Thanks for this insightful article, Joe. It is unfortunate so many ubf chapter directors ignore such good advice.

Also taggging this article because we were contacted by one of the former ICC members over at reveal.org. There is much in common between ICC and ubf in regard to the need for organizational health.

There are signs of change elsewhere, and talk of change everywhere, but Westloop is living the change right now!

* “West Loop is not really UBF,” or
* “Whoever joins Dr. Ben is no longer UBF,” or
* “West Loop no longer goes fishing, writes testimony, carries out 1:1, teaches the Bible, or ‘trains’ anyone.”

That’s why I LOVE being in UBF! They just “made my day!”

Concerning the development of the reform movement in the ICoC, I didn’t find much info on the Internet. We would probably need to find an isider. One thing I know is that many high ranking leaders, and even Kip McKean (the Samuel Lee figure of the ICoC) repented and apologized. However, when I read Kip McKean’s apology I immediately recognized it was not genuine. He tried to belittle his failues by saying his movement was a “religous experiment”. I think he was mocking those who trusted him and based their whole life on his idea. He should have told them that it was only an “experiment” and not bloody serious, don’t you think? I also read that later Kip McKean started to reestablish ministry in the old ways under a new name. Some of the old chapters seem to still follow him. The rest of the chapters seem to follow one of two different directions. One moderate faction, and one reform faction.

The choice for me comes down to: Listen to God’s voice or propagate UBF heritage.

Perhaps the Spirit will guide local chapters to do those things, perhaps not. But there is no longer any one UBF “director” who is overseeing like Lee did. No one will check up on whether a UBF chapter is upholding the heritage or not.

Ben (and likely you) has already paid a heavy price, taking the blows from leadership so that now the door is open to remain connected to UBF and yet follow the voice of God and follow Jesus wherever He leads. Of course there might still be a few hardships going this route, but it is doable and far better than being a fully rogue chapter.

One thing I learned personally is that we should stop pretending to have all answers concerning spiritual matters, and aspiring towards a perfect theological system. If such a simple system would exist, I think the Bible would teach it more clearly. Let the church embrace different opinions and systems in that regard, as long as they don’t touch the core doctrine that we are saved sinners, by the grace of God. Let the church become a place where people come together who are eager to learn and serve, who are honest with each other so that they can be true friends and brothers who can tolerate and respect different opinions and life styles. The new culture and mindset should be very different from the old culture of shaming and blaming, teaching and training others. This would also be my answer to David: UBF has always claimed it has “no system” and was “non-denominational”. I think that’s something good that could be kept. Well actually, we know that claim never really true, since UBF has sort of created its own rigid system and denomination, but it could become true in the future. So UBF could become a place where Christians with different cultures and theological systems can meet and read the Bible together, and share their views, and encourage each other. A questions would be whether this should be a place that exists in addition to ordinary churches (like Campus Crusade) or if it should be a full fledged church by itself. The former had the advantage that it could help bring more unity to Christians, to have more healthy exchange and cooperation between various churches. We do not need to have the answers right now. UBFers believe they don’t have time to discuss or experiment, they need to be busy with fishing, 1:1 and preparing conferences. But after more than 50 years, it is time to pause and think and discuss and reflect on why “doubling the ministry” and all other number goals never worked out, and so many people left hurt and disappointed. A reflective “time out” is sometimes necessary even if it looks like wasted time. The Bible is full of such examples where people of God took time out from activity and people, often in the desert, often for many years. Even the most active Paul seems to have taken such a 3 year time out after his conversion (that’s how I understand Gal 1). I think the whole machinery needs to stop for a while and only then start to move into another direction, not immediately chose a random new direction and start running again. Take time for healthy and open talks, healthy Bible studies, fellowship with other Christians, etc. and then see what God will make out of this. If you already know all answers and directions, you don’t need to talk. Be open.

When I finally realized (it took 18 years) that trying to do this was nuts, I put aside those expectations and decided to do nothing except what God was truly calling me to do. I put a stop to the insanity, changed careers, slowed down, and focused on my relationships with God and with the people closest to me. No one from HQ formally complained to me that I wasn’t doing enough. But plenty of others have made it clear that I’m not living up to the expectations. That’s a price I now gladly pay.

Here are some thoughts that come to mind when I think about “organizational health” in the UBF context:

Is UBF a church? If you want to setup UBF as a new denomination and as a proper church, I don’t see many paths forward that avoid division, discord and disunity. As mentioned in one of the links above, Korean churches seem to see splitting off as normal and have little problem with dividing many times. I think we have a chance to avoid division here.

Can UBF return to its roots? In Acts 15, the Apostles struggled with the question of whether to propagate their Jewish church customs to the Gentiles. Their conclusion was in Acts 15:28-30 to instruct the new Gentile believes to avoid 3 things. That’s it. I see many paths forward if UBF can find a way to exist as a para-church network.

Although these are big, top-level organizational questions, I see them applicable to every local UBF chapter. Because the UBF headquarters makes almost no demands of local chapters and insists on not getting involved, I see a huge opportunity for local chapters to become healthy.

The first question I would ask at a local chapter level would be: What is the minimum requirement to be identified as “UBF”? Everything outside of those things are up for discussion and change.

Over the course of 8 years, I found the answer to that minimum requirement question. Three things are needed 1) Send performance numbers 2) Send offering money 3) Attend at least 1 conference per year. #2 turned out to be a soft requirement. When I didn’t send offering (I sent $0 over 8 years), no one said anything. But larger chapters wouldn’t get away with that one.

My point is that there is a lot of flexibility here at the local level. The rigidity and in-flexibility is mostly all in our minds. There is a huge gap right now between the perceived requirements and the actual, flexible reality.

The very first question is: Who in the organization should be seated on the leadership team to clarify and set the direction for the organization? The discussion here between MarkO and Chris anticipates this nicely.

And David, I really appreciate your comment. You are exactly correct. It’s one thing to challenge problematic beliefs and practices, and another to come up with effective solutions. Over the years, UBF members have held a variety of beliefs about all sorts of doctrines and practices, but we never actually discussed them. Once discussion starts and the diversity of beliefs is revealed, how do we maintain unity and move forward? How do we promote peace and honor one another’s beliefs and values in the midst of disagreement? How do we keep it from degenerating into political battles that cause more splits? Some would be happy moving in a direction of Reformed tradition and theology, but others wouldn’t. Keeping people quiet and stifling discussion so that the disagreements stay hidden is no longer an option. These are important questions, and Lencioni’s book gives some partial answers. But we all need to think about it more.

@Ben: You raise an issue that should be discussed more deeply. Since I did not grow up in a shame/honor society but in a truth/freedom society, I have a hard time understanding the “Klingon syndrome”. But it is real. I too often forget how much value some place on shame/honor. I really did make every attempt to honor that honor-value system for 20+ years. In the end, I had to return to my roots– to truth and to freedom. I am sure there is a balance somewhere but it can only come from Jesus and his gospel.

I’ve stated that even after becoming a Christian it might be easier for some to commit suicide than to confess a mistake/embarrassment that brings shame to oneself.

I read last week that a man named Dr. James Houston from Regent College in Vancouver BC shared this in a lecture to professors and students: “I want to be a Christian, but in spite of that, I want to be honest.”

I now no longer care primarily about building an organization or changing the nations. I just want to be human and live honestly.

That is a big reason why the first and foremost part of my biblical mandate is to embrace humanity.

It had to be that way for me and my family. As a lone “house church”, we simply had to get out of all UBF authority. I think we have an advantage then, in the UBF discussion. We can speak free of authority. I don’t want authority and I’m not seeking authority.

Btw, in our discussions about authority in our cohort group, I came across a quote indicating that those who seek authority are the least qualified to have authority. I think it was Chuck Swindol; I’ll see if I can find it again.

In regard to comments, it looks like some manual html tags are available such as bold and italic. I know the link tag also works as well. I’ll see if there is a plugin for the format buttons…but some of those mess up our custom theme.

I think it’s called “noon-chi.” I’ve heard it referred to it as “power ranking.” (#6, or 3rd from the bottom.) So, sorry, Brian, since you left UBF, your power ranking is low down (not that you care)…except on ubfriends!

I’ve called the last two listed as “unhealthy dependency,” which also applies to others at the top.

Hey Brian, A technical question: I’m wondering if we can BOLD, italics, or tab/indent, when we make comments?

We are on guard for any sign of interpersonal threat, always watching for any minor slight as well as overt attacks.

Conversely, we may think that others should be doing more for us, even when we are actually capable of doing for ourselves. (We see others as responsible for our happiness)

I do however have many, many ideas of what UBF should and must discuss. And as MarkO mentions, those with the authority to make the changes are sorely needed in those discussions.

I do also find much in James Kim’s words and in all the reform movement material that is helpful– helpful to understand where we’ve been. Such facts are crucial to the discussion of how to move forward. Otherwise we will repeat history yet again.

To answer my own question, What is different this time around? I would say first of all: JoeS, BenT, ChrisZ and BrianK are different. JohnA is heavily involved. And perhaps most importantly, there are many “Yoon’s” involved :)

I will remain the critical voice. I don’t mind being labeled a “bitter, wounded, hurt, critical, rebellious heretic” :) I’m not going anywhere– I’m available if and when UBF leaders would like my input. My wife and I have moved on and are recovering well, and excited about this new phase of our journey.

Best wishes to you and your family. I’m glad that you are still part of this conversation, because you have a wealth of information. You have read and digested large volumes of material (such as the Reform literature) that most UBF members in North America have never seen, and your voice needs to be heard.

When I read the letters by the late James Kim, I sense a great deal of hurt and pain that was never addressed. The issues that he and the reform leaders pointed out were and still are very real. But let me be honest with you: I don’t see much there that can help us to constructively move forward at this time. (I’m not suggesting that you do either.) I find their language to be highly spiritualized. There’s little awareness of the interpersonal dynamics and shame-and-honor culture that caused the previous reform movements to fail. His language is too triumphalistic. And, frankly, it just sounds too Korean. Here in North America, we need to understand and articulate a fresh vision with a truly American voice that respects and builds not simply on the positive aspects of UBF that ought to be recognized, but also on the strengths of American Christianity that ought to be honored.

I ran across a very thoughtful article by a Korean-American Christian blogger about the structural problems in Korean immigrant churches that cause them to split so often. He wrote:

“Most Korean Americans I know have experienced or witnessed a church split in their lives. At least one. And by the time they’re adults just kind of shrug it off as if they are inevitable, because in their minds and experiences, it is. Even pastors will say, oh, it’s that whole depravity thing. We’re sinful creatures, blah blah blah, drivel drivel drivel. As though that is an acceptable posture to project in front of a world that is mocking churches these days. Shame on us, judgment on us, and boo for us. A church splitting is absurdly normal for Korean communities.”

The article has plenty of insights for those would naively believe that getting rid of a few dissenters or troublemakers (like you and me) would solve UBF’s problems. It also cautions would-be reformers against thinking that their ideas would solve the organization’s problems. The full article is available here.

http://nextgenerasianchurch.com/2008/10/06/why-churches-split-a-family-systems-explanation/

Like you, I browsed through Lencioni’s book quickly a few months back. It’s short and easy to read. But now I sense the need to go over it again more carefully, because there’s some excellent thinking in the book that deserves to be unpacked.

You wrote, “I think that it is virtually impossible to correct/change anything, where there is an undertow of refusal to acknowledge that there is anything wrong.”

For the most part, I agree with you. It’s difficult to start addressing problems that few are able to see or acknowledge. But God has a way of going ahead of us and starting to work things out before we are aware of it. Corporate repentance and public acknowledgement of failure doesn’t necessarily have to happen at the beginning of recovery. Perhaps it will happen more gradually along the way. Perhaps it will happen only in retrospect some years later, after some constructive changes are already in place. Or perhaps it will never happen. Those of us who would like to see change should be open to all of these possibilities.

You and I see certain problems that others do not see. Is it because they will not believe that problems exist? Or is it because, for a whole host of reasons, they cannot believe?

A common mistake in evangelism is to suppose that, if people don’t accept your offer of the gospel, that they are stubbornly and willfully rejecting it. Yes, sometimes people refuse to believe. But sometimes they are unable to believe because of complex historical, emotional and intellectual barriers that have not yet been overcome. Sometimes God works among hearers of the gospel in powerful ways that don’t fit the evangelist’s paradigm.

I want to see positive change in the UBF community in the years ahead. I want to extend grace to leaders and give them the benefit of the doubt when I can, without being condescending or naïve. And I want to have eyes to see God’s work wherever and however it happens, even if it turns out to look very different from what I anticipated.

It would be so easy to change UBF– just face the facts and remove the bonds of shepherd/sheep authority. Then discussions can begin to make the organization healthy. But no valid discussion can take place until at least the first of those is widely supported.

Alas, in the end, your words are deja vu… For example in 2001 our good friend James Kim wrote similar words during the 3rd reform movement.

Can someone point out what is different about this 4th reform movement? I see a lot of re-arranging chairs but I see zero evidence of real change.

Here is a relevant quote from James Kim’s 2001 letter (he died not long after this). The full letter is here: James Kim Open Letter 2001, but it is very long and a bit troublesome to read through all the details. He makes excellent points however, points that we are still talking about 11 years later:

“Yes, we have had many great assets of His people who could have been Christian leaders in every aspect of society in the 157 countries. But it’s not too late if we reform and steer this organization of UBF in the right direction, no longer veering off from the right trail. Many prominent spiritual leaders, Bible scholars, theologians and Christian leaders in every rank and file can be raised up and we can truly become salt and light of our Lord Jesus Christ in this 21st century if we act now.”

“If we don’t pay attention to the voice of truth now, because of our fear of the tight power of darkness, we will be subject to history’s judgment as the ones who disobeyed the Lord’s call. I believe that Korean reform shepherds and American reformers presented the full vision of the Reformed UBF through the blue print of the Reform UBF, which is already edited and published.”

“Our Lord Jesus said, “No one tears a patch from a new garment and sews it on an old one. If he does, he will have torn the new garment, and the patch from the new will not match the old.” (Luke 5:36) Yes, unity is very important. But to the Lord there is no unity that can be accomplished by tailoring the reform movement to fit into D. Lee’s old system of a pyramid-style structure in which the leader never repents and everyone else always repents. This creates a double standard. Should we compromise for the sake of unity?”

“Even if we want to do it, it cannot be done because of the characteristics of the kingdom of God. It is like tearing a patch from a new garment and sewing it on an old one. Again our Lord Jesus said, “And no one pours new wine into old wineskins, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, new wine must be poured into new wineskins. And no one after drinking old wine wants the new, for he says, ‘The old is better.’” (Luke 5:37-39)”

“It is so sad that we have to undergo such pain and insecurity because the ministry we relied on as a part of ourselves has been shipwrecked. And I am sorry that I am one of the reformers who had to shake up and challenge the old system of UBF, which became like the old sweet wine in inflexible old wineskins. But I cannot curve the truth of the Scripture. The dynamic gospel work that is going on now must be put in the new frame of the gospel work in order to be fully fomented.”

“On the other hand, I don’t want people to misunderstand in such a way that we deny all the good work of the Holy Spirit in UBF simply because we reject the darkness of D. Lee deeply embedded in LeeBF. We never deny the goodness of one-to-one Bible study methodology, of Christian training; nor give any hint of discrediting the great mission work of salvation through Bible Korea and world mission. The purpose of my letter is to disclose how much LeeBF has been off from the original purpose of the aforementioned spiritual directions of the Holy Spirit. Just as the reform confession indicated, the resource and power of serving Bible Korea and world mission must come from the grace of our Lord Jesus and the power of the Holy Spirit. As we realize the falsehood deeply embedded among us, we wholeheartedly return to the original purpose of our Lord’s will upon one-to-one Bible study and upon training and the world mission and Bible Korea. Therefore the UBF reform movement is not the work of division, but the work of restoration, returning to the true teaching of the Scripture and true rejuvenation in the Lord.”

As you stated, and which I have also expressed to those who would listen, is that there tends to be some reluctance to “fess up” and to take responsibility for causing such an ongoing exodus of good Christians from our church.

I think that it is virtually impossible to correct/change anything, where there is an undertow of refusal to acknowledge that there is anything wrong.

I’ve heard that some say that there is acknowledgment of wrongs in private among some leaders, and that some changes are taking place. Perhaps so. But regarding such clandestine and non-transparent ways of repentance, the Bible calls for public repentance, especially when the sins committed were also public, as in scores of people leaving angry, disgruntled, hurt, embittered, disillusioned, and wounded by their own shepherds and chapter leaders.

Another reason for ignoring or minimizing UBF’s lack of organizational health is that there are “spurts of new sheep coming” in various places. This will likely continue to happen, because UBF’s strength has always been and still is hospitality, generosity and sacrifice for new young Bible students, what some have called “love bombing.”

But this will not stop middle-tier UBF leaders from leaving (on average after five to twenty years), if we continue to not intentionally and specifically address areas of unhealthiness in our ministry.