#Greater grace world outreach free#

They are committed people and hard working. They do adhere to the cardinal doctrines of the Bible. They do have some good ministries such as in India with a good school and orphanage. They do send missionaries to different parts of the world. What merits it healthy? They do evangelize sharing the plain gospel, this is defintely part of their work. I suppose the question I am asking is it healthy not as compared to the way it was but as compared to a healthy ministry? It definetely seems to have improved from before, but before was so bad in some respects that any change would seem good. At the end of the debate a vote was held with the congregation and Tom Schaller won by a larger margin. This is the first change of leadership for over 30 years and it was very stormy change, ending with a debate between two candidates, the present leader Tom Schaller and the former leaders son Steve Stevens.

#Greater grace world outreach free#

The money is used I understood for the paying of the bills, the running of the ministries such as, radio, CD duplication which are distributed free to all their missionaries, hosting conferences, regular bills of the property and the salaries of the staff. I guess anything seems just compared to the way it was, however, I don't have any reason to think why not though greater transparency would help. These abuses and the culture that allowed it seems to have gone.īut whether the use of the offerings of the congregants are being used in a just way I don't know. It is these very serious abuses that seem to have stopped and the great destruction it left.Īlso there were cases of adultary reported and very little was done to the leaders who were involved in them, for the best part they continued in their leadeship position as a pastor or a teacher. The other things I read of was that people sold houses and moved into the community living, having given a large percentage of the sale proceeds to the organization and soon found themselves without a home and having to pay rent which they were told they would not need to. First taking $1M them later a further $5M that was hard to digest, but it was the fact that following that $6M or so, they allowed her then to write her will leaving nothing to her children but most to The Bible Speaks.

The serious financial wrongs such as the court case that was alarming to me. I don't think any of these measures have been taken firstly they do not have members, which limits the rights of congregants, however, it also removed restrictions from access to the community. Without this type of objective change whatever the group claims it has done to change may be merely cosmetic and not really that significant. The church board would be able to discipline and if necessary fire the pastor or any staff and decide upon the budget.Īn annually published budget should be distributed to all contributing members and could be independently audited. This would typically require all members to vote by secret ballot to elect board members to fixed terms, who would stand for election again when their term expired. The key to meaningful change for this group would be accountability or its leaders, such as through a democratically elected church government and an annually published budget that details all salaries, compensation and expenses paid out from church funds.Īn elected board could be required through the bylaws of the church corporate filings and constitution. The judgement against the church was upheld all the way the US Supreme Court. The group has been called a 'cult' and lost a court case that revolved around charges of 'brainwashing.' See [ This gives message board participants a better understanding of the group in question, which has a deeply troubled history.