Approaching the 3rd Anniversary of HKL

All, join hands in prayer...

ICC DIVIDES: CORE SEPARATES FROM MCKEAN FACTION!

From RightCyberUp.org

ICC Divides: Core Separating from McKean Faction
Revised: November 3, 2005

"We believe that you began your new movement with 'The Portland Story' article calling out 'the remnant' to follow you." -- Statement by 84 leaders of the International Churches of Christ withdrawing fellowship from Kip McKean.

A split appears inevitable, as a core group of International Church of Christ congregations has severed ties with ICC founder Kip McKean of the Portland (Oregon) International Church of Christ. It seems likely that a faction of churches affiliated with McKean and Portland will continue to divide from the core churches.

A November 2nd statement from 84 ICC church leaders announced that they would have "no further fellowship" with McKean unless he repented of "character sins" and "divisive tactics." The statement accused McKean of "dividing disciples and churches around the world," of "building a kingdom for yourself" and of telling a "self-advancing" revisionist history of the movement. The statement asserted, "We believe that you began your new movement with 'The Portland Story' article calling out 'the remnant' to follow you."

On October 3rd, a warning letter signed by 63 key ICC men’s leaders had been sent to Kip McKean, asking him to repent of his continued leadership sins and to stop the “self promotion and propaganda” coming from Portland. The Portland Church leadership (including McKean) responded with a letter on its website, defending its leader and methods and stating the intention to work toward similar goals as the core churches, “as in Acts 15, Paul and Barnabas going their separate directions.”

Although the core group has expressed concern about the methods and sincerity of McKean, and McKean has expressed concern about the “lukewarmness” of the core churches, the split in many ways appears to be a turf battle. McKean has begun recruiting members away from the core, and has supported church “replantings” (i.e. competing churches) in core cities, as part of a systematic and centrally controlled plan to evangelize the world.

Supporting McKean according to a Portland-run website (1) as of October 6 were:

The Portland Church of Christ leadership and congregation

the Greater Baltimore Church of Christ led by Doug Arthur

the Savannah Church of Christ (Georgia) led by Steve Johnson, who has announced his intention to go with McKean

the Central New York Church of Christ (upstate) led by Chris Broom

the Montreal Church of Christ led by Danny Brisebois, and the Quebec City Church of Christ

the Salt Lake Christian Church led by Jay Hernandez

the Santiago, Chile church led by Raul Moreno

the Eugene International Church of Christ

The November and October letters to Kip McKean were signed by many prominent ICC leaders with long associations with McKean, including four former World Sector Leaders (Al Baird, Andy Flemming, Marty Fuqua & Scott Green); the former head of the ICC's book publishing service, DPI (Tom Jones); the former head of the ICC's media service, Kingdom News Network (Roger Lamb, who was McKean’s co-minister in Charleston, IL in the 1970s); and the man who originally invited McKean to the Crossroads Church of Christ in 1972 (Sam Laing).

These letters followed a month after letters from three prominent ICC churches (among others) opposed McKean: the Boston Church of Christ, the Seattle Church of Christ, and the Phoenix Valley Church of Christ.



Letter from a Concerned Relative

Recently RightCyberUp received an interesting letter from the concerned relative of a current ICC member. He couldn’t help but notice the irony and hypocrisy of core ICC churches shunning Kip McKean in their initial October 3rd letter. Although this site usually doesn’t publish letters, this one deserves an exception:

Today I read the letter of rebuke written to Kip McKean. I suppose my focus should have been on Kip and the many infractions which called the letter into existence. And, I suppose the indignation arising in my heart should have been directed exclusively at this unscrupulous and arrogant man. At first that was the case. At first I was focused on Kip and my indignation was directed at this man exclusively. But as I read further something very interesting happened. I started feeling sympathy for Kip and my indignation was redirected toward those writing the letter and the institution which they were representing. I couldn't help but recall the words from Galations 6:7, "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." As I read further, I began to sense that Kip is simply being true to what the system of the ICOC has made him. The system sowed arrogance by claiming it holds all the truth and every other "church" has no truth at all. The system sowed divisiveness when it taught its incoming disciples that everything their parents taught them regarding Christ is false and so is everything that their former religious organization taught. The system sowed the principles of unethical recruitment when it encouraged their evangelists to take members away from local denominational and non-denominational churches.

And because the system sowed this stuff, they are now reaping it. But they do not like what they are reaping. They want to deal out this high pressure arrogant spirituality; but when the tables turn, they don't want to be on the receiving end of it. It is my sense that those writing this letter are brow beating a man for being exactly what they taught him to be. They are reaping in the behavior of this man exacting what they sowed in recruiting him. How could they expect anything else. To me, it is an ironic twist; but I sense they simply don't get it. Was it not Jesus who once said: "If the blind lead the blind, they both will fall into the ditch”? That is my perception of what is happening. All of Kip's infractions notwithstanding, I have more feelings for him than I do for those indicting him. Am I wrong for feeling this way?

Lest we give the wrong impression or risk getting misquoted, let’s be clear: we believe Kip McKean fits all the criteria of a cult leader and is a dangerous man. But we also have many concerns about the core ICC churches, their leadership, and the damage that can be inflicted on members and communities -- just as we have concerns about the congregations aligned with McKean.

Sources:
Brothers' Statement to Kip McKean, November 2, 2005.
Letter to Kip McKean from various Elders & Evangelists, October 3, 2005.
Portland International Church of Christ Leadership, "Concern For All The Churches," portlandchurch.org, circa October 14, 2005.

(1) Information compiled from list of affiliated churches on upsidedown21.org, October 6, 2005.

----
Also from RightCyberUp.org:

ICC CHURCHES OPPOSE MCKEAN
Responding to ICC founder Kip McKean's "calling out of the remnant" from ICC churches, leaders of ICC's Boston, Seattle and Phoenix churches issued letters two months ago stating opposition to McKean's actions. You can read about them here:
http://rightcyberup.org/links/oppose.htm

I'LL FOLLOW KIP, SAYS JOHNSON
Former ICC World Sector Leader says he'll go with his mentor, McKean, in the current split:
http://rightcyberup.org/links/johnson.htm

KRIETE STANDS BY LETTER, SAYS ICC WAS A CULT
Two-and-a-half years after his "Honest to God" letter rocked the ICC, former ICC evangelist Henry Kriete stood by Honest to God in a follow up letter he wrote to Chicago Church of Christ elder Steve Staten. The only difference, he writes, is that his convictions have become stronger. Read more here:
http://rightcyberup.org/links/kriete2.htm

INSIDE THE ICC'S 20TH ANNIVERSARY MAGAZIINE
Henry Kriete says this 1999 issue of the movement's official newsletter shows the ICC was a cult. Readers can judge for themselves:
http://rightcyberup.org/links/lastory.htm

CONCERNS ABOUT TODAY'S ICC LEADERSHIP CULTURE
This article examines how today's ICC leadership culture endangers the movement's chances for healthy reform. Based on observations from the ICC's Seattle Leadership Conference and recent events, this new article says the ICC leadership's biggest probem is its own culture, not anything happening in Portland:
http://rightcyberup.org/links/culture.htm

WHAT IS MCKEANISM?
Kip McKean's teaching legacy decoded:
http://rightcyberup.org/links/mckeanism.htm

[Discussion with 2corinthians518.blogspot.com]
DISCUSSION BLOG WITH CURRENT MEMBER
A current member of a McKean-affiliated church posted this email discussion RightCyberUp.org had to a blog. It sounds like we came away disagreeing about just how dangerous Kip McKean is, but agreeing on several other things:
http://2corinthians518.blogspot.com/2005/10/e-mail-discussion.html

Henry Kriete, Is the ICOC a cult?

Henry Kriete stated his current belief to that question this past weekend in NYC. Following is a transcription of his belief, with some introduction, from the Saturday afternoon meeting with the New York Christian church.

-----------------------

Intro

I'm not a spokesperson. I know a little bit of what’s going on. I’m just trying to get my own life together and get help where I can. Trying to work my salvation with fear & trembling. And I’ll do the best I can here. I may change my answers a week from now (laughter), no I’m serious – I am in major transition right now.

I’m getting emails like, do you think the ICOC is a cult? I’m getting all of them. And you know it’s some things like “I waver,” some are like “yeah,” some are “I don’t think so,” some are “I don’t want to have anything to do with it anymore because I fear I would be endorsing,” I don’t believe with all my heart and feel that they are trying.” I’m just in one of those places. So I’m going to go ahead and start with the most emotionally loaded question, Do you believe the ICOC is a cult?

Answer

Let me explain – well I wrote a little letter to Heather. I don’t know who Heather is. Is she here yet? Maybe she isn’t. But she asked me that question. And I’ll tell you where I’m at right now, okay. Not to be evasive, number 1 – if you were a cult leader, it’s very hard to see you say - like saying to a fish in the water, do you swim in the water? No? Agree, yeah! It’s a word you don’t find in the NT. But a word you do find is “sect,” false prophet, arrogance, leaders losing connection with the head, douse, God is putting out the church, you find that stuff.

Here’s how I would answer that. I think – you got a big meeting to help me out here – I think [there are in the ICC?], these are systemic sins. And they’re a struggling group. But I also believe that it did affect the different churches and leaders to various degrees. Everybody was affected. There are some leaders I would now say, man they are Cult Leaders. And [in contrast] there are some places I’ve been like in India, some places in Africa, Harrisburg, Virginia, and more, but not a lot. We’ve never been told this is what you have to preach, but there’s a controlling nature, which you know, there’s a culture of deceit, which you know about, there’s abuse, totalitarianism, to different degrees.

I would say that the ICOC is a sect with a lot of very cult-like tendencies, especially some places. I would never be commanded, “This is what you’ve got to preach and teach.” I can’t ever remember ever being given that – “this is what you have to preach and teach,” in terms of theology, in terms of [prejudice?]. But the culture of control that you know about –invasiveness, money, bad theology – that’s prevalent as all of us know. But I think the ICOC was infested, infected, with abberational theology.

The one I am burdened with, that I struggle with all the time is, “Are there any brothers and sisters there?” Sure. You guys became Christians in the ICOC. And I go, no matter how lukewarm in [Thessalonica?] or worldly they were in Corinth or legalistic in Galatia, the converts themselves must be going “well, Amen, through all this junk – I’ve found Christ. Why it’s so difficult for me ( and you don’t think it should be difficult) is,
I truly believe with all my heart that there is only one true church. Not like “we’re the true church” not that way, but there is one body, one church. And, like it or not, accept it or not, admit or not, if you’re a Christian, you’re a part of it. Among that family there’s aberrations, there’s wickedness. It’s like you have a family with 13 kids. One becomes a murderer, one’s a teacher, one’s a banker, one’s this, one’s a cult leader. These are your kids!

And this is my struggle right now, it really is. Because people want me to just absolutely, “you cannot associate with the ICOC anymore, in any way, shape or form.” I’m just not there yet. I know some of you are - “I am done, period!” But I feel like there are Christians.

And I think there are leaders that are completely unrepented. I think New York is a fiasco, and I support your decision, I respect it. In other places, I feel there are Christians…. There are some churches I think still guilty that have renounced the ICOC. You know what I mean? But it’s like, let’s say in Vancouver – we didn’t sign an affiliation agreement. In fact, if we did, I would have been gone. I will no longer be a part of that. The leader has declared his intents to the ICOC to go to Dallas. No one is over us, the money is not going nowhere.

Some people don’t think that’s enough. I mean that’s – now what they should they do in Vancouver, what if the whole church is really trying to change? I think some are doing it. I think Salt Lake. Others, no. I wouldn’t go to San Francisco and I certainly done with that. I think the ICOC is abberational, is just severely lacking repentance. Those who have light and don’t act on them, you’re under the curse of God. But I do think people have to work out their own salvation in fear and trembling.

Henry Kriete in NYC
Kriete came to NYC to preach. He also did some Q&A sessions, which you can see posted on the NYCOC forum.

HK in NYCOC: Q&A session (first question posted below)

Post your response to HK Q&A session here.

Henry Kriete Q&A session in NYC

Here is the scoop on the question & answer session that Henry gave to a small meeting this weekend in Manhattan. These are the same questions he gave to the service on Sunday. At the smaller meeting, he answered these questions on the fly, and don't think he skipped any. I saw. I asked hard questions and he did answer them. He emphasized that he is not a spokesperson for the ICOC. He also said that since he is very conflicted, his answers could change. "I am in a major transition," he said.
Before these sessions, Henry did a sermon as well, and it was mainly all scriptures about Jesus. No recruiting or evangelization ICCisms.

I have the recordings of his answers, but for now I'll paraphrase his answers from my notes. I'm at work so this will consist of a few posts... I am closing this thread to responses. Please see the Response folder to post responses. Thanks.
--------------------------------------------------
Q: Is the ICOC a cult?
A: That is an emotionally loaded question for me. Is Heather here? (LOL) I don't want to be evasive, but - if you were a cult leader... LOL... you don't find the word cult in the Bible, but you do find "sect," "arrogance," etc. The ICOC is a Sect with cult-like tendencies. I would say that some of the ICOC leaders ARE cult leaders. Others are not.

Also, I was never given mandates, "You must preach this or that." But we cannot deny that we had a culture of control. Invasiveness. Bad theology. Abberational theology.

I do believe there's ONE body, one church. But NOT the "One True Church" ICOC-style. If you are a Christian, you are part of the body. You are united to the body.

But for the record: I am DONE with the ICOC, and have cut ALL affiliation with it. (Later he states that Vancouver church refused to sign an affiliation agreement with the ICOC.)

[additional notes:]
I'm here to support you. The stonewalling with the finances... What happened in NYC is a tragedy. I respect your decision to leave the church.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/nycoc/messages?msg=345.1 "Henry Kriete's Question & Answer Session"

No "official" Henry Kriete response yet so far. Here is an interesting point CLEARDATEMPL makes on the NYCOC DF about ICC politics:

The ICC is political in many ways.
The ICC was/is a microcosm unto itself. A full fledged FASCIST OLIGARCHY. A virtual Utopia with it's own AGENDA, PROPOGANDA & THOUGHT REFORM! The weekly brainwashings..umm.. I mean sermons consisted of repetitive messages conditioning our minds into homogeneity.

"The Kingdom, d-group, DP, follow-up, visitors, stats, bt, zones, sectors etc" Independence, the sin of rebelliousness and nonformity for the sake of unity are slogans that embody church politics & imprison members within its boundries.

I had a roomate who worked on a councilman's campaign a few years ago. Many of us here vote on a national & local level but we debate more on community issues. more proactive than reactive.

I think if Kip or the other ICC uppers were to be more politically outspoken, they would only attract more attention from the outside to their cultic teachings & unethical business practices.

Yet at the same time, ICC is also a multi-million dollar corporation and America is run by corporations. The government, like much of the ICC lower leaders are just puppets of a corporate machine. So in this sense ICC is analagously political Capitalism is its master.

I found that ICC congregations also tend to reflect their geographical makeup and the majority of the United States is still ULTRA-CONSERVATIVE & Puritanical in thought. From my travels, there are really only pockets of liberalism. Thats why many progressive & free thinkers move to big cities like NYC, LOS ANGELES, SAN FRAN, MIAMI etc. because we reflect that .

I always felt The Manhattan NYCOC was one of the most liberal from all the other ICC's in the US. and even with that said, it was still a very jacked up place to be.Though many disciples here were funky, creative artists,(brothers who had long hippie hair were encouraged to cut it off. I was rebuked once for getting a nose ring against advice.) INDIVIDUALITY was not encouraged especially if one was to be considered for leadership. Upper leadership seemed to have a Banana Republic dress code and blonde hair and /or good looks was instant qualification. If you did'nt fit that mold you were deemed "rebellious ","out there" or "not sharp".
Anyway I'm just rambling at this point.

Response from Henry Kreite
Kreite responded "informally" to Kip's letter directly to the ICC DF -- he preached in Portland OR where Kip is now lead evangelist. See his post below.

Hi everyone.Grace and peace.
I just returned from Portland and had an amazing time. I went because my son was in a soccer tournament, that's all. They came in second,and it was great fun.
For the record....
The wheatfield group invited me to speak to them on Sunday and I did not hesitate. It was encouraging to me personally. The Christians were warm and joyful and eager. In my opinion, and from what they have shared,they are not a protest group but a fellowship desiring to follow Christ and not men. That simple, that free in the Lord. I spoke on the love of Christ and His centrality in all things, followed by a Q&A. We worshiped and shared in the Lord's supper.My being in Portland had nothing to do with Kip. On Saturday at the tournament, I was approached by a few of the members of the wheatfield fellowship and was invited to share Scripture the next day. I will preach and teach and worship wherever I find brothers and sisters in Christ, and wherever I am welcomed in the Lord.
I utterly agree with those of you who don't think I should be 'exalted' in anyway. Never my intention at all.This is not a Kip or Henry thing-but a truth thing. To be lifted up at all, especially for the painful contents of my letter,H2G, embarrases me beyond words. That said, I do appreciate the encouragement I recieve from those who have been helped or healed by my letter, and the myriad expressions of gratitude. Other than that,I don't aspire to any kind of role but 'Christian'. I also understand,clearly, that my letter was published after countless letters and appeals were already made from others, at great personal sacrifice and pain, over the course of many years( I have recieved a copy of several of them in the last few months)I also agree that I said nothing new in my letter. I was standing on the shoulders of others.If anything, I simply articulated the silent anguish of countless Christians over the years and gave them a platform to speak from.As for being called a hero,I've never viewed the publication of my letter as an act of courage, but more as an act of conscience . My only regret is that I did not share my convictions sooner. For that I am deeply ashamed, and sorry for the many others who were continuing to be hurt in the meantime.
Our time in London had little to do with the actual writing of my letter.Although, it was without doubt the context of my letter. What happened in London was neither the main impetus to my letter, nor was what happened in London subsequently, a result of the release of Honest To God. That is a misunderstanding that needs to be rectified. I became more urgent and intense with respect to my convictions while in London,and the unfolding crises/events we were experiencing there only strengthened my resolve to release H2G as quickly as possible.However,clearly,what was happening with the church in London was a validation of the four main points in my letter, and so served as the context and final motivation to make my letter known. London was already 'in motion'so to speak, one of the first dominoes to fall as a result of the so called 'Unity Conference' in LA in November.

I think the speed and intensity of the world wide fallout-'or crumbling wall'- proves beyond question that the ICOC as an organization/institution, from it's inception, was not built solely on the foundation of Christ and a ministry of grace and truth, but rather, was mixed with straw and wood, an inordinate exaltation and respect for men, as well as poor theology.

Did amazing things happen in the ICOC? To be sure. Are there wonderful Christians within the ICOC? I believe so, with all my heart. Of course,thousands have now left for conscience' sake while others have elected to remain and pursue change.( Marilyn and I are in anguish over this very issue at present and are not sure of our spiritual future. Pray for us)
Was the ICOC a corrupted religious group? Sadly, it cannot be denied. However,in spite of this, through the efforts of both true and false brothers,the sincere and insincere,truth mixed with error,God continued to use us(not Him)as a tool for the spread of the gospel-albeit a legalistic one.And just as easily as a woodcutter can lay aside his axe after a days work, God seems to have done so with us.Were we ever 'God's Modern Day Movement'? No.Too much arrogance and damage and sin for that claim.The statement alone almost demands a smashing by God.

Do I love Kip? Always have. Do I respect him as a spiritual leader? No longer. Do I believe that many of his teachings are false and unbiblical? Yes . Am I his 'emotional,but dear son in the faith'? Not at all- Steve May, in Ajax, Canada brought me to the Lord in March of 1977, and to him alone I 'owe' my salvation and eternal gratitude(as in Paul to Philemon-'not to mention you owe me your very self')He is my father in the faith.(Whatever Kip hoped to accomplish by that remark backfired-at least with me) Am I emotional? Yes, but I would have prefered for him to say passionate and full of conviction!Did Kip make an impact on my life and faith? Like no other.Have our churches and leaders been above reproach financially? In my opinion,most are,but clearly, several are not. (By the way,having a clean slate from outside auditors on proceedural issues-however glorious- is hardly the same as being ethically or morally righteous in the eyes of God and the church.Clean audits are imperative, to be sure,but we have routinely bragged about them to dissuade a pursuit of the more relevant issues - where the money went, how much of it went there, to whom and why. Those are the spirtual issues that demand accountability. Not opening the books in any city or in any church is utter folly and a recipe for disaster- a total betrayal of trust. What is there to hide?

In the meantime,I have been writing a brief response to Kip's letter on the issues he put forth, but I am hoping a significant amount of other teachers and elders and preachers will do the same-just as Salt Lake did.Not to divide for the sake of division,but to make a very clear stand.If not,I will be extremely disappointed. I believe there are still too many politicians and fence sitters- scary. It's not necessary or wise to get 'too' personal or , God forbid,become mud slingers. We can assume his curse for that kind of behaviour.Rather,we must speak to the relevant issues with Bible in hand-that is enough.But to ignore Kip and his RR3 , as if he has made some kind of personal or tactical blunder,in my opinion, is simply a mistake.To hide like an ostrich behind the guise of some newly embraced 'autonomy'is cowardice.To hope this will all simply go away if we ignore it, is unrealistic.

Does Kip have a real grasp of what happened in London? According to his paper-not at all. But that doesn't seem to matter -he has, sadly, again skewed the facts for his own ends. Those who live in London know what happened in London.
On a more personal note,were we asked to leave London? No.We volunteered to step down at the beginning of April.Shortly after that,however, the majority of the staff were 'forced 'to resign for financial reasons- a drop in confidence was quickly followed by a drop in contribution.I was sure that, ultimately, all of the staff (including us) would have been made redundant(laid off)eventually, pending each regions local needs and decisions by their local leadership groups .In other words-none of these staff reductions were necessarily permanent-but were dependent on the needs and desires for 'rehiring' in each local sector/ministry in the near future. After three months,ending in May, a shift was to be made from a temporary central leadership to a more local one- and each staff situation was,theoretically at least,supposed to be up for review. Some left the full time ministry for good, some were not asked to return.But almost all have left at this point in time.
We served a rather small but amazing group of Christians in North London,but we (Marilyn and I)felt the need to step aside to purify our hearts, make atonement as it were, and to humble ourselves before God.That's what happened to us. We were given 4 weeks severance, one week's UK goverment employee compensation, one month's rent and our flight expenses back to America.We paid for our own moving expenses.We are grateful for the assistance we recieved.We now live in Vancouver.

I am perplexed that Kip took such pains to get his facts correct,and from so many people over the course of so many weeks,but was still so misguided or incorrect in his assessment of things.I am perplexed, but not surprised.

In truth, my letter had no real or measurable affect on London. My letter was barely acknowledged, if at all, by the temporary central leadership group or moderators.Open forums were already in progress through out the church-starting with MT and from there to the East region .Although I did not start them, I am an advocate, but only when they are conducted in a respectful manner. I have never advocated a one way barrage of open critism against anyone, especially if they cannot defend themselves.Some 'open forums'were more productive and healthy than others.My suggested 'rules of engagement'for open forums-if a church wanted to pursue that route- are clear in my letter. Responding to sin in a sinful way grieved/s me deeply. No matter what happens, we must conduct ourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel.Convictions yes, but always in a Christlike manner.

At the same time, I am sympathetic and even empathetic with the hurts and anguish of the members and their attempts to convey their pains whether 'we' liked the way it was done or not. Shame on those who try to belittle this 'new, supposed freedom in Christ' because of some anger and venting. We have produced anything but a culture of openess and honesty in our churches-therefore,should the level of hostility have surprised anyone at all? Or the awkward and nervous attempts by many good hearted Christians to ask legitimate questions or expect some accountability from their leaders? It is hard enough to be calm, above reproach and graceful in any confrontation-how much harder when simple believers are finally confronting or challenging 'the anointed servants of God'(not my words) who have been 'over them' in the Lord?
Of course, some have sinned and some have rebelled and some were even divisive-but the kind of universal discipline we have experienced within our fellowship of churches-so swift and unrelenting- cannot be the 'work of the devil', but only of God. I utterly renounce Kip's demand that we ask the members to 'beg forgiveness'from the leaders.If you need to as an individual ,so be it.

To clarify again: In February and March,my letter was making an impact in other parts of the world- but not really in London itself. London was where I lived and wrote the paper, and of course, London served as a segue to the wider issues at hand- as evidenced by my first few pages.If you want the facts about London, ask those who served in the 'Working Group'-those elected by the churches throughout the UK to consider the issues and solutions facing the London and UK churches. An amazing group of men and women.There were about 20 elected non-staff, 12 elected staff(I was one)and four moderators.

Finally, am I bitter? Not at all. I am convicted, humbled,ashamed, hurt, disoriented,and uncertain- but not bitter.I never have been bitter, and it is beyond me why Kip would use such an expression-several times- in reference to my letter or me.I have always loved our fellowship and our many cherished relationships. I have served with my whole heart. I wrote my letter with tears and anguish of soul, that is all.

In closing, I have been asked several times about the 'errors and half truths' Kip said my letter contained. Like many of you,I am also at a loss on that point.I suppose you must ask Kip about this yourselves-and why he did not ,right then and there, set the record straight!I have countless hundreds of letters from all over the world, , from those young in the Lord to former WSL's who would beg to differ with Kip on that point. Straw arguments and manipulation are his intention, that is all. I am ashamed of his letter and deeply disappointed for those in the ICOC. I am personally embarrassed by his arrogant and relentless attacks on the churches of Christ. I am dismayed that more public response from those reputed to be pillars in the faith has not been forth coming.He drew a line in the sand.Who will cross it and who won't?Who will make their intentions known?

Anyway,forgive me if I can't answer your questions on this forum at this time. I am a ridiculously slow typist-I will still be answering the first question after the post has been closed for a few days already!

However,if you email a brief question or comment with your name, in private, I will try to answer as best I can if I have time( no promises,however)By the way, Dave Anderson's article and John Engler's soon to be released article pretty much sum up my feelings. John has said it much better than I could. Much love in Christ,Henry.


http://forums.delphiforums.com/ICCdiscussion/messages?msg=7826.93 "Henry Kriete Preaches in Portland Sun."

An article on the ICC in "Christianity Today." It has interesting testimony from the people involved in the Rhode Island issue (there's an extensive thread on this in ICC DF, see link below), Henry Kriete, and non-ICC christian authors commenting on the possibility of ICC change from authoritarian rule to "mainstream evangelicism." They say very nicely, fat chance... at least for now.

'Boston Movement' Apologizes
Open letter prompts leaders of controversial church to promise reform.
By John W. Kennedy | posted 06/04/2003

A London leader's 39-page confessional open letter detailing abuses in the International Churches of Christ (ICOC) has further shaken a movement that has been controversial since its beginning 24 years ago. Whether the movement, an offshoot of the mainline Churches of Christ and known for its aggressive campus recruiting, is unraveling or reforming is hard to say.

The February 2 letter followed the resignation of founder Kip McKean in November (CT, March 2003, p. 26). Evangelist Henry Kriete, an influential leader in the Boston Movement (the informal name of the ICOC) in six countries and ten churches, wrote the letter. Kriete said the ICOC's viability was at stake. He said leaders have engaged in financial mismanagement, legalism, dishonest statistical reporting, and abusive teachings, and have ignored critics.

Kriete's letter pulls no punches, but he continues to identify with the church. "The devil has his fangs deep in our neck," he said, "and I am afraid that unless we repent, many of our churches and thousands more of our Christians will be devoured."

According to Kriete, a turnaround won't happen unless leaders denounce structural evils. "The main problem is that Kip never addressed the specific 'sins of our
system,' " Kriete wrote. "He did not even mention them, let alone repudiate them."

For the first time, ICOC leaders have acknowledged the calls for reform that have originated from within the movement. On February 25, 42 ministry leaders at the
Los Angeles Church of Christ headquarters issued an apology. They admitted to staff arrogance, legalism, authoritarian discipling, and improper teaching (for
example, that the ICOC is the only true church).

"These sins have not just been isolated events, but a culture that was created and allowed to continue in much of the LA church," the letter states. "We are committed to changing this culture to become more Christlike."

With the autocratic McKean gone, leadership now is in the hands of 10 elders ruling by consensus. One is Al Baird, longtime spokesman for the ICOC in Los Angeles.
"Most of the churches have basically seen how much leadership has been out of touch with the rank and file," Baird told Christianity Today. "We've done a lot of apologizing for things we've dropped the ball on." He said several leaders have left. Some are gone because they no longer agree with church teachings. Others were released because of financial cutbacks caused by a drop in contributions.

"We're trying to get back to motivating people from the heart rather than by rote," Baird said. "We've been too narrow in saying we've got a corner on the truth and we're the only way."

Before the upheaval, the ICOC had 130,000 members worldwide, down from a claimed high of 185,000. More than 250,000 people have left the movement.

Jay Guinan, 41, and his wife, Deanna, illustrate some of the ICOC's problems over the years. They joined the Rhode Island ICOC in 1994. Guinan, a small-business
owner, said he had been a volunteer choir member and a children's ministry worker. He persistently raised questions about what he believed were the lavish lifestyles of leaders and unbiblical financial demands put upon church members. A year ago, church leaders asked him to leave.

"Basically, I was told not to speak to anyone regarding financial issues of the church," Guinan said. "People were told privately to stay away from us."

Last June the Guinans started a small Bible study for former members of the ICOC. Bible study members gradually found local church fellowships with which they felt more comfortable. Guinan and his wife eventually joined an independent Protestant church in Attleboro, Massachusetts, where they live.

Guinan, however, has been forwarding news of recent developments, including Kriete's letter, to interested parties. He said leaders in the Rhode Island church so
far have shown a willingness to confess wrongdoings, but not an eagerness to repent.

Churches in at least a dozen large U.S. cities have issued online apologies. Some congregations have sponsored open forums in which members may express
frustrations. Others, however, are ordering members not to read accounts on the Internet.

Moving on requires more than rhetoric, says Carol Giambalvo, who has conducted more than 60 interventions for families connected with ICOC. Her organization, the American Family Foundation in Naples, Florida, is a nonprofit research center and educational organization founded in 1979.

"I know people who will never attend a bona fide church again because they have been so bashed by this group," she said.

Erol Dogan of Vancouver, British Columbia, is encouraged. Although he left the ICOC 12 years ago, Dogan said he has received five phone calls of apology from members of the church since the recent changes.

Ronald Enroth, author of Churches That Abuse, told CT it is extremely difficult for an aberrant Christian group with such an authoritarian structure to move into mainstream evangelicalism.

"It remains to be seen whether the International Churches of Christ, with its remaining power structure, can truly make major changes," Enroth said. "If it does so, it won't happen overnight."

Copyright © 2003 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information. June 2003, Vol. 47, No. 6, Page 23

The Boston Globe article on Kip and the ICC is up on the web and in the paper!!
http://boston.com/dailyglobe2/137/metro/A_Christian_community_falters+.shtml

A Christian community falters
Loss of leader, governing body hurts group formed in Boston

By Farah Stockman, Globe Staff, 5/17/2003

It was one of the fastest-growing and most controversial churches in America, banned as a cult from dozens of college campuses while boasting 135,000 members worldwide. Its followers were known for spending their free time recruiting new members and waiting on doorsteps at 4 in the morning, hoping to persuade those who had ''fallen away'' to come back to the fold. But now the central organization of the International Churches of Christ, a strict religious body founded in Boston, is collapsing.

Thomas ''Kip'' McKean, its charismatic founder, has stepped down. Its world governing body has dissolved and dozens of local church leaders have resigned or been fired, in part because churches can no longer afford to pay their salaries.

Behind the story of a teetering church empire is the tale of the autocratic visionary who built it and his independent-minded daughter, now a Harvard senior, whose decision to leave the church sparked turmoil in the already troubled group.

''It caused her father to have to step aside and it caused the group to reexamine itself,'' said Michelle Campbell, executive director of REVEAL, a nonprofit organization that provides information and support to former members of the church. ''It was sort of inevitable that Kip would fall. The standards he set, no one could meet. Not his children, not even himself. The very thing that he created came back and bit him.''

McKean, who was forced to resign his post because of his own rule that church leaders must step down if their children leave the church, said in a telephone interview that he participated in his own demise.

''I think I hurt people's feelings in some areas,'' said McKean, who still belongs to the church. ''I do think there is some bitterness and some hurt.''

Years ago, few could have imagined the church without McKean, a wiry, gregarious self-described ''prophet'' whose followers filled the Boston Garden -- or without his daughter, Olivia, a straight-A student, a promising junior tennis player and beauty pageant contestant whose life successes filled the pages of the church's many publications.

''They are like celebrities,'' said Jim Procanik, a former church leader, of McKean's three children, Olivia, Sean, and Eric. ''It would be like the president's kids. They had to be the best at everything.''

The son of a strict Navy admiral, McKean began preaching in the 1970s as a chemistry major at Florida State University. At a time when other students were partying, he led Bible studies in fraternity houses and gave inspiring religious speeches to crowds. McKean went on to study at a Baptist seminary, but grew disillusioned and dropped out after ministers criticized his strict interpretation of the Bible.

In 1976 he married a fellow Florida University student and took a job as a campus minister at Eastern Illinois University in Charleston, Ill., working with one of a network of 15,000 autonomous Churches of Christ. Hundreds of college students flocked to his congregation, but he quickly became controversial. In 1979, months after a local newspaper explored accusations that he used coercive tactics to pressure people to join and donate money to the church, McKean moved to a church in Lexington.

There, McKean constructed a new kind of church based on a hierarchy some have likened to an Amway sales pyramid and others have compared to the military. Every church member has a superior called a ''discipler'' to hold him or her accountable for sins. Known as the Boston Church of Christ or the ''Boston Movement,'' the church attracted tens of thousands of members from all backgrounds, who later moved on to form the Manhattan Church of Christ, the Chicago Church of Christ, and hundreds of other churches, spreading to London, Sydney, Moscow, Nairobi, and other cities. Wildly ambitious, McKean's goal was a church in every sizable US city and in every country within a few decades. But the system had a dark side: Those who failed to give 10 percent of their income or who couldn't recruit enough new members were publicly humiliated, according to former members. Those who questioned authority were shunned or kicked out.

''Any major life decisions would have to be run through your discipler,'' said Procanik, who led churches in Boston and Los Angeles before quitting the church three years ago. ''Vacations, going home. . . . If you are spending too much time with old friends, that would be frowned upon, unless you are recruiting them. All your free time is accounted for. Dating has to be pretty much approved. You can only date people in the group.''

Some say McKean grew more uncompromising over time. In the late 1980s, he officially broke with the mainline Churches of Christ, preaching that his church was the only true church. Thousands of his members were rebaptized and all were told that outsiders, even other mainline Church of Christ members, were destined for hell.

As dynamic as a rock star and as hard-driving as a drill sergeant, he required meticulous record-keeping of baptisms, attendance records, and money tithed, and he erupted into anger when the numbers failed to grow, according to former and current leaders.

''It was not just like a church; it was like a corporation,'' said Rick Torres , a former leader at the Manhattan Church of Christ. ''If your numbers were going negative, they would come up with a reason that God is not with you.'' McKean could be generous, buying expensive clocks, artwork, and dinners for his closest followers. He knew how to lavish praise from a pulpit. He knew how to make you feel you were the only person in a room. But he also knew how to humiliate you. Former leaders describe him as a man who would throw things and yell if he lost a Ping-Pong game, a preacher who might ask you to repent if you failed to work your way through a crowd to greet him.

Thousands left the church, going on to seek out support groups or contribute to the half-dozen websites that post negative information about the group. Still, others stayed, hoping for reform or unable to leave.

''A lot of the upper-level leaders who I was friends with had tons of doubts about the group, and would even joke about it being a cult,'' said Procanik. ''They knew there were serious problems, but they felt trapped financially. They had kids, and a house. . . . They had no other job skills. No other church would hire them.''

In the early 1990s, McKean moved his family to Los Angeles to build the church there and enrolled his three children in Brentwood School, which currently costs $19,500 a year. There, they became academic achievers constantly spotlighted on Kingdom Network News, the church's official media arm.

In church literature, the date of Olivia's baptism is listed as a milestone, alongside the opening of the first church in Moscow and the first urban ministry:

''First second-generation disciple born, raised, and baptized in the Movement,'' it reads.

''I coached Eric's basketball team, and the Lord blessed us with the championship,'' McKean wrote in the KNN newsletter. ''All three have made straight A's this year and have been active in a tennis academy where they have reached out to and baptized their coach.''

Teased as ''cult kids'' by the same peers they were forced to invite to church, they spent their Friday nights -- known as teen nights at the church -- in another spotlight. They received special treatment and were envied for their lofty positions.

McKean let his children know that their successes were ammunition in his war for the Lord.

''I'm convinced,'' McKean told followers in Washington, D.C., in 2000, ''that when a teen falls away [from the church] . . . there are some sinful dynamics in that family, and that family, that mom and dad, need to repent.''

But Olivia had just left for Harvard University, and she was already tasting the freedom of life away from home. For a while, she attended the Boston Church of Christ and even gave dynamic speeches to crowds of hundreds. Although the church paid for her discipler, a young woman from Los Angeles, to move to Cambridge with her to guide her spiritual growth, by January 2001, Olivia stopped coming to church and told her friends she no longer wanted to be a member.

''She finally just stood up and said, `I'm sick of the whole thing; I'm leaving,' '' said one former church leader who knew her personally. Her father ''was pretty brokenhearted.''

Olivia McKean declined to comment for this article. But her father acknowledged that mistakes he made as a leader and a father led to his departure in November from the church's leadership.

''I am very, very sorry,'' he wrote in a resignation letter posted on the church website. ''My most significant sin is arrogance -- thinking I am always right. . . . I take full responsibility for how my sins have spiritually weakened and embittered many in our churches. I also take full responsibility for the spiritual condition of my family.''

In a recent interview, he said he and his daughter have overcome their differences.

''She's doing awesome,'' he said. ''We're very well-connected. She has no bad feelings toward the church. . . . We're cranking on as a family.''

McKean's resignation, pushed by some who had long resented his leadership style, opened the floodgates of demands for reform, including a widely circulated letter from one leader who charged the church with ''coercive giving,'' violating individual liberties, and inflating its growth rates. Dozens of leaders apologized for their sins, and the central body that governed the church dissolved, leaving churches across the country to declare autonomy. Financial problems due to reduced donations prompted massive firings, and missions abroad are declaring that lack of funds might shut them down.

''We are going through a challenging time,'' said Gordon Ferguson, an elder in the Boston Church of Christ. ''Some of the critiques we have received are valid. We are trying to reexamine things we have done and not lose the good things.''

Now the future of the International Churches of Christ is as uncertain as the future of its founder, who is planning to release a new letter to the world congregation in the coming weeks and who has been attending whirlwind meetings with church officials and old friends.

Asked if he is staging a come-back, McKean said, ''We're praying that God will lead us to a new ministry. You might say, `What is that?' I don't know.''

Farah Stockman can be reached at fstockman@globe.com.

This story ran on page A1 of the Boston Globe on 5/17/2003.

© Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company.

Leslie's reaction to the letter distribution. Leslie Clemmons is an ICC member. It is clear that she is afraid of committing slander, despite the leaders' dubious financial track record. How is it actually "sin"? If anything, sounds like another case of ICC guilt.

Proper term would be "libel," since it's written communication. Libel a: a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression b : a statement or representation published without just cause and tending to expose another to public contempt

In this case, there IS "just cause" because leaders were giving only watered down financial info (See below, March 27) and there have been several written complaints about the NYC COC finances sent to the NY State Attorney General.

Anyway, the ones in the darkness are the ones who really should be ashamed and afraid. Let the light shine -- "May God's wrath speak fiercely."

May 12, 2003

Aces churches and NYCOC and to whomever else it may concern:

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ:

I am writing this letter to confess sin on my part, possibly confront sin on the part of other people, and set the record straight. As some of you may know a letter that I wrote has been posted on the Internet for all to read. This mass display of this letter was by no means my intention and was done so without my knowledge or permission. In fact, the site where this letter has been posted requires membership (a username & password) and I have never been a member of this website. This letter was exclusively given to the sister who told me of the information found in the letter for her review, one brother who was trustworthy in order to let me know his thoughts on the letter, and one sister in a congregation far, far away whom I trusted for her review and thoughts and expressed that I wanted to make sure the information was accurate before I sent it to the church. I was later told that the letter was full of inaccuracies. I never brought it before the church and realized that I did not need to be the one to bring these issues before the church. If anyone should, it should be the person who gave me the information.

Some two weeks ago a sister invited me to come up to her area and spend time with her. She wanted to tell me some things that she had discovered about the church finances and wished to tell me of her recent meeting with Henry Kriete. She expressed to me that she had already talked to the people involved and that they were not admitting to any wrongdoing and that she was now ready to bring it to the church. She encouraged me to bring a bus load of people with me if I wanted. I remember this quote distinctly, because I immediately thought, WORD (pardon the Hip Hop vernacular). I was unable to get anyone to come with me.

After hearing what she had to say, taking in the extraordinary intensity of this information, I asked her repeatedly if she was sure of what she was saying. I even asked her if the information was documented. And she said that what she was telling me was fact. And because of the fact that she tearfully told me that this information involved one of her best friends, I believed her story all the more.

Now is the time to confess my sin. After digesting this information, I grew very alarmed, afraid for the church and the leaders mentioned, and also very angry. And in my anger I sinned for mans anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires. Let me clarify. In the Bible, God provides for sin offerings even for sins that are unintentional as is the case here. If the unintentional sin is committed by an individual, the guilty person must bring a one-year-old female goat for a sin offering(Numbers 15:27, NLT) I, however, am not the one-year-old female goat in question. But, I am guilty and I must take the responsibility (Leviticus 4:22, Leviticus 5:17) and apologize to everyone mentioned in the letter and anyone else that this has affected. Had I intended the letter to go out to the public, I believe I would have practiced the directives in Matthew 18. Yet, due to the current climate in the church, it was unwise for me to send it to anyone at all. For this I take full responsibility and I profusely apologize to all in concern. I now understand how many of the leaders in the ICOC must feel. We are all guilty of unintentional sins but, that does not prevent us from taking on the responsibility. Probably my greatest sin in this was even listening and getting involved in the first place. However, if all of the leaders in the New York church and surrounding areas would be as transparent as they have always called us to be, then, I am sure that this scenario would not even exist. I never intended to slander anyone but now I find myself involved in what seems to be slander, even though, I dont know what the truth in this situation really is. I have been hurt myself in all of this mostly because I have hurt so many people whom I love. This is the truth. Please forgive me.

Sincerely,
Leslie Clemmons
Member, NYCOC since 1991

http://forums.delphiforums.com/ICCdiscussion/messages?msg=6184.97 "3 MILLION from ACES to ATHENS"

RELEVANT HISTORICAL LINKS:
ICC DF: "3 MILLION from ACES to ATHENS"
ICC DF: "Suing the ICC / NYC COC"