Urban Ministry Live And Unplugged: Misleading The Church

Sunday, November 18, 2018

Misleading The Church

On 29 July this year, I attended a Church Meeting of my old city Church. The audio above begins with the Church treasurer addressing the congregation (click ⊳ to Play). On the surface of it, all seems in good order: the auditor has completed the audited accounts, and so on. Then I received an e-mail from the regulator (the IRBA). The auditor, they wrote, was not an auditor, and this was a criminal offence. On 30 October, then, I went to see the auditor -- I felt that this was the right thing to do. That is the second part of the audio above. I discovered then that there is no auditor, there are no audited accounts, and the treasurer did not have a copy in front of him as he claimed. The audio serves to confirm it:

0:00 ... The treasurer confirms that the meeting is being recorded.
0:06 ... He reports: "The audited accounts have been completed."
0:12 ... He tells the members: "I have a copy in front of me."
0:36 ... He names the auditor.
0:46 ... The Church Meeting accepts all without question.

1:01 ... The auditor denies that he is the auditor: "No. Never. Can't be."
1:15 ... He expands: "I am not entitled or allowed to express any opinion on the merits of the statement at all."
1:28 ... I put it to him: "The Church said that you present audited accounts to the Church." His answer: "No."
1:36 ... He rules out any misunderstanding: "I've never, ever, to my knowledge, said anything to anybody which could lead to that impression being given."
1:56 ... He and I agree that I reply to the regulator that the auditor "is not in fact an auditor of the Church." Audio: Greg Nichollas, Colin de KockSee also

See also Misleading the Church: What Happens Next. And for what happened next: Audit All Clear? This is what happens, however, when one fails to notify a minister of the Church of a meeting. Normally this invalidates the meeting, if it was held without informing everyone that it was to take place.

No comments:

Post a Comment

About This Blog

I have spent ten years in suburban ministry, twenty-two years (total) in urban ministry, and seven years in country ministry. My involvements in ministry continue, now reduced.

There are a few reasons for this blog: 1. To help people form a picture of what ministry is about -- in particular urban ministry -- not least seminary students who may be destined for urban ministry. I have found that the image and the reality may be far apart in academia. 2. My experience in ministry may be (and, in fact, often has been) an encouragement to other ministers -- alternatively, a cautionary tale, as the case may be! Many notes of thanks have been recorded on this blog. And 3. Friends have simply told me how interesting reports of ministry are.

This is not a "parochial" blog. Only a tenth or so of readers are local (in South Africa). Outside of my home country, this blog is most read in Europe and North America. Russia is no. 4 on the list, and there is some interest in Muslim nations. At one point, this was the most authoritative Religion blog in Southern Africa (I now do not know how it is ranked).

With all of the above in mind, the purpose of this blog is simply to record urban ministry "live and unplugged", in the form of accounts. This blog is not a "church blog", but a "ministry blog". For the most part, I don't intend to share my views. The emphasis is the experience of ministry and the various events that surround it.

A definition of “live” is “actually being performed at the time of viewing”. A definition of “unplugged” is “without amplification or modification”. However, see my Posting Policy below.

Posting Policy

This blog may be unique with regard to its degree of transparency about urban ministry. Many people have written to me to say how they cherish the help they have received through this. However, this means that special attention needs to be given to confidentiality in particular. I use the following guidelines for posting on this blog:

I apply the following questions to posts: Are they posted in good faith? Are they balanced? Are they compassionate? Are they informative about ministry? Do they help one better understand a problem or issue?

I consider a post to be unproblematic if a person's identity is unknowable in the post, if the facts are public knowledge, or if a change of particulars (name, place, date, and so on) will truly protect privacy. If I consider that anyone who was not involved in an incident would recognise those who were, then I do not post. If a post could compromise the safety of those I blog about, then I make a post safe, or I do not post.

I believe that these measures should enable me to continue to be "open" about urban ministry while not compromising privacy.

In 2013, ninety percent of the posts on this blog were removed. I then put the question of the freedom of the blog to the South African Human Rights Commission. The position is this: if a post is legal, it is legal. Essentially, all of my posts were OK. There is freedom of expression in South Africa.

Having said this, if any post should even cause discomfort, it will be removed from this blog immediately. This has always been the position. One does need to contact me for that, best through an e-mail or a blog comment, and I prefer to see a name on it. The post will be put back up only if there would seem to be compelling reason for it. It is hoped that there will be the assumption that I wish to address any discomfort satisfactorily, compassionately, and efficiently.