Wednesday, April 26, 2006

No more Ambassador Centre





Jesus Loves Fellowship's Anne Hanna gives her correspondence about the closure of Ambassador Centre at Azusa Pacific University.

In the April 12, 2006 Ministerial Update, Pastor General Joseph Tkach made the announcement that Ambassador Center at Azusa Pacific University was closing.
This is a LONG overdue decision. Established in 1997 the Center saw it's first graduates in 1999. During the years since then it has had an average of 4 to 5 grads each year.
"I am pleased to announce that Russell Duke has been appointed President of Ambassador College of Christian Ministry. We want to thank Russell for his service to our young people at the Ambassador Center at Azusa Pacific University and are excited that he will be joining us full-time to focus on pastoral and leadership education. The Ambassador Center will close in June.
Upon the close of Ambassador University in 1997, Russell moved from Big Sandy, Texas, where he served as President of AU, to work for Azusa Pacific University under a joint project funded by APU and WCG. Over nine years, we have been able to assist 55 WCG students with their Christian education at APU. More than 30 students have graduated, and many are serving today in WCG congregations, with some of them leading worship and other ministries in our churches.
Several factors have led us to close the Ambassador Center in favor of putting greater emphasis on serving the educational needs of pastors, ministry leaders and WCG members. So, effective in June, Russell will be joining the staff in Glendora where he will commit his time to develop the ACCM Advanced Diploma program. "I'm looking forward to developing courses in theology and pastoral leadership for ministers and members. Many of the courses I have taught at Ambassador and at APU can be adapted for our online program, and now I can have more time to focus that part of my ministry."
Due to Russell’s transition over from APU and the move of the denominational office, we will not be running any classes this spring. ACCM classes will resume in the summer, followed by a second session this fall. " (April 12, 2006 Ministerial Update from the Pastor General)
Russel Duke now serves as executive director of the academic council of ACCM.
Back in 1997, the church described Ambassador Center as:
"The mission statement of Ambassador Center is: Provide a central focus for WCG members who are committed to sound Christ-centered education in liberal arts and theology in order to establish a trained laity and ministry for Christian service and leadership in the WCG, while participating in the interdenominational vision at APU. "
So it probably now seen as unnecessary since the church offers ACCM to its members and ministry.
Big problem is that Azusa IS accredited and ACCM IS NOT.
With the WCG so small and amazingly showing signs of being strapped for cash despite selling its major asset, how practical is ACCM?

Posted by Felix Taylor, Jr. at 9:24 PM | | Comments

You go girl!!! Raise a little hell, raise a little hell, raise a little hell on Gerald Flurry!!!














(I want to thank "Woohoo" for letting me republish this on my blog, I truly like the way this woman thinks!)

One of my hobbies is to read articles from the WCG and write my comments to the cult leader. Guess I'll have to start doing this with the Trumpet as well. I do it for my own entertainment, but I also do it for those who have to confront this tripe on a regular basis.
This article was one that I found both funny and haunting. Can something be both?
My comments in red. That makes them holy...LOL.

Overpraised Children Friday, April 14, 2006 http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=article&id=2146 “I am even more amazing than I thought.” “Today I will remind myself that I am a marvel.” These syrupy “thoughts for the day,” found in the book Today I Am Lovable: 365 Positive Activities for Kids, represent a myth that infects modern child rearing and education. This false idea, intended to help our children, actually damages them.
What is it? That praise is not just the best, but in fact the only, motivator for children.
Somehow, I can guess what motivator you would prefer.
This idea saturates children’s programs and interactive toys and games. When a child does something right, rather than a simple “That’s right!” they say, “Wow—you’re really smart!”
God forbid that children should think that they are smart. They might grow up to think for themselves. Can't have that, now can we?
American schools in particular emphasize self-esteem as the chief virtue,divorced from achievement or even effort. Thus, children are routinelysheltered from the sting of failure—and therefore trapped in a sunny fantasy world in which bad behavior and poor performance have no negative consequences.
The kernel of truth in this myth is that children grow up and perform best in a positive environment—that an enduring climate of criticismcan be withering. Of course we want our children to be confident, well-adjusted and happy. But overpraise is not the way to get them there.
An example of taking something that nearly everyone believes, then turning it into a total disdain for all praise.
If children grow up best in a positive environment, and if you really care about how children grow up, then it must mean that you believe that the environment of the PCG is positive. Either you are deluded, or you are sick, calculating bastards. (Editor's note: how about both?! I think so.)
In a book called The Feel-Good Curriculum: The Dumbing Down of America’sKids in the Name of Self-Esteem, Maureen Stout pinpoints several destructivemyths that have taken root in our educational system—including: high expectations damage self-esteem; evaluation is punitive, stressful and damaging to self-esteem; discipline is bad for self-esteem; effort is more important than achievement; it is the teacher’s, not the student’s, responsibility to ensure learning.
Ah, we have an expert quoted. I guess you want me to feel non-expert in believing the opposite. Well, I will take it for granted that you actually read Dr. Stout's book and not just the blurb on Amazon. Personally, I think that it is okay to feel good about yourself for no good reason.
Let’s face facts: High self-esteem is wildly overrated. Repeated studies have proven that bloated self-worth doesn’t improve a child’s academic performance, strengthen his interpersonal relationships, help him avoid self-destructive behavior or translate into adult success. In fact, it often hinders a person in all these areas.
Cite your "repeated" studies, please. I guess the Plain Truth about Child Rearing would solve all of these problems?
Is this any surprise? A child raised on the notion that he is a marvel—just as he is—has no motivation to improve.
Wrong. Because he feels that he has inherent self-worth, he is not afraid to try new things, expand his horizons. Even if he fails, he has not failed...he has tried and learned something in the process.
Stout makes a strong case that these ideas, which infect our public schools from kindergarten through college, lead directly to narcissism (preoccupation with self), detachment from one’s community, rejection ofabsolute truth, and cynicism. She also shows a correlation with the dumbing down of curricula, grade inflation, loss of motivation (among teachers as well as students), an unmerited sense of entitlement and the ridiculing of critical thinking skills.
Narcissism? Preoccupation with self? Ridiculing of critical thinking skills? Wow, Gerald, you must have done really well in public school. I thought Ambassador College was the only place that could have systematically produced such effects in adults.
Do we really want our children thinking, “I am even more amazing than I thought”? As one educator put it, who in the world wants to hang out with someone who thinks like that? Studies have shown that self-esteem can actually become self-delusion—a conviction that you are more popular, more capable, more loved, than is really the case. Such self-centered attitudes only alienate other people. At the same time—almost paradoxically—the overpraised child can be addicted to approval from others.
Could being addicted to approval have anything to do with giving oneself such illustrious titles as "Apostle?"
Children who are taught self-worth with no link to personal achievement generally face crushing shocks when reality finally comes knocking, challenging their artificially high opinions of themselves. As we approach adulthood, praise dries up; life’s trials get tougher. The overpraised child, having long been shielded from small failures, finds sudden, big failures overwhelming.
Correction: if they are not taught self worth, they end up as robots, blindly seeking after the praise of those above them morally and spiritually. They do not think.
As for praise drying up in adulthood, I guess you have really handed your members the big dose of reality, right?
When we look at this issue spiritually, we really see its sinister side. The originator of the self-esteem movement is Satan, whose heart was lifted up because of his beauty, who was obsessed with his own brightness (Ezekiel 28:17). This spirit being, the prince of the power of the air (Ephesians 2:2), pumps our carnal human nature with his egomaniacal attitudes. (Our free booklet What Is Human Nature? explains this truth.) In other words, our children already get enough training in loving themselves above all others without any prodding from misguided educators and overeager parents.
We know how best to teach your kids to love themselves. Educators? Misguided. Parents? Overeager to protect.
God, eminently aware of our vain proclivities, filled His Bible with warnings against flattery and insincere praise like these: “… a flattering mouth worketh ruin”—“A man that flattereth his neighbour spreadeth a net for his feet” (Proverbs 26:28; 29:5). In Psalm 49, God spells out “the fate of those who have foolish confidence” (verse 13, Revised Standard Version), and it isn’t pretty.
It's called a Lake of Fire. Don't be confident; just keep sending in the cash. It's fire insurance.
That’s not to say that praising our children is wrong, of course. We should think on what is praiseworthy and commendable (e.g. Philippians 4:8). But empty,indiscriminate praise means nothing. Children should receive sincere, specific praise when appropriate. When they scrawl out a crayon picture of clouds, “That’sgorgeous!” is less meaningful—and less truthful—than something along the lines of,“I like how you’re using different colors,” or, “Wow—you’re learning how to drawon paper what you see outside.”
In other words, praise only when kids are learning to do things your way.
Such conversations also lend themselves more to your giving gentle guidance on how to improve the next time. Handled correctly, constructive criticism won’t make our children flinch. We want them to accept it as a boon to personal growth and a crucial part of life. Loving correction, graciously received, is one of life’s greatest gifts. That is a lesson even our children can begin to understand.
Let me reword this paragraph for you. "We want people to receive correction from us without any complaints. Life would be so much damned easier for us if you people didn't have your own will and your own thoughts."
Rather than trying to inject our children with self-worth, we need to help them see reality—the way God helps His children. And reality is this: You are a child. As you strive, you grow. You have much yet to learn. But I love you, and always will—even when you fail—as long as you never give up.
Try modeling this for your members by actually trying it with the adult ones. Just drop the "as long as you never give up" part. Conditional love breeds madness. Oh, wait -- you aren't ethical people, are you? Never mind.
Consider: It is only when we recognize our own inadequacies that we can see the need to seek God’s help to live the right way—the way that will bring happiness. As Jesus Christ told us, “Without me ye can do nothing”—clearly the opposite of self-worth. In the end, our children will need to recognize, deep in their heart,that, like all human beings, they can do nothing without God.
Wow, I loved how you wrapped that all up at the end. Just like Spokesman's Club.
So that's what you ministers are doing in berating people -- getting them to live the right way by showing them their failures. What pompous morons you all are!
We can do nothing without God. I kind of thought that God gave us all free will, but maybe I was mistaken.

You GO GIRL, you give these manipulative twerps hell lady!!!


Posted by Felix Taylor, Jr. at 8:04 PM | | Comments

A little comedy satire folks...


















We're brothers...we're happy and we're singin and we're colored...give me a high FIVE!!

Posted by Felix Taylor, Jr. at 7:52 PM | | Comments

Monday, April 03, 2006

More about the WCG name change



It doesn't take an Einstein to know that the Worldwide Church of God thrives on chaos, putting its members under a state of alterness. The issue of changing its denominational name has logically been no exception. Here is one insider's thoughts about it a little more in depth:


To quote the Chinese proverb: "Becareful what you wish for, you might just get it."
Alas this unfortunately is what happens when you ask people for their opinion ... they give it to you. ;-)
Actually it looks like Tkach and company are a bit frustrated at the opposition they received to the name Grace International Communion.
The original name "Grace International Felllowship" actually had nothing to do with any input from members as far as I can see. It was named at conferences as one that was liked by Headquarters ... I know from comments one WCG minister made that this was well known to be regarded as the "favorite".
Then however they discovered a few legal draw backs to that name. So Tkach and his hand picked council came up with the next best thing. This way they could still keep it close to the original by changing "Fellowship" to "Communion".
As Bernie stated this was a suggestion from the leadership not the members. "The requirement that our new name be novel so that others cannot object that the name has already been taken raises an important irony about the word “communion” as proposed previously by church leaders and the Advisory Counsel of Elders."
Suggestions from the membership worldwide do not seem to have matched up to the leader's favorite.
I believe for appearance's sake they asked members for their input on Grace International Communion.
If it had been just a few negative replies then I would be comfortable in saying the name would still be used. Judging by Bernie's tone it may have been much more negativity than they expected.
So now back to the drawing board and not just that they are now stuck with the process they have put in place. Propose the name then wait for feedback.
If they were to change the process by giving several suggestions for members to give input on, an idea Realist put forward, well I would just love that.
Besides looking a bit heavy handed on this, the DELIGHTFUL upside to all this mess could be a bigger problem down the road for Dr. Tkach.
Namely, that in "a matter concerning the church" they are deciding it by a form of member VOTING. That could send a signal to the membership of a change in decision making. A change where the HQ is not only willing to listen but their decisions CAN be swayed by strong member opinion.
IF MEMBERS WERE TO REALIZE THIS, WELL IT COULD BE A WHOLE BRIGHT NEW DAY IN THE WCG IF THAT WERE THE CASE !! :-)
You think that was the end of this person's assessment of what's going on? Wait, it is NOT over yet!


One thing that puzzles me in regard to the request for member input on the new name suggestion is that they asked at all. It would have been easier to look at the proposed names that came in from different congregations and after vetting them for trademark etc. just made an announcement.
What I do seem to sense is a change in the membership which has been happening gradually over time. I think is just a natural consequence after all the failures and delays since 1995.
I do not think the WCG is doing very well morale wise and this maybe a growing worry at HQ. Thus an attempt to look as if they are trying to involve the members.
The main focus of the church for so long was how much things would change and how free the church would be to move forward after the campus sold. But when this happened what did the members get? Nothing. No figures, no idea where the money went and what it would be used for.
That may have been a turning point after all the failures since the changes. Members held in there for years and they were shut out at the end.
Now they have a Pastor General with a terrible track record whose word I would suggest many no longer trust.
I do think HQ misjudged the name change process. People seem to be finding their voice. That I see as a great thing but long over due.
Bernie Schnippert's reply was in typical fashion. A tone he has used before with the Pasadena residents when they voiced opposition and concern over the church's high density housing plans for the campus.
The new financial model has given the congregations a sense of their own power locally whereas in the past everyone followed the leader. But the leader has very few resources now adays and the congregations are having to fill the gap. Also the minister is more or less a local man or one that has been there for many, many years because transfers are costly. His concern has become more locally focused because of the limited and greatly reduced contact with Pasadena.
If the WCG leadership do not take substancial steps to make themselves accountable and more open to the membership I would not be surprised to see a split in the church.
Joseph Tkach made a lot of promises but after a while people may just get feed up waiting. How many more years of their lives will they have to waste hoping for changes that may very well not come?There are many accountable denominations in the greater Christian community that the congregations could affliate themselves with.
My pick for a new name for WCG would be: Stubborn Dead Church Walking Fellowship!

Posted by Felix Taylor, Jr. at 8:26 AM | | Comments

Search


Last posts

Archives

Links

Subscribe to this blog's feed
[What is this?]
Powered by Blogger
& Blogger Templates