joe Jr. got lucky - he inherited a lucrative lifetime position from his father. With his skill set, he could not afford anywhere near his current lifestyle in any other job. Joe Jr. probably meant those words when he wrote them. He knew what was right. But since then, reality has smacked him in the face. He's got a good thing going and he's not about to give that up.

  2. If I were Joe, I'd be asking myself two questions.

    1). Has anyone who is qualfied to replace me come along?

    2). What if the next pastor general were to reverse all of the corrections? Is that even worth taking a chance upon?

    He's probably concerned about all the children who would once again be beaten, the worse than Santa Clause lies and manipulation surrounding British Israelism being revived and perpetrated, a resurgence of angry, growling, HWA-style authority, and a number of other issues.

    People have a lot of divergent opinions regarding the Tkaches, but Joe Jr. is a buffer, much needed at this point, because ACOGdom is still very unstable.
    There just have not been enough miles traveled to put the old toxic cult at a safe distance in the rear view mirror. What you would really hope to see in the mirror is smoke rising from a blown engine, and all the tires popped! All things considered, Joe is probably is worth far more than he is actually being paid!


    1. With all due respect Bob, I think you've missed the point. It's the continuation of the hierarchic model that poses the biggest threat. Accountability and the legitimation of leadership through a process of endorsement by the membership is the only way, in the long term, to ensure that a church stays on the right path. Not talking doctrinally - that's another matter - but in terms of avoiding spiritual abuse. It's not Joe's call as to who replaces him. That belongs to the membership, and there are a wide range of ways that can be accomplished. The only way a new Pastor General could put things into reverse would be if there were another Pastor General appointed without a mandate. Solution: systemic change that sees the office of PG either abandoned completely or transformed with a strict set of checks and balances.

      Besides, let's get real, all the folk who'd take GCI back to the Dark Ages have up and gone. While the broader post-WCG movement is incredibly unstable, that is hardly true of those who have remained in the parent body. A five year buffer might have been excusable. Not a twenty year buffer.

      And, if they were given a chance, far better leaders than Joe would rise. I could name you several.

    2. I agree with you, Gavin, to the extent that we are actually discussing a legitimate church here. Unfortunately, most everything which has received the kiss of Herbert W. Armstrong largely revolves around authority, and money. And, I am not sure those factors are no longer preeminent. This would seem to make the ashes or ruins more akin to a political movement, vulnerable to coups des etat and revolution. If there were ever a return to the alleged 18 "restored truths" would most of the splinter leaders return to the mother ship? If they did not, numerous members might.

      In my years away from the Armstrong movement, I have witnessed much better church government. I attended a non- ACOG church, as an example, where the candidates for the board of elders were introduced on stage during services, and the church was instructed to comment on the worthiness of the candidates over the next thirty days. If anything detrimental surfaced, and the allegations survived investigation, basically that individual's candidacy was finished. This, of course, got the entire congregation involved in church government, and I found that to be refreshing. There was often tremendous shock over ordinations in the old WCG! WCG spoke quite a bit about their version of the Holy Spirit, but apparently didn't trust "it's" influence sufficiently in the minds and lives of the members.

      I think we might actually agree on the key issues here. Just a minor difference in perspective. There are profound reasons why I did not embrace GCI following my return to faith, not the least of which are my own personal trust issues. I wanted new tires, not retreads.


  3. I must confess that I really do not understand what you guys have against "Joe, Jr."? Technically, he has made all the changes in doctrine that most of you have proposed. The only thing I can see that he hasn't done is dissolve the Church, and why you seem to think that is a good idea is beyond me? I know "Dr. Tkach", and he is an incredibly nice guy, and sincere. HE had personal issues with HWA, which I will not elaborate on; but considering how much most here seem to despise HWA, you would think that "Joe" would be the recipient of continual praise from you. Doesn't seem to happen.

    Kind of reminds me of my ex-wife.....never satisfied.

  4. I don't really see a need for GCI.

    Isn't there a nice Protestant Church near you? I mean with a building and everything? Without all the baggage of drama?

    1., uh...I mean, yeah and there is also the idea that since the "word" is complete and canonized and there are no more apostles...who need a church anyway?

  5. Larry, I'm sorry, but your inability to satisfy your ex-wife is not a topic I can comment on.

    However, my juxtaposition toward the present Tkach, I can comment on.
    I've heard it said that his detractors are those who wish that he had not deviated from the teachings of Herbert Armstrong.
    In the case of very many people, this is not realistic.
    The problem is that Joe Jr promised financial transparency which never materialized, and also promised that a new election for a new Pastor General would happen- but that also never materialized.

    Am I wrong in remembering that these were promises made for an acceptance into mainstream Christianity? Is it now time that Joe Jr's promises were evaluated, to see how he's progressed toward those promised goals?
    If not, what time-frame would you suggest?

    Larry, for many people, "Joe" is not the recipient of continual praise as your logic portends he should be, and hopefully now you'll understand some of the why of it.

    1. Since you brought it up, please explain precisely how a "new election" for Pastor General would take place? Who would be voting? What credentials would be necessary in order to cast a vote? What if he was elected by such an election? Would that stop the complaining? Are there other potential nominees seeking the office? If so, who?
      When it comes to financial "transparency", what are you looking for? Salaries of employees? Donors? Liabilities? Expenses?

  6. So now it's "Dr." Tkach? What did he do, use the church's money to go out and get a worthless "Doctor of Divinity" degree?

    The man is a liar and a thief. He took assets donated by people with a specific set of beliefs and spent them on himself as he pursued goals exactly opposite the original intent for which these monies were donated. He promised to do the right thing but instead did the selfish thing. And he continues to do so. Can you not understand why we are against this?

  7. Larry asks, "Since you brought it up, please explain precisely how a "new election" for Pastor General would take place?"

    Larry, did I miss something, or wasn't it Joe Jr himself (or the ghost writer of his Master's Thesis) who promised a new election for Pastor General within the time that's long expired by now?

    Since such an election was promised, wouldn't it be incumbent on the church leaders to devise a fair election plan, and to implement it within the promised time frame? (And not have you throw it on me- as in 'explaining how I would do it' ?)