RightCyberUp HOME search comment
"...thus far, the central theme of the ICC's new era seems to be decentralization, not reform."
February, 2003
Rocked by recent changes in its senior leadership, individual congregations of the International Churches of Christ (ICOC) have responded differently. A few churches are said to be making significant changes in how they operate, while many others apparently are standing pat.
RightCyberUp has been silent for weeks about rumors of changes in ICC congregations because there have been no official announcements about reforms -- either from local churches or ICC senior leadership.
But it is obvious that a degree of change is being attempted in several ICC congregations (this is clear from anecdotal reports and statements by current ICC members on bulletin boards like the Delphi International Church of Christ Discussion Forum). Beyond that, the only discernible "pattern" is that the ICC has no consistent position on reform. Many other ICC churches seem to be using the same old methods, predictably with the same old results.
Indeed, the ICC is less uniform today than at any time since its church "reconstructions" in the late 1980s. Yet the decline of ICC uniformity hardly surprising, considering that its "unity" was forged in the past by the loyalty of several World Sector Leaders (WSLs) to one man and one methodology -- World Missions Evangelist Kip McKean. The November resignation of McKean, and the elimination of the World Sector Leader positions has apparently left the ICC without any central voice of authority (note that many WSLs remain in leadership without the title). So the ICC has a new "Unity Meeting" method of governance (1), but not the "unity" (actually, uniformity) it has had in the past.
While the ICC claims it has entered a new era of "consensus leadership", one has to wonder if there is any consensus in the ICC about some crucial issues facing it, on which it has made no official comment:
Instead, continued silence on these issues would seem to indicate that ICC leadership as a whole has no consensus about them -- and that regional ICC leaders are "calling the shots" locally. Indeed, all evidence suggests that local leaders have been allowed to decide whether, and what to change. Ironically, many of these same leaders are the people who have the most to lose by embracing change.
As RightCyberUp has written before, reforms in the ICC are welcome, and there is much that could and should change. But thus far, the central theme of the ICC's new era seems to be decentralization, not reform. Some localized, positive change is undoubtedly resulting from decentralization, but the need for sweeping, movement-wide reforms has not yet been met.
P.S. Readers who can forward current documentation of official leadership statements about change (e.g. printed material, tapes) are encouraged to contact webmaster@rightcyberup.org.
(1) The ICC has released a statement about its new "Unity Meeting" that will meet biannually to govern the ICC. It is interesting that mainline Churches of Christ have historically held meetings they called "Unity Meetings" even though the participating churches were considered autonomous. "Autonomy" has been a bad word in the ICC since the late 1980s. Now, at least for the time being, the ICC has given more autonomy to its own churches.
Copyright © 2003 Dave Anderson. All rights reserved.
