CC Philly Conference 2016

You may also like...

39 Responses

  1. Janet Guerra says:

    Lack of accountability and morals rings a bell here in CA. Do your own research, BG of CCV gave Jr a gun. I am one of Bobby’s friends and he shared that he pulled the gun on his wife before he left her to return to his father’s dictator lifestyle.

  2. Captain Kevin says:

    They just won’t accept that the horse they’re beating has been dead so long that it stinks! There’s not enough Febreeze on the shelves to cover this stench.

  3. Janet guerra says:

    Yes, most of our community are aware of BG and his evil ways. Will be made public soon!

  4. Janet – if the community is aware, what is to be made public? What most can’t get through their head is that people don’t care.
    The wider central valley is not even aware that there is such an entity as CCV and most of those who do know don’t care and anyone left at CCV like it.

  5. Kevin H says:

    Michael,

    A few questions on the things you wrote:

    1) “Affiliation” is now done on the East Coast – What do you mean by this? When a church (or I should say pastor), regardless of location, wants to become a Calvary Chapel affiliate, does it only go through East Coast leaders/administration to approve? No one outside the East Coast has a say or makes an effort to have a say? Is the East Coast the only portion of Calvary Chapel that may be trying to enforce any kind of oversight over existing affiliations?

    2) As for the “demotion” of the Costa Mesa conference to a regional conference, I kind of remember a little while back Brodersen himself making it open to more than just senior pastors. So in that facet it seemed that Brodersen changed it from what it had traditionally been and represented. But in what ways has it changed in that it is now viewed as only a “regional” conference?

    3) Due to the double-speak that has been talked about here before with Chuck Smith in regards to how he wanted to please people and tell people what they wanted to hear, is it possible that some honestly believe that the current CCA and leadership structure is what Chuck wanted? Is this possible with any of the “top” shakers and influencers in the movement today?

  6. Babylon's Dread says:

    Local people in Albuquerque know virtually NOTHING about the roots of Calvary Chapel. CC is a movement of independent churches and it will thrive of wane purely on the charisms of the local church pastor.

    One underlying catapult for CC was its seizure of the media as a means of proliferation. In the 70s Christian radio was fledgling and CC sensed its value and took it. The relative value now is lower, but it gave CC a push in many locales, not least in Albuquerque.

    The national CC will now become a microcosm of Alexander the Great’s kingdom. It will be carved by the sons and eventually take its place among the denominations as a niche.

    The end times craze was perfect for radio proliferation. It has much less strength in an internet world where debunking data proliferates.

    Finally I think Wimber felt the same as Smith about his kingdom. He wanted it to go away with him. Both men are blessed to have their names off the movements.

    Random Reaction Dread

  7. Fyi says:

    I am a regional leader and affiliation is NOT done on rage east coast. Each region has sole authority to affiliate churches (and remove them) with zero interference from outside regions. Wanted to set the record straight.

  8. Fyi says:

    Don’t know where the word rage came from in above post. You h, well. Getting old…

  9. Michael says:

    KevinH,

    The moving away of the affiliation piece is more symbolic than real.
    It’s another way of saying that “Costa Mesa is no longer the center of the CC universe”.
    Affiliation (and dis-affiliation) is now supposed to be in the hands of regional leaders, but it doesn’t always work that way.
    This is just another way to try to get around the problem of liability for rogue pastors, but it won’t work…you’re either a denomination or not and CC is a denomination whether they want to admit to it or not.

    The difference for the Costa Mesa convention was as the “national” convention attendance was required.
    That is no longer the case, as it is now just another “regional” meeting.

    Some may believe that Smith endorsed the CCA.
    Great trouble has been gone to to smear me, and the other person who tried to speak (my old nemesis George Bryson) was kicked out of the movement.

    He stopped speaking.
    I won’t.

  10. Michael says:

    FYI,

    You can affiliate them…but they’re not official until placed in the database by McClures office.
    You may have had no interference…others have.

    Just wanted to set the record straight.

  11. Michael says:

    Lots of wisdom in BD’s post…

  12. Kevin H says:

    Thanks for the answers, Michael.

  13. Kevin H says:

    One last follow-up question. What was the genesis of the Costa Mesa conference becoming un-mandatory?

  14. EricL says:

    I find it fascinating that CCA has migrated back east. I remember when all the big shots flocked to Orange County to help Chuck Smith (and maybe hoping to inherit his mantle of leadership): Skip left New Mexico, Jon Courson left Oregon, Don McClure left San Jose, and even Greg Laurie came in from Riverside to teach a mid-week study.

    But Chuck never anointed the next leader for the movement. Slowly each of these guys realized it and drifted away. Then Brian inherited CCCM and its goldmine of properties (it own the colleges, conference centers and radio stations- not Calvary Chapel as a whole) but not the mantle of Movement Leader.

    It looks like the last holdout has finally fled: Don McClure.

  15. EricL says:

    To BD’s point @6, I think the Vineyard took a different path after it lost its founder. It has had a National Board of Directors and 3 national directors in the last 20 years, helping to turn the movement into a denomination. The Vineyard went through a lot of turmoil here in the USA and lost many congregations, but they seem to have righted themselves. Not many of Vineyards left here in the land of their birth (Southern California) but they are big in Ohio and other areas.

    I wonder if Calvary Chapel we also go through that many years of unsettled times. Will they coalesce into a denomination or will that shatter into hundreds of small fiefdoms?

  16. Michael says:

    I’ll answer after we record the podcast…

  17. Steve Wright says:

    Attendance was not “required” at the annual pastor’s conference. That is just flat out wrong. I missed a few and I have many pastor friends who likewise certainly did not come each and every year. There were no consequences, no chastisement for missing. The loss was OURS for not going (as usually the decision not to go involved scheduling conflict or financial concerns for transportation)

    It was certainly encouraged, but the fact is, most pastors did not need much encouragement since it was always a very special week. In fact, if one did not sign up early one likely would get shut out as it would fill up – hard to have a “required” conference that is first come, first served. (That is also the chief reason why they were so strict on senior pastors only – they did not even have enough room for all of them, much less if everyone brought assistants. Having it at Costa Mesa makes that a moot point)

    I would disagree that calling the current conference at Costa Mesa simply a regional conference is accurate. However, I am sure that there are far less out-of-state pastors who want to make the expense and effort to come to a church in Costa Mesa, stay in some dorms off site and be shuttled in, find your own meals etc as opposed to the wonderful Murrieta Conference Center and all the amenities that made that conference special.

  18. EricL says:

    Steve @17, thanks for sharing your insights. I can see how moving the conference away from Murrieta and its facilities would dampen attendance a bit. (It certainly makes your traveling distance longer.) I wonder why they moved it, since CCCM owns both properties. Cost factor, or does the Bible College need the housing?

  19. Michael says:

    I’m not sure if it was in the old affiliation agreement or just a published statement of Smith’s that attendance at the national conference was expected.
    He reasoned that because the movement was based on “fellowship” that non attendance indicated that someone was no longer in “fellowship” with his brethren.

    I’ll see if I can find the exact quote, but this isn’t really disputed.

    So, to answer your question, Kevin H, the other council members (some,not all) didn’t want the main conference centered in Costa Mesa anymore because that gave the appearance that Brodersen was head of the movement.

  20. Steve Wright says:

    Agreed. What you just posted is not disputed. I disputed the “required” comment and yes it is a distinction with a difference. There are many other ways that pastoral fellowship was encouraged such as monthly lunch gatherings, regional conferences etc. Nothing was ever considered mandatory. Of course if someone was opposed to hanging out with CC pastors it would warrant a question as to why one would seek to be one. Which was always Chuck’s point.

  21. Tim - Doulos says:

    @18, I was told it was moved to CCCM because the Bible College was running out of space. They wanted to open it up to pastors who were not “Senior Pastors” and CCCM had by far more room for that sort of thing.

    Personally, I far prefer the Bible College. There was a lot more fellowship over the meals (though they were loud & crowded), and it was just good to get away.

    FWIW, this is the 1st conference since my initial affliation that I will miss.

  22. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Last night I was watching the Q&A session with the old guys and perhaps I heard it wrong when Don McClure was speaking of the web site — but did he say that they were putting Chuck Smith’s Distinctives on the web site?

    Not that they would just be in there but he seemed to single them out. I thought they had walked away from the Distinctives.

    Help me here

  23. Michael says:

    MLD,

    LOL!

    They had walked back from them and they are still not published in the original form on the CCA site.
    These guys have won the battle…now they’re implementing their reign.

  24. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Well if I heard right, he did identify them as Chuck Smith’s Distictives and it sounded like a future event to be accomplished – so perhaps now they just have an abridged form of them.

  25. Michael says:

    MLD,

    Right now they have some doctrinal statements on various issues…but that group wants the old “Distinctives” back.
    Brodersen envisioned a group where things were more open…but he has capitulated and lost.

  26. Michael says:

    Tim,

    Why are you missing this one?

  27. Tim - Doulos says:

    @26, a variety of reasons. Mostly because (1) it’s simply not the same conference as it has been in the past, and (2) I cannot honestly abide having Skip as a main speaker, especially in light of his current ongoing support of GFA.

  28. Josh the Baptist says:

    *applause*

  29. Michael says:

    Tim,

    Thank you…that tells me you have a blessed congregation, indeed.

  30. Kevin H says:

    Seconding the *applause*.

  31. Jim says:

    Tim, I am not going either. Same reasons.

  32. Kevin H says:

    Thank you, Jim.

  33. pstrmike says:

    @27 and 31

    I am not attending either… same reasons.

    @17 Steve,
    The old statement on affiliation including wording that CCOF was not interested in offering affiliation to those who were not willing to make the time for fellowship by attending conferences, particularly the SPC at Murrieta. Might have been prior to you becoming pastor at your church.

  34. Nonnie says:

    Since Skip will be speaking at the conference, I wonder if GFA will have a table at the conference, as in past years.

  35. Steve Wright says:

    Mike, that sounds pretty much like the wording I recall too.

  36. Tim - Doulos says:

    Thanks…and as I’ve already seen Jim & PstrMike comment, I knew I wouldn’t be alone in my reasoning. I’ve got to think registrations are somewhat low for this particular conference, considering I’ve seen several announcements of it in my email. In past years, one announcement was all that was needed & it got filled up fast.

  37. Steve Wright says:

    If we are taking roll 🙂 …I’m not planning on attending either. However, there are multiple reasons why in my case…

  38. Michael says:

    Thanks to Mike and JJ…I know there are others who won’t be attending because of Heitzig and GFA.
    That is a stand for righteousness.

    Lets hope CCCM has the sense to leave GFA out this year.

  39. Jim says:

    Tim @ 36, yes there has been a lot more promotion of this conference than at any time prior including video invitations. I’m sure it will be interesting.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.