Mission Catalyst Network

[Kelly Youngberg]

Here's some Adventist news:

Mission Catalyst Network

[Naomi]

You're absolutely correct Doug. Prayer for the members of this group and for all with whom they interact. The good news is, God is still in control. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

[Jim]

Just a point of interest:

Ron Gladden will be answering questions sometime during the week of Sept. 5 on www.blacksda.com forum. There is a lot of good discussion taking place already.

[Fran]

This isn't good Adventist news for our denomination. This is a letter from the NAD about this Mission Catalyst Network.

This is that letter:

Seventh-Day Adventist Church

North American Division

August 10, 2004

[To]: Conference Presidents

North American Division

Dear President,

Ron Gladden met with me and two other church leaders for several hours this past Saturday night following the ASI meetings in Cincinnati. he outlines his plan to create a church planting ministry immediately. This follows on the heels of his termination from the Mid-America and North Pacific unions in March of this year. You can read the full plan that he shared with us on the ministry's website--www.missioncatalyst.org. Briefly his plan includes the following points:

* He is creating a very congregational network of churches committed to church planting.

*Churches in his network will subscribe to a set of beliefs similar to the Adventist Church's beliefs.

* Churches in his network will give 10% of their tithes and offerings to Gladden's ministry office.

* No church in his ministry network will return tithe or offerings to the conference--or any part of the Adventist Church.

* No pastors in his network will carry credentials from the Adventist Church.

* Ron indicated that he is aware that churches in his network cannot be part of the Adventist Church.

I am deeply saddened that Ron has chosen to develop a ministry that cannot work with the Adventist Church. (I even made one more appeal last evening to Ron, asking him to back away from this plan and build plans that can work within the Adventist Church.) He is, however, adamant that his plan--which he acknowledges saturday night will create a new denomination--is better than the church's governance structure and church planting plans.

We've had significant success in planting churches in the past 8 years since we first established the SEEDS conferences. We've planted about 1,000 churches, most of which are still healthy, growing parts of the denomination. On Saturday night, I asked Ron to continue to work within the church's successful program of church planting, but he said he had gone too far with his plans to turn back now.

[page 2]

I've included three things which I hope will be useful to you.

* Information about our growth in members and churches in the past 20 years that shows we have 1 million members and 5, 600 congregations in North America.

*Information about the growth of tithe and offerings in the past 20 years that shows members will give about $750 million this year, and $380 million in offerings to local churches, far more than the $55 million that members gave to the worldwide work of the church.

* A chart on the use of the tithe dollar and the 75% that is used for the ministry of conferences and churches.

You may already have heard from your union president about this, because we talked about this issue on a conference call today. We al hope this may be helpful information as you counsel with pastors and church members who may be contacted by Ron Gladden.

Very sincerely,

Don C. Schneider

President

North American Division

This scares me. I believe we are nearer to the end than we think.

[Jeannieb43]

Ron Gladden's version of his conversation with Elder Schneider is that Ron asked Schneider to let his ministry be included as a part of the NAD organization [something like ASI is], but Schneider refused.

The only difference, as I see it, is that Gladden's ministry will not spend money for overhead (such as owning real estate, or having a "Conference office"); it only goes into the actual seed money for planting new churches. Then the churches themselves support their own ministry once they're established, plus send 10% of their offerings to Mission Catalyst to provide seed money for more planting. The members must agree to a list of beliefs which are the SDA beliefs (minus any reference to coffee or jewelry, I think).

I heard a tape of Ron Gladden's presentation. I've never met him myself. He certainly sounds sincere.

And what's wrong with other voices proclaiming the message?? Do they have to be hired by the Conference in order to be valid?

[Gregory Matthews]

I do not see a real difference between what the two men say about the meeting. I think that they are substantially in agreement.

There is nothing wrong about "other voices" proclaiming the message. The point is to what extent should these "other voices" be considered to be Seventh-day Adventist? That is the central quesstion?

In what I say next, I am not stating a position on the rightness or wrongness of MCN. I am speaking from a practical standpoint:

1) MCN has organized in a manner that has clearly crossed the line of what the SDA Church will allow in regard to allowing an independent organization to be part of the organized SDA Church. Ron G. has been a part of the organized SDA Chruch for a long enough time, and worked on high enough levels, that I must assume that he recognized that such souch would happen when he set up his organizational framework. Therefore, I have to assume that he has known from the very beginning that MCN would not be allowed to remain in a relationship such as ASI members commonly have. I have to assume that he has planned from the practical standpoint, from the beginning, to go independent.

The above is not a judgement on him. Yes, we can wish this "other voice" well in the future.

Frankly, I suspect that with the passage of time, we will see more of this type of event happening.

2) It has been a while since I have read his statement of doctrinal requirements, and practices. But, as I recall, the has a statement that would likely make many SDA leaders, and members uncomfortable. Yes, it is similar to the SDA statement. But, it pushes the comfort zone of many.

Again, I am not saying that this is either right or wrong.

[Jeannieb43]

Ron Gladden commences his presentation (accompanied by PowerPoint, but as a tape listener I didn't have access to those charts) by pointing out how in these last days missions must be done by "thinking outside the box." He likens our present SDA organization to other Big Business, such as Chrysler, or Xerox, etc. Some of those companies have reinvented themselves and have "cut out the fat" in their overhead, thus devoting more of their funds to the actual product. Whereas, in our five-level hierarchical organization, more of our tithe money goes to administration than to evangelism.

His special concern is that vast amount of money which is being spent on running the Organization, rather than spent where it can do some good for the "end user" (presenting the message to the unchurched, as well as for the members and newly converted members).

That's why his plan is that each church must be started by consecrated, well-grounded Adventists. But it should be a "stripped down version" of administration. Each group should be able to make its own decisions without asking permission of higher levels of authority. And in order not to scare off the new members we shouldn't drum into them the 2300 Days, but we should preach the soon-coming Christ who has redeemed us.

[my feeble attempts at paraphrasing his message should not be taken as "gospel"!]

Well, I say Good for Them!

I realize there's room for doctrinal error to creep in. But we have that already, in our disputed interpretations of the investigative judgment and the six-day creation, etc. I don't believe God requires us to have a perfect understanding of Him. He meets each of us where we are.

So, IMHO, the MCN can't do any harm. And it might actually help spread the gospel faster.

P.S. Legally, MCN is forbidden from using the name "Adventist" in its churches. That law is a two-edged sword; it removes the "good" association with Adventism, but it also "protects" our dear SDA organization from "tainted doctrines."

And let me hasten to say, I'm a fourth-generation SDA and proud of it. I wouldn't change that for anything.

[Jeannieb43]

This recent article about the Atlantic Union Conference and its new media ministry reminded me again of MCN.

http://www.adventistreview.org/2005-1525/news.html

This article shows that the dedication program for this new Atlantic Union Media Ministry was shown live on 3ABN.

I can recall a day when 3ABN was not a part of the Adventist "organized work." But now that it has become successful (and perhaps for other reasons as well), the SDA Organization has embraced 3ABN and they are working hand in hand.

I don't know where 3ABN stands on the "organization chart" of the church. But it has come in from the "outside" and is now accepted as an arm of the organization.

I wonder if (someday in the future) MCN might also be embraced and welcomed. Because there is a need for independent ministries, IMHO. And we can't always ensure total similarity of belief--even if it were physically possible to have each new believer interviewed by a single examiner prior to baptism.

[Gregory Matthews]

ASI is an organization of SDA businesspeople that works closely with the SDA Chruch. 3-ABN is a very active member of ASI. While 3-ABN works quite closely with the SDA Church, at times, it is really not part of the organized SDA Church.

Mission Catylist Network is something of a different color. It has taken positions that make it impossible for it to become a part of the organized SDA Church. It has simply crossed the line. As long as it maintains those positions, it will never become a part of the SDA Church.

This is not taking a position on MCN. It is simply a fact. While it is not a part of the SDA Chruch, we can wish it will, and God's blessing.

[K]

Yep, they will never be part of the church because the choose to look outside the box and be about bringing people to the kindgom.

MCN is doing what the early founders of the Advent movement did. They are progressive, focused, hard working, and mission oriented. Not acceptable postions in the Adventist church right now.

K

[LynnDel]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

They are progressive, focused, hard working, and mission oriented. Not acceptable postions in the Adventist church right now.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

That may appear to be the case, especially when you live in an area that has made many corporate and individual efforts to reach out to the local community with little to show for it. It may also seem to be the case when there has been troubles both in the local church and in the conference. But I do know that many church leaders spend much of their time directing their efforts and prayers toward being progressive, focused, hard working, and mission oriented, and they try to find ways to help each individual member be the same.

I don't believe that the Adventist church frowns on progressive, focused, hard working, and mission oriented persons and movements. There are reasons the MCN idea wasn't espoused, and these have been discussed here before. While in general the idea seems plausible, some of the details cause difficulty.

MCN could well turn out to be an experiment, with either positive, negative, or neutral consequences. If it works, hallelujah, and if it doesn't, I hope the promoters will find ways to flex it, following whatever plan God has for them.

LD

[K]

Quote:

---

I don't believe that the Adventist church frowns on progressive, focused, hard working, and mission oriented persons and movements

---

[:"blue"] Then why would they threaten to remove our names from the books when we spoke to the MC people. Doesn't sound like they are too keen on any other way but theirs. It was the one of the biggest blows of my life to hear those words spoken to me. I doubt that I will be able to recover from the event. It has left me hurt and very disappointed in this church.[/]

[LynnDel]

K,

I have also experienced very hurtful words spoken by those who are employed by our church. In general, however, I don't find this to be the case. When leaders say and do cruel things, I just have to put it down to human weakness and lack of the love of God being present in the lives of certain individuals. Unfortunately, these experiences tend to color our view of the church, but I am trying not to let that happen to me. The most important thing is that we don't let these experiences color our view of God or put us into such discouragement that we lose our hold on Him.

In the past (1950s - 60s) I know the church made policies threatening membership when members expressed interest or curiosity in certain movements. I don't believe it is a general policy now, but I am sure there are some (not a majority, I don't think) in administrative positions who might like to make such a policy.

Could it be that God lets such experiences happen to us so that we will learn to depend on Him and not on the church? Could it be that God lets good seeds be scattered so that there will be wider-spread germination and a greater harvest?

LD

[darlene]

You are right LynnDel and K. Those working in 'the church' are not perfect. I happen to be a part of 'the church' and still have been deeply wounded and unfairly treated in the years I have worked for 'the church.' However, having said that, I have chosen to 'forgive and forget' because I know those I work with are human and imperfect. (myself included) Yes, I believe that the Lord is still in control of His church and he uses imperfect vessels to do His work. Those who misrepresent Him are accountable to Him, not to me. They will have to pay for their actions, not anyone else.

K don't let what church workers do to you affect your relationship with Christ. Look to Him, He will not fail you, others will.

[K]

Quote:

---

[:"blue"] K don't let what church workers do to you affect your relationship with Christ. Look to Him, He will not fail you, others will. [/]

---

I think that I'm where Bevin was years ago. I'm deciding if membership in the Country Club is more important than having a vibrant relationship with Christ.

Right now Jesus is ahead. He's all I need.

K

[Fran]

To all;

There is a fine line between being a Seventh-day Adventist Church member and a member of a church that says it teaches the SDA message minus a few points.

The ministries start out with very good intentions, but as time passes the private agendas start to appear. MC is tearing the Seventh-day Adventist church into pieces. Why can’t these vibrant, energetic members do their thing within the church?

The Seventh-day Adventist church has many vibrant, energetic members active for God within the Seventh-day Adventist church. When it comes to private ministries and private agenda’s, I take a good hard look at motives and intent. It is ever so hard to judge a book by its cover. Be careful.

These ministries will be at the GC in full force. Those that would lead away from the safeguards of the World SDA church, or away from the GC Session, should be looked at very carefully indeed. The church has strict guidelines and do cause difficulty at times, but in the end, these very safeguards that are complained about now are actually a protective fence for our own good.

If my understanding is correct, the members that join a MC Church give up their Seventh-day Adventist membership. This is because they have joined a non-Adventist congragation and organization.

Their loyalties are no longer with the World Seventh-day Adventist Organization. This sounds right to me.

My advice is for everyone at the GC to be very careful of what they are doing. Don't leave the GC Session to follow after the private agenda leaders.

Chances are they are after your money through Trusts and Wills set up by these private agenda ministries. Beware and find out everything before you leap. Know the facts.

[Gregory Matthews]

The question of SDA membership for people who connect with non-SDA organizations is left to the decision of the church where the individual has membership, and that Conference.

The Conference where I have my membership has had breakaway groups. In its past history it has allowed, and recommended, that the local congregations keep the breakaway members listed as SDA members in that congregation. Sometimes this has been done for several years. Ususally, sooner, or later, those members had requested that they be dropped from SDA membership, and eventually that has happened.

I personally wish MCN well. I do not believe that people who join them need to be dropped from SDA membership. But, MCN has taken positions that clearly make it impossible for the SDA Church organization to accept it a a SDA group.

[K]

Gregory,

As usual, you have the facts right about MC. It is a conference decision or church decision.

Our conference is trying to nip MC in the bud. There are whole churches in Texas that are Adventist, but not part of the conference that are taking part in the networking of MC.

I find it interesting that the conference has never made a move to take the 2 people in our church who are convicted killers off the books, but they want our names immediately sent to them so we can be dealt with promptly.

K