Unfit leaders.

[Billy D]

That was the strategy of the BOD at twi, was it not?

Sad thing for CES, you are stuck with em. Can't vote them out.. at least three on top.

Actually, that is not true, since one of the three founding members (JAL) is no longer on the board. To my understanding, a founding member can be removed from office via resignation or by a unanimous vote from the rest of the board members. MG could not be voted off b/c one other member sided with him....thus the current situation. I won't get into the "clergy community" issue.

I'm really close to these guys (it's no secret that I am a former home office employee), and I know that each person on the board (including MG) has worked tirelessly and, in differing degrees depending on the person, selflessly to help people. They really don't sit around plotting ways to manipulate and use people for their own personal gain, and none of them (to my knowledge) is getting or has gotten rich off of the donations sent in to the office in Indy.

That being said, I do agree that the lack of accountability to others OUTSIDE of the board "inner circle" (which is very closed some times and not so closed at others) is alarming and highly problematic. However, EVERY church has an "inner circle" - a relatively small, close knit group of people who go about the business of running the church. The "laity" (for lack of a better term) does not need to know every tiny crisis/disagreement within the church. And if every church were a wide-open democracy nothing would ever get done!

The question is in the balance. Since CES/STF is a non-profit, I hope to see more of an adherence to established guidelines for internal and external oversight. More transperancy, so to speak. I know that some of the lax approach to such guidelines resulted from a consious effort to keep things more like a "family" and less like a "business." However well intentioned, I think this was a bit naive. Families are messy - the guidelines and structure are there to HELP and PROTECT people - including leadership.

Just some thoughts....

[Ham]

Well, I for one, as a lowly squirrel, would never argue with the great Denny Crane.

So, is J.L. not on the board?

did he resign, or allow himself to be voted out?

enquiring squirrels would like to know, or at least to understand..

I've been working over this big research project for my Literature class. Funny thing, every time I look over the work, my opinion has changed.

[Holy Smoke]

My understanding was that John Lynn resigned from the board several years ago.

[caribousam]

My understanding was that John Lynn resigned from the board several years ago.

That is a good question. Part of the problem with CES has been lack of transparency about

things. I'd had a sort of arms length relationship with CES for several years, but it was always

hard to tell what was going on among the leaders in Indiana. In John Lynn's case, he was off

the board, the he seemed to be still really involved at one time...etc. Secrecy about these kinds

of things doesn't seem to work well for anyone.

[caribousam]

Actually, that is not true, since one of the three founding members (JAL) is no longer on the board. To my understanding, a founding member can be removed from office via resignation or by a unanimous vote from the rest of the board members. MG could not be voted off b/c one other member sided with him....thus the current situation. I won't get into the "clergy community" issue.

I'm really close to these guys (it's no secret that I am a former home office employee), and I know that each person on the board (including MG) has worked tirelessly and, in differing degrees depending on the person, selflessly to help people. They really don't sit around plotting ways to manipulate and use people for their own personal gain, and none of them (to my knowledge) is getting or has gotten rich off of the donations sent in to the office in Indy.

That being said, I do agree that the lack of accountability to others OUTSIDE of the board "inner circle" (which is very closed some times and not so closed at others) is alarming and highly problematic. However, EVERY church has an "inner circle" - a relatively small, close knit group of people who go about the business of running the church. The "laity" (for lack of a better term) does not need to know every tiny crisis/disagreement within the church. And if every church were a wide-open democracy nothing would ever get done!

The question is in the balance. Since CES/STF is a non-profit, I hope to see more of an adherence to established guidelines for internal and external oversight. More transperancy, so to speak. I know that some of the lax approach to such guidelines resulted from a consious effort to keep things more like a "family" and less like a "business." However well intentioned, I think this was a bit naive. Families are messy - the guidelines and structure are there to HELP and PROTECT people - including leadership.

Just some thoughts....

Some thoughts from an insider/outsider:

Those are interesting insights. It seems that CES - wittingly or unwittingy - developed a sort of clique-y way of being. There were the

inner circle leaders in Indiana, and then another wider circle of Indiana folks around that, and then everybody else. It seems that the inner

circle was trying to keep things very close to the vest, maybe out of a concern that too much outside influence might bring impure stuff

into the ministry.

But it seems that the overly controlling ways of the inner circle left many folks who were not part of that clique feeling very out of

the loop. There was a lack of opportunity for many (like myself) who were excited to do all kinds of things to promote God and

Christ in everyday life and culture....but creative ideas were shot down pretty quickly.

So the inner circle lacked accountability, but they wanted strong accountability from those outside the circle. I can see

how that would cause problems.

Edited April 12, 2007 by caribousam

[WordWolf]

(snip)

That being said, I do agree that the lack of accountability to others OUTSIDE of the board "inner circle" (which is very closed some times and not so closed at others) is alarming and highly problematic. However, EVERY church has an "inner circle" - a relatively small, close knit group of people who go about the business of running the church. The "laity" (for lack of a better term) does not need to know every tiny crisis/disagreement within the church. And if every church were a wide-open democracy nothing would ever get done!

I draw a distinction between "disagreements" and "crises".

What is a "tiny crisis", anyway? A crisis that one wants to call "a disagreement"?

But churches are updated weekly as to what's going on. They have announcements, bulletins,

and now in the Information Age, they can have a mailing list for email.

The question is in the balance. Since CES/STF is a non-profit, I hope to see more of an adherence to established guidelines for internal and external oversight. More transperancy, so to speak. I know that some of the lax approach to such guidelines resulted from a consious effort to keep things more like a "family" and less like a "business." However well intentioned, I think this was a bit naive. Families are messy - the guidelines and structure are there to HELP and PROTECT people - including leadership.

Just some thoughts....

That is a good question. Part of the problem with CES has been lack of transparency about

things. I'd had a sort of arms length relationship with CES for several years, but it was always

hard to tell what was going on among the leaders in Indiana. In John Lynn's case, he was off

the board, the he seemed to be still really involved at one time...etc. Secrecy about these kinds

of things doesn't seem to work well for anyone.

Seems to work well for the top people, if they can manage to grab ALL the power

rather than just SOME of the power at the top...

it's DISASTROUS for everyone else...

Some thoughts from an insider/outsider:

Those are interesting insights. It seems that CES - wittingly or unwittingy - developed a sort of clique-y way of being.

There were the inner circle leaders in Indiana, and then another wider circle of Indiana folks around that,

and then everybody else. It seems that the inner circle was trying to keep things very close to the vest,

maybe out of a concern that too much outside influence might bring impure stuff into the ministry.

But it seems that the overly controlling ways of the inner circle left many folks who were not part of that clique feeling very out of

the loop. There was a lack of opportunity for many (like myself) who were excited to do all kinds of things to promote God and

Christ in everyday life and culture....but creative ideas were shot down pretty quickly.

So the inner circle lacked accountability, but they wanted strong accountability from those outside the circle. I can see

how that would cause problems.

"Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."

"The lessons repeat until they are learned."

[Billy D]

Well, I for one, as a lowly squirrel, would never argue with the great Denny Crane.

So, is J.L. not on the board?

did he resign, or allow himself to be voted out?

enquiring squirrels would like to know, or at least to understand..

I've been working over this big research project for my Literature class. Funny thing, every time I look over the work, my opinion has changed.

Lol....sadly, I only have the picture. I lack the Great Denny Crane's gifts of argumentation and persuasion. :)

No, JAL is not on the board and he is no longer paid staff. He resigned a few years back. In recent years, he has not had an official, public position with CES/STF, though is still involved. He attends conferences, helps run a small fellowship/bible study, and writes/edits publications.

[Ham]

Ah.. I think I "gawwt" it.

It's some kind of unholy trinity, you have J.S. the father, MG the errant "son", and J.L is the "ghost" writer. He's somehow absent, yet his effects are still felt..

edited to more closely match reality..

Edited April 16, 2007 by Mr. Hammeroni

[dmiller]

Ah.. I think I "gawwt" it.

It's some kind of unholy trinity, you have J.S. the father, MG the errant "son", and J.L is the "ghost" writer. He's somehow absent, yet his effects are still felt..

edited to more closely match reality..

Mr H. -- If you really want to *gawwt it*, pick up your phone and dial 1-888-255-6189.

If they are unfit, you can find out for yourself,

by questioning the principal folks at that number.

I did, and you can do the same.

While I have questions myself, I see statements like that

(as well as entire threads in the *ABOUT THE WAY* forum),

as cheap shots that (while questioning the validity of twi, etc.,)

demean the quality of GSC, and the purpose for which we are here.

Sometimes I wonder if we aren't all back in high school engaging in gossip.

I for one, have NO PROBLEM with exposing the evils of twi, ces, etc.

Maybe we can raise the bar, and engage in serious discussion,

rather than making flippant comments.

Do what you will, and I'll do the same.

As usual -- this is my (imo).

I've been ignored too many times to think that this post might have some credence to it.

But I will say -- GSC deserves better than what is being offered (these days).

(edited for spelling).

Edited April 17, 2007 by dmiller

[Ham]

Sadly, the "gossip column" here has more to offer than that sad group with delusions of prophethood among those on the top.

They never really left the way, and they admit it. "We've left with the GOLD".. "Eat the fish, spit out the bones..."

same sad posturing. Same arrogance, instead of "we are PREVAILING" the war cry is "we have the BEST PACKAGE". Where did they get 92.7 percent of their "package"?

Now they've turned on themselves. Maybe nowhere else to go.

I think for those who have thrown off the cult mindset, from the outside, it looks like a bad situation comedy. Or "survivor, Indiana". Sorry, that's the way I see it.

[Ham]

Honestly, with the effect of prophecy shenanigans and momentus, I think a more fitting comparison to be to the Three Stooges.

In my opinion.

[Ham]

To this day they pull out the lame "eat the fish, spit out the bones" analogy. Despite the fact that I can't stand the smell of fish, I did fish when I was young. Just couldn't eat what I caught, the rest of the family did though..

I caught a fish once, my dad says, "we don't eat those, THEY ARE ALL BONE"

it was a sucker..

[dmiller]

Sadly, the "gossip column" here has more to offer than that sad group with delusions of prophethood among those on the top.

They never really left the way, and they admit it. "We've left with the GOLD".. "Eat the fish, spit out the bones..."

same sad posturing. Same arrogance, instead of "we are PREVAILING" the war cry is "we have the BEST PACKAGE". Where did they get 92.7 percent of their "package"?

Now they've turned on themselves. Maybe nowhere else to go.

I think for those who have thrown off the cult mindset, from the outside, it looks like a bad situation comedy. Or "survivor, Indiana". Sorry, that's the way I see it.

Fair enough.