As some of you may remember from a past edition of CETF, this is the AOG General Administrator who got himself in a muddle in a sorry attempt to justify Gerald Coates' popish treatment of Paul Weaver. I must admit to feeling rather sorry for the unfortunate Gill, as he is always put in the impossible position of having to justify the unjustifiable and explain the inexplicable. Anyway, in response to our open and frank questioning of the current AOG leadership, we have received the following statement:

'Reading your publication 'Vanguard', it is evident that you and your colleagues have set up as the independent, self-appointed prosecuting counsel, judge and jury of the Christian world, accountable to nobody (other than God) but yourselves. You are fully entitled to your views and opinions, but we do not believe that the pages of your publication are the proper medium through which our views can be expressed, since you exercise sole editorial control of its content. We decline to dialogue with you because we judge from your published views that you are deeply biased against the Assemblies of God leadership, and therefore believe anything we say will be used as further fuel for your fire. We are accountable to God and the General Council of Assemblies of God that appoints us, and content to submit ourselves to both.'

Okay, let's take this one step at a time

Firstly, and please allow me this small moment of irrelevant musing; the verb 'set up' lacks an object. In other words, the sentence makes no sense. Does this demonstrate the shoddy way this reply has been thrown together? Is literacy too much to expect from those in charge of AOG?

Secondly, and back to the real issue, they seem to have completely misunderstood the idea of accountability. Let us define how accountability should work in the Body of Christ. Yes, it is true that those in leadership are accountable to God. But this is not an excuse to be wheeled out whenever they want to avoid a more immediate analysis. Many a cult has used the 'accountable to God' line to avoid awkward questions. So how does being accountable to God work in reality?

Well, those in leadership are accountable to the scriptures – the rule by which all our actions are measured. But how does this work? Who brings the actions of those in leadership under scrutiny according to the Word? The answer is clear and simple. It is the Body of Christ who calls those in leadership to follow the Word.

In other words, it is not the General Council of Assemblies of God (a toothless epitome of impotency) who calls Weaver and his cronies to account, but you and me.

All of us have the right to demand that they demonstrate the scriptural basis for their actions.

They 'decline to dialogue' with us because they judge that we are 'deeply biased' against them. Does this mean that they will only speak to those who are in favour of them? Is this the sort of accountability they like? Are they only accountable to those who endorse them?

They accuse us of setting ourselves up as the 'independent, self-appointed prosecuting counsel, judge and jury of the Christian world.' During our recent CWM Gathering at Whitby two pastors informed us that they were present when the AoG publicly handed Jacob Prasch over to Satan, and now they have the audacity to accuse us of being judgmental. Their arrogance is exceeded only by their hypocrisy.

--SB

[ TOP ] ... [ BACK ]

Appeared in Issue CETF 8.1 December 2002
"...contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" -- Jude v3