“Does God allow his people to express anger? Yes, he does. But only under these circumstances: You are reacting against actual sin, you are more concerned with the offense against God than the offense against yourself, and you are expressing your anger in ways consistent with Christian character. And as we can all testify, this kind of righteous anger is difficult and rare.”

We in the west might perhaps have some difficulty in grasping this. Yet, I believe it needs to be done because any Christian’s core value must be loyalty to Christ first and foremost. “Do you love me more than these?” (Jn 21:15a)

This is at the heart of the ubf/ex-ubf miscommunication. ubf people keep talking about the “inter-personal” problems between ubf people and people who left. People who left keep talking about the problems between ubf ideology/heritage/image/history and current ubf members, and also their own recovery from such ideology,etc.

So I really wish ubf people would consider the reality that even if all inter-personal conflicts were fully resolved, there is still a problem, the same problem in fact that causes the exodus of leaders every few years. And let’s say I was best friends with all ubf people. I would still never return to such a controlling system.

In other words, people are not the problem; the religious machine called ubf is the problem. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, ubf directors have diagrammed the ubf machine several times.

God became flesh/man to reach us. Thus, meeting in person or talking in person changes/improves the dynamic of communication, rather than just in email/cyberspace.

Since you will be in Kyiv, Ukraine, a meeting of sorts can perhaps be arranged. Perhaps even a phone call. Small gestures of love, I believe, can go a long way.

You wrote: “Thanks Chris for your comment. I have not met you personally, but I want to meet with you someday when the opportunity comes.”

ubf ought to fly Chris and his family on an all-expenses paid vacation (i.e. no ubf meetings) in America, including a stop in Chicago, so all the leaders could apologize in person, given the abuse he has endured.

What day it would be when ex-ubf people are also allowed into such open dialogue!

Nor can open dialog happen when the chapter director has the power to kick members out of the church, arrange or not arrange or postpone or cancel their marriage, or shame and blame member s in front of the others in meetings. There are many things that are interlocking here. All the practices and teachings of UBF establish an unhealthy alliance where all parts reinforce each others and make it difficult to change things without making a fundamental paradigm shift. For us, who already have released ourselves from our “self-incurred tutelage” (as Kant would say), it is easy to talk freely. But, as Brian already pointed out, for the sheep it is very difficult, as they have to fear the power of the authorities. That’s another reason why older members are obliged to really push things forward, because only they really can do it. Also, the 2nd gens should push more, as they have a jester’s license since their parents will not kick them out or declare them as “children of the devil” so easily.

And the fact that this person felt they could say such a thing to you Ben demonstrates that even a decade ago you were much more willing to discuss issues and problems than most other ubf leaders.

Ouch!

Yeah, Chris, when we have such “open” meetings, I could have gone on for several hours more.

Without a doubt, Brian, “sheep” must also join in such open dialogue and communication. That would be the only way for “top down” domination to cease, and for true servanthood and diversity to begin among us.

Do you think that it is possible for UBF to begin to have all our elders meetings, member’s meeting, weekly fellowship meetings, staff meetings with such a free flowing dialogue, open-heartedness, and exchange in love and diversity?

I ask this question because our UBF meetings have a flow of “order” coming from the oldest senior leader/missionary imposing themselves through their stories, announcements, jokes, prayer topics onto everyone else who really has “no choice” but to agree and accept what he says. This, I think, is what Brian is sharing, which has “crushed the spirit” of many, sooner or later.

Perhaps, the elder’s meeting under your stewardship is beginning to have such open dialogue.

* Perhaps, you might freely share with your fellow elders on Tue evening the spirit of our happy meeting at your house on Sun, and ask the input of Daniel, Augustine and Alan.

* Perhaps, you might want to suggest to the General Director, to UBF staff and fellowship leaders to have such open-hearted “official” UBF meetings at EVERY meeting.

* Perhaps, next year’s annual member’s meeting may have such an “open” forum.

Then, as I have said, if all UBF meetings becomes like the meeting we had, I will never ever miss any UBF meetings, ever!

What have ubf members and former members thanked me for the most these last 2 years? For listening without giving commands or advice! I’ve listened to so many stories of pain and abuse, and gave no advice. I only shared briefly some of my experiences and principles. And I have an enormous amount of energy from God to keep on listening… and blogging.

Shepherds who are free from abusive control then feel so good about themselves and about ubf ministry, wondering why sheep don’t rejoice, why they are not so thankful. It is nothing new; it is the same pattern as always, just with different people.

I sincerely hope that such kumbaya moments as above may lead to the opening of the eyes of all of us to see the facts of abuse and release the bonds of shepherd/sheep relationships. Such things do not require a meeting with every person individually.

Holla.

Cringing is part of friendship. Amen. Thank you all for the kind words above.

I just wanted to say that John Y was very encouraged by this recent respectful dialogue.

Keep it up everyone!

Well, the Bible clearly says that wives should obey their husbands. So yesterday, I commanded my wife not to submit to me anymore. Let’s see how that works out.

“What I admire about Koreans is that they can adapt very quickly to adverse conditions, learn new things very quickly, and can make radical moves in their lives if they are determined.”

Indeed. South Korea just recently elected a woman president. Even the USA has not done that yet. And Psy has gone global, beating everyone in youtube views.

Perhaps Koreans have the potential to be even more progressive and open and radical than Americans?

Or perhaps the Korean missionaries living foreign countries missed out on the cultural revolution occurring in South Korea?

This movie is always on my mind as I blog. Surely Jesus was a heretic at the end of his life to the eyes of the ordinary Jews and the Jewish leaders.

Seeing Jesus smile at the criminal on the cross was the specific moment that melted my heart and sparked my multi-year transformational journey.

Paradise was born in my heart at that time because just before watching this I felt I had failed as a UBF Director and had little reason to live:

Of course, we know it is indeed difficult for a ubf director to acknowledge and address these problems. We need to understand that this is the hardest thing ever for them to do, and in fact, to do such things does require God’s redemptive intervention. I became convinced that Jesus Himself must intervene for reconciliation to happen.

[I think there will be a lot of donkeys who see God’s angel and suddenly begin speaking. And there probably will be a lot of horses who see blinding lights soon too…]

1) Leave UBF or stay.

2) Cultish behavior.

3) Marriage issues.

4) Frustration (that cannot be addressed).

5) Let’s talk! (Oh no, let’s not…)

In ubf, I always crossed the half-way line. This video expresses my frustration in dealing with Korean culture. What options are there?

But seriously, the role of woman is a big issue that needs many blogs to discuss. As you might guess, hereticman is an egalitarian.

As a ubf fellowship leader, I often took a lot of flack for allowing women to lead bible studies and give messages. I even trained some women to be conference messengers.

What I hope our Korean brothers and sisters would understand is that Chris and I (and others) are not disparaging Koran culture or hoping that Koreans become Germans or Americans. We are criticizing and exposing based on Christian ideas. Of course we are doing so with our own cultural bias. But that is a good thing.

As an American who spent 24 years in ubf, I feel that my culture was fully suppressed and that I was demanded to become Korean in order to become holy and pleasing to God.

I think we all need to strive for a Christian community that goes beyond our own cultures. I have found Koreans and Americans have a HUGE opportunity to do that. But it takes a bit more flexibility from the Korean side of things.

Thanks, James, for not being silent, and for being willing to dialogue on this “rogue” site. Without your willingness to do so, the vision of Joe for UBFriends might have never seen the light of day.

I love Chris’ comments extolling the strengths and virtues of Koreans. I have known them and seen their beauty since the day I stepped into UBF in 1980. I have said to many people that no matter how much I strongly disagree with certain things in UBF, I will have no hesitation to entrust my life and the lives of my children to my Korean brethren.

I also love Joe’s statement of what U in UBF does and does not stand for.

Wow. Today, by the grace of God, may be a good Sabbath day.

Unity-in-diversity is not just found in creation; it is a feature of God himself.

About ten years ago, Christian apologist Ravi Zacharias visited Penn State University and gave wonderful talks to faculty and staff and then to students. During one of the question-and-answer periods, he started to talk about the university (unity-in-diversity) as a picture of the community of God. He said, “There is unity and diversity in the community of the Trinity.” I hope and pray that UBF will display this as well. After all, the “U” in “UBF” means university, not uniformity.

When you say that “these problems are not just UBF problem, but it is same in all Asian culture which was influenced by Confucius.” this gives me some hope because it seems you’re really rating this as a problem. We don’t need to be fatalistic about problems. We can overcome problems. Aren’t UBFers famous for overcoming any kind of problem (I mean this honestly)? But I also observed that many Koreans in UBF do not see Confucianism as a problem, they see it rather as a problem that they have become “tainted” with western rational logic and the spirit of discussion, and they sometimes even “repent” of that. They seem to think that Confucianism is the cherry on the cake of Christianity, or maybe sometimes even the other way around, Christianity is the cherry on top of the cake of Confucianism. It would be an important first step if UBF leaders recognize and admit that such thinking is a problem.

Just to be clear: Confucianism is not all bad, it has many good teachings, and loyalty is a real virtue, but the problem is when you start to mix these teachings with Christian teachings and set the wrong priorities. Do we agree in this? We must put love and truth above everything else. The Bible says “God is love” and “the spirit is the truth”. Just read the first verses of 3 John – it’s all about living and walking in the truth, not about being loyal.

I also think it’s too fatalistic and insulting if we insinuate that Koreans can’t argue logically and cannot make drastic moves or challenge authorities. What I admire about Koreans is that they can adapt very quickly to adverse conditions, learn new things very quickly, and can make radical moves in their lives if they are determined. To leave Korea and work as a missionary without being paid and without knowing the language and culture at all and without knowing whether they will find a job is a good example. We all marvel and acknowledge this courage and decidedness. And I believe many did this against the advice and wish of their parents. I.e. they were principally able to ignore Confucian traditions. All members, including the now stubborn and hardened leaders, once had this flexibility and willingness to live according to the truth. If you look into Korean history, there are also events like the 5.18 uprising which show that Koreans are not principally unable to stand up against authorities.

Recognizing the problems in many UBF practices and teachings is not only a problem of logical thinking. These problems have also manifested in many staggering grievances like those reported in the 1976 letter. When reading about such things, you don’t need much logical thinking to understand that there are problems, but you need a heart. And I think if anything, Koreans have big hearts. They really should be able to understand.

In the Korean Parliament, sometimes many congressmen from different parties just cannot debate coolly, logically. When they have different opinions, many of them just get upset and go out to the front podium and fist fight each other, raising voices, saying bad words each other. In other word, angry emotions come out first ahead of logical explanation. The cultural norm is that if you agree with me, you are my friend, but if you do not agree with me, you are my enemy. When I came to America as a training medical doctor, I saw medical doctors freely share different ideas in a very cordial/ respectful way. I learned from them a phrase, “I respectfully disagree with you.” There is no such phrase in Korea.

Another problem is as Dr Underwood mentioned in his essay, loyalty is virtue,( not loyal is immoral) more important than honesty. In the hierarchical society like Korea they find where they are in their pecking order and see “Noonchi” of their superiors and keep their mouth shut. In other word, they are afraid of expressing different ideas from their superiors. These problems are not just UBF problem, but it is same in all Asian culture which was influenced by Confucius.

That’s why sometimes it is so difficult to understand each other. But it is OK because in God we can have unity in diversity. Jesus who is the Creator God came down to this earth and mingled with people who are soooo different from him and accepted/ welcomed them just as they are.

Also, even if wives may not be the visible leader of various UBF chapters, it is frequently shared that some wives of UBF chapter leaders hold absolute sway in their own chapters, and they instill “fear and trembling” in all junior members of their respective chapter.

I fully agree with your last statement. But I have honestly heard more frequently from not a few people the EXACT OPPOSITE statement that if change happens too soon in UBF, the consequences will be dire!

Yes, some people claim that UBF should have changed A LONG TIME AGO. And others say that UBF should NEVER, EVER change. But as you know I’m a very moderate person. Therefore I will say that UBF ought to change TODAY (2Co 6:2). And because I’m quite patient and gracious, I will even settle for TOMORROW, or perhaps even THIS MONTH.

Some others, wish that UBF changed YESTERDAY. So anything short of this comes across as excuses, pacifying others, playing games, bolstering egos, etc.

For sure, we, especially I, don’t know what the heck I am doing. But I am going to keep on doing until God and the Spirit does whatever He wishes (Ps 115:3; 135:6; Jn 3:8). Only Jesus alone can build His church (Mt 16:18).

But the elder’s meeting and weekly staff meeting are all men, which might be the influence of partly Presbyterian male only elders (maybe), and partly/mainly Korean male dominance. Sorry for more of my messy reasons/explanations.

“1) A lack of familiarity with the English language. Since Korean is their primary language they would not likely be able to communicate in English as well as native English speakers would. This is just pure, plain, simple fact, nothing more.”

> I call bs on this. How many years have some of the old guard been in America? 30 years? 40 years? And they still talk like babies? I used to think like this. Oh missionary so-and-so is just so helpless, so I need to help him. This happened on many occasions, I was directed to help the English of many Korean missionaries in ubf. Guess what? They knew English quite well. Even the old guard can speak quite well. They hide behind “language problem” far too often. I’ve seen some of the emails of the old guard. They speak and understand just fine, at least in America. [The English training I was supposed to be giving was not for the Korean missionary, but training for me to learn how to train.]

“2) An open discussion levels the playing field, which is anathema to Korean culture. My guess is that this subtle subjective reason may be the predominant reason. Silence may be their silent protest that they do not like nor approve of it.”

> The old guard is hardly silent! They speak SO much to each other, by email, by phone! And there are certain networks of people who are indeed a level playing field. What they are doing is shunning ex-members, based on Jesus who remained silent. The old guard did this in their interaction with the NAE, who called their bluff and kicked them out. God only knows why the NAE let them back in after this.

“3) An dislike and unfamiliarity with an open forum. Most older traditional missionaries grew up in UBF where the leader directed and the rest “just obeyed.” An open dialogue challenges that authoritarian and hierarchical model, which has been UBF’s only paradigm and framework. When the 1976 and 1990 “rebellion” occurred, up to 1/3rd of UBF left or were cast out.”

> Fair enough.

“4) A “misunderstanding” of the Trinity as a STRUCTURED ORDER of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, rather than a RELATIONAL EQUALITY of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.”

> Misunderstanding the Trinity is not the problem for most of the old guard, Ben. Rejection of the Trinity is the problem. The 50th Anniversary Book is proof that the old guard rejects the Trinity, views the Holy Spirit as their enemy, accepts some sort of magical spirit power, and believes in a dualistic god of “Father” and “Jesus”, and Jesus always submits to the Father in their mind. This can be proven by examining the ubf lectures as well.

1) A lack of familiarity with the English language. Since Korean is their primary language they would not likely be able to communicate in English as well as native English speakers would. This is just pure, plain, simple fact, nothing more.

2) An open discussion levels the playing field, which is anathema to Korean culture. My guess is that this subtle subjective reason may be the predominant reason. Silence may be their silent protest that they do not like nor approve of it.

3) A dislike/unfamiliarity with an open forum. Most older traditional missionaries embraced a UBF where the leader directed and the rest “just obeyed.” An open dialogue challenges that authoritarian and hierarchical model, which has been UBF’s predominant paradigm and framework. When the 1976 and 1990 “rebellion” occurred (by their own countrymen), up to 1/3rd of UBF left or were “cast out.”

4) A “misunderstanding” of the Trinity as a STRUCTURED ORDER of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, rather than a RELATIONAL EQUALITY of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Please feel free to fully critique my “miserable mean messy” reasons.

It is good to hear that things are changing. But it is not so good to hear that things are changing very slowly and gradually only. As I have often explained, my main issue with this “gradual reform” paradigm is that it shows that people haven’t understood that the problems at hand are very serious and that spiritual abuse is a sin. If a Christian recognizes he is committing a sin, should he rather make gradual changes or should he actually make radical change? Let me quote a UBF lecture: “What is true repentance? True repentance brings a radical transformation in one’s life.” If people don’t want to make a radical change, this indicates that they haven’t understood that what they are doing is seriously wrong. That’s what worries me. There are both horrible individual wrongdoings of leaders in the past (like those mentioned in the 1976 letter) and systemic issues in the core teachings and practices of UBF (particularly everything that has to do with “spiritual order” and personal shepherding) which have caused and facilitated these wrongdoings. Real change can only start when people are willing to admit the mistakes and sins of the past, and willing to question even their core traditions, founder legends and “achievements” which they are so proud of, if they are unhealthy and not in line with the gospel. The good thing is that once this “small” step is made, not only real change will follow, but also real reconciliation. And there will be a guarantee that the same mistakes will not be repeated. If mistakes are never really admitted, there is no such guarantee.

Btw, I like your term “mam power”. You’re right, UBF needs more women to speak up and also comment here. Unfortunately, most of them including my dear wife are too shy. In the meetings in our chapter, all the women missionaries sat in one corner of the table and never said anything on their own initiative. But when only men have the say, bad things happen (a picture speaks more than words: http://www.thezooom.com/2012/12/8971/).

I too was glad that Sharon came to the Chesapeake retreat. Her presence there, along with Deborah Ward, Liz Hembekides, Christy Toh and other women was invaluable. (Kathy Vucekovich was greatly missed. I look forward to her participation too.)

Another barrier to open communication that I have sensed is the feeling that, unless we are devoting a significant portion of our retreat and staff meeting time to group Bible study and/or listening to messages and/or testimony writing, that God will not be pleased with us. Bible study is great. But it is possible to study the Bible too much. In the sense that Bible study can be a means of retreat into familiar, comfortable and superficial interaction. If Jesus were physically present at our next staff meeting, I don’t think he would be telling us to go back to the Bible and study it more diligently. I think he would say, “Put your Bibles down for a while and talk to one another and really listen to one another. Listen to the voice of my Spirit speaking through one another, even in the midst of everyone’s sinfulness.”

Even at that Chesapeake retreat, only a handful ofthe 50+ people who were present actually contributed to the discussion. Why? I don’t know for sure. People have various reasons for remaining silent. That poem that Sharon linked to yesterday, the one about passion versus perfection, is really making me think. It’s quite possible that many of our longtime members and leaders are reluctant to open their mouths for fear of saying something that is less than perfect. Perhaps they are afraid of expressing negative emotion that would reflect complaint, anger, doubt, fear, and other things that we would rather not show one another. I hope that we can learn to trust one another enough to blurt out things in a very honest and imperfect way, then extending grace to one another, so that greater trust may develop. I see this happening on UBFriends, especially during the last 2-3 days, and it is gratifying.

Surely, only God can truly change the tide, where open dialogue becomes the norm, rather than something that feels like pulling teeth, and something we have to exhaustively fight for every single time.

About 3-1/2 years ago, I attended a senior staff retreat in Delaware. For one whole day, we engaged in open discussion among ourselves and with the current and past General Directors. It lasted just one day, but it was a helpful start.

And a few months ago, we attended another brief retreat in Maryland. About half the time was devoted to ceremonial and business matters. But there were a couple of hours of discussion that touched on these uncomfortable issues.

My sense is that the older leaders are split on this issue of open discussion. Some recognize the need and want it to continue, and others want it to stop or to get over with it as soon as possible and would like to throw up roadblocks to keep it from happening.

If our friend JA would moderate such a panel, I would gladly participate (in the panel, not in the conference itself).

The problem as you put it (spiritual order) is that it has taken 50 years for some older missionaries to realize that you ABSOLUTELY CANNOT relate to people based on hierarchy, seniority, superiority, etc.

Many missionaries “painfully” realize this when their own children will not take this “keep spiritual order” way of relating to people.

Older missionaries who primarily regard and relate to younger people as subordinates will become an increasingly isolated and irrelevant breed of people. Again, I am not criticizing. I am simply making a statement, which I believe is absolutely true.

God, who is in the highest heavens, condescended Himself to be “below us.” Then how can any Christian leader who regards juniors as subordinates ever amount to anything significant or spiritual?

[Note to our silent readers: being someone’s friend does not mean they mutually agree with you or that you support what they are doing. John and I are clear that we are friends, but we don’t fully agree with each other’s approaches.]

Acts 7:56 “Look,” he said, “I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”

Oh how liberating this verse was and still is! Just before Stephen died at the hands of religious leaders, he saw Jesus STANDING! Our pastor’s point was that Jesus is up and moving, and working toward reconciliation in the hearts of people.

I see now that I shed so many tears that day last year during this Acts 7 sermon because I always subconsciously imagined Jesus just sitting on His throne.

[I’m not really being facetious here; I was in an actual bible study once where the leader told us that even God sits on his chair a lot!]

But it did just happen, correct? I have heard good things about The Well. I think if ubf has any chance of staying in existence longer than SVM (which ubf is loosely patterned after), ubf would do well to stay at “The Well”.

Still, the Well is not an effort to reconcile ubf and ex-ubf, but it is a huge step toward reconciliation within ubf. Perhaps that has to happen first.

I cannot but think of all the “practical” reasons, responses, excuses, reactions, rationales, as to why such a simple suggestion of spending quality face time together in mutual interaction so virtually IMPOSSIBLE. It has not happened in 50 years of UBF history, especially in “top-down” run staff conferences, national conferences, international conferences, or even the recent annual member’s meeting in Chicago.

(James, would you do a survey and get the honest opinion of all 44 people or so who attended the member’s meeting, preferably from those under 50 years old. I’ve already heard from at least 3 people who attended who were not happy with it. I shall spare the detailed comments on this public space.)

I’m not being funny here. I’m not being critical. I’m being real. It is the single major reason why I will likely not attend the upcoming staff conference. It is still agenda-driven, and agenda-heavy. Any interaction “on the side” will seemingly just be “tolerated” in order to appease those who need such interaction to discuss the “inconsequentials.” OK, I’m being funny here. Sorry.

We have a few reactions to the discussions above. Here is our 2×2=4 cents’ worth.

Regarding the Members’ meeting: This year, we were invited to send a representative from Penn State to serve on the board of members. For practical and family reasons, we were not able to send anyone this year. But we are thankful to James Kim for the invitation and his efforts to include new members who are more representative of UBF in North America. This is a positive sign. We also like Chris’ suggestion to leave as much time as possible for open discussion. In recent years, we have been frustrated because, while many people in UBF leadership positions do (at least verbally) acknowledge the desperate need for open communication and discussion at national meetings, such discussions usually gets cut short; the brief time together gets filled up with messages, reports, and so on, leaving only a few minutes for discussion. Given the nature and seriousness of the issues faced by ubf at this time, it’s going to be necessary to suspend the business-as-usual activities as much as possible to devote maximal time to passionate, messy, open dialogue, exposing the conflicts within the community that lie poorly buried just below the surface, to listen to painful truths about ourselves and then seek God’s face through repentance and prayer. The reports and other business matter can be distributed and read by members ahead of time so that the precious time together doesn’t get squandered. Outside of ubf, I’ve served on many professional committees, review panels and advisory boards. In all cases, the necessary subject matter was distributed to panel members ahead of time in electronic form so that the face time together wouldn’t be squandered. As Brian has frequently pointed out, sitting down in a chair for long periods of time listening to presentations is not an effective way to build community, especially in western contexts.

Regarding diversity in the church: Sharon and I both believe that God’s vision for the church does involve diversity visbily expressed and respected at the local level. Through some of the books that we’ve been reading lately (for example, A Community Called Atonement by Scot McKnight), and through various happenings in our lives and ministry, we’re coming to understand that unity-in-diversity is an essential outcome of the gospel. In these postmodern times, the Spirit of God seems to be pressing everyone on all sides to stop wasting so much energy reinforcing their own narrow boundaries and draw near to one another by drawing closer to Christ. We think that God’s vision for the church does include
* diversity of ethnicity and culture
* diversity of spiritual gifts
* diversity of doctrinal understandings on non-essential matters.
Ideally, this diversity should be evident *within* local congregations, not *between* local congregations. Because when you have to live in close contact and friendship with people who are very different from you, that’s where you really begin to understand and experience God’s love. It’s uncomfortable, painful, and messy, but very necessary if we are to grow in God’s grace and witness to the world.

Most German UBF chapters are registered as “Verein” (association) in order to get benefits like tax exemption. (Germans are known as “Vereinsmeier”, they like their sports club or carnival or rabbitkeeper association – a church as a “Verein” is somewhat awkward though). Such associations need a members’ meeting at least once a year. So in order to conform to the law, we really had such a meeting in our German UBF chapter every year. But it was only a formal thing, usually done very quickly on New Year’s Eve in a harmonic atmosphere, and nobody took it serious. The Abraham of faith was always “elected” univocally as association president (i.e. the director suggested him as president, and of course nobody ever disagreed, since it had no real meaning anyway, and since nobody would ever disagree with the director anyway). Nothing was discussed at such meetings, no questions were ever asked. Participants were all shepherds and missionaries of the chapter.

A guess in America it’s similar, it is only a pro forma thing. But one notable difference that is confusing (not only for Brian), in America the chapters are not registered individually, bot form a corporation (right?) and instead of a real members’ meeting there is are meeting of hand-picked representatives of members only. This makes it even more of a farce. When such hand-picked loyal member have to listen to sermons and reports until they are tired, when open discourse is never practiced or encouraged through the year, and harmony and obedience is considered to be the highest goal, and even the introductory sermon preaches unity based on John 17, when the underlying culture does not allow to question superiors, do you really expect that there would be ever a single vote against a decision of the leaders, or even a disapproval of any report? Much less a majority vote. To expect a real check-and-balances effect from such a meeting would be foolish. James, since you understand Korean culture and UBF, you should know best. UBF works very differently from a German rabbitkeeper association, since it is not only based on Korean culture, but leaders are considered to be shepherds and authorities in a “spiritual order” which has to be kept by all means, which is not the case in any ordinary association. It would be completely alien to any UBFer to question any of their decisions or reports, even publicly in front of the other members, in such a meeting.

My suggestions for the future: 1. Label it properly as “Members Representatives’ Meeting” not “Members meeting”. 2. In all reports, make it fully clear what the purpose of the meeting is and how these representatives are chosen. 3. Send reports to the participants before the meeting, instead forcing people to listen to them at the meeting, so that they can read them beforehand (many have long travel time that could be used for reading anyway) so that they have more time to discuss and socialize at the actual meeting. Do not allow that there is not enough time to answer questions any more. 3. Throughout the year, practice discourse in all internal meetings. 4. After the meeting, publish a real protocol. All members should know for instance, which questions were asked at the meeting, and which answers were given, and which questions were not answered; which decisions have been approved, which people have been elected, which directions has been found, and how they has been found. In short: Make things transparent.

3.7 Powers and Rights of Members. Members of the corporation in good standing have the power to:

(a) Elect elders, president, vice-president, recording secretary of the corporation at the annual meeting of members.

(b) Approve or disapprove, upon nomination of the general director, local chapter directors and treasurers, central treasurers, world mission/finance director, daily bread directors, and USA/Canada coordinator.

(c) Remove from office any elder, officer, or chapter director for good and sufficient cause, at a regular or special meeting.

(d) Hear, consider, and approve or disapprove reports of the board of elders of the corporation.

(e) At a regularly constituted meeting, modify, suspend, or veto any decision of the board of elders, by a majority vote of all members present.

(f) Hear and act as final arbiter in any dispute between or concerning the elders, chapter directors, officers or individual members.

But those statements are vague and don’t establish anything different form normal ubf meetings. The only real difference from a ubf weekly meeting is scale, and special nomination, which in my chapter came only from the chapter director. So I guess my chapter director was a staff/director member and we only had 1 “corporation member”.

So why have such “corporation members”, other than to satisfy legal demands of proving to be a corporation? And why would ubf want to be a corporation? I thought ubf was a non-profit church?

2.1 Qualification of Members. The corporation members of the University Bible Fellowship shall be Christians who confess the Apostles’ Creed and who believe the Bible to be the inspired word of God, the only rule of faith and practice, and who concur in the purpose of this corporation to propagate the Gospel of Jesus to all people of the world, especially to college students and teenagers, through the study and teaching of the
Bible.
2.2 Election of Members. Qualified persons may be elected as corporation members of the University Bible Fellowship at the annual meeting of members, by nomination from the floor and a majority affirmative vote of those present. The Board of Elders may also elect members on a temporary basis, but such persons must be approved at the next meeting of members.

Chicago being a headquarters of UBF, most of initial members are from Chicago. It was around 20 people. Later we gradually added members from big chapters like New York, Washington, LA. Then gradually added medium size chapters including Canada. Now we have about 60 people. What do we do? After message we hear various committee report (Education committee, North America coordinator’s report, GD’s report, Young generation report, Medical mission report, CBF, Daily Bread report etc.) including the North America financial report, and find new direction for the year. One general rule is that chapter directors cannot be elected to be members. It is a kind of check and balance system. I don’t know this answer is satisfactory to your question.

> I would say the silence of 99% of ubf members and directors in person and online is what shows dialogue with ubf is not possible.

“And about “understanding” and intercultural communication. My opinion is that no native needs close international communication and “understanding” at all.”

> I think you expressed a key Christian missionary principle: let the natives lead, because it is their ministry. A missionary who follows Christ’s example would never establish themselves as kings or lords, demanding obedience of the natives. Perhaps some ubf missionaries should try to evangelize some remote part of Africa, and see if they will bow down so humbly?

“I left ubf. And all the natives left ubf here in our city. we are together, we study the Bible together, we communicate, we are Christains.”

> Are you hearing this, ubf directors? I thought a certain someone reconciled Russia ubf so well?

“We don’t feel and can’t see any need to “understand” and to “submit” to a korean king/director or to a strange organization in order to become “better” Christians or “marine” Christians.”

> Amen for that. I just realize an odd contradiction in ubf. They claim to be marines and holy soldiers, but what is the primary action of a ubf man or woman? Sitting in chairs! One shepherd began to complain about sitting so much. Later he wrote in his testimony that he “repented” and now accepted his chair as his cross.

“btw my teacher once told me how to remember the spelling of the word “difficult”. “ff” are like a king and a queen. Two “i”s are like guards on both sides. Then comes “cult”. He said that it is very difficult to be under kings, in a cult.”

> Thanks Vitaly, I needed that humor!

> Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts Ben. That is all I ask. Because I know you somewhat, I could already guess at your answers. But thanks for expressing them anyway. Just the fact that you are willing to break the silence means volumes to me. It is why I consider WL Church to be redeemed. And yes they are hard questions, but the “marines of Christianity” should be able to take such hard questions, right?

“I do not really know how to answer question 1 comprehensively. I think that a consistent regular tither to UBF would qualify. Of course, UBF’s statement of faith is that we believe the Apostle’s Creed.”

> Ben, you misunderstood my question. Was I a member of ubf? Sure. But was I a Member? No. In my chapter, only 2 people were Members. Member Shepherds are those who attend the Member’s meeting, traditionally held two weeks before the first Staff meeting of the year. I would like to know what those qualifications are. After 24 years in ubf, I feel that I deserve this answer. There are many kinds of shepherds in ubf, after the sheep level: Shepherd, Fellowship Shepherd, Staff Shepherd, Member Shepherd and Director Shepherd. People can say, well it doesn’t really matter. It does matter to me. Why does ubf need a class structure? Why a semi-secret “Members Meeting”? I know in the past SLee would hand pick who was actually a Member Shepherd.

“But for any loyal committed UBF person to read it, it would be like being bludgeoned and sledge-hammered without ceasing, which would make it very, very difficult to read. It may be like reading about your own dear brother or sister whom you love being clobbered by hearing only bad and horrible things, while you know that your siblings also have a lovely aspect to them.”

> Indeed. But who created such an abusive environment? The committed UBF persons! The reform letters and my letters and blogs seem harsh and brutal. They are, but not because of me or the reformers. Such letters are brutal because the letters are mirrors! We are simply reflecting back the reality to you! But ubf must look in the mirror some day.

“These are surely my short, incomplete, and very likely unsatisfactory answers. Though I fail again and again, I do wish from my heart to love those who left UBF, and also to love those who are still in UBF.”

> Thank you very, very much Ben. How could any one person give anything but incomplete answers? We former members don’t expect perfection. We long for messy, honest, real passion!!

Since I have been in UBF since 1980, I think I am the 2nd longest UBF person who participates on UBFriends, next to James who surpasses me by a decade and a half–at least. Correct me on this if I am wrong. So after 33 years in UBF, these are my incomplete attempts at some answers.

* Yes, silence is horrible. That is why I would personally like to do my best to respond to any and every question.

* I do not really know how to answer question 1 comprehensively. I think that a consistent regular tither to UBF would qualify. Of course, UBF’s statement of faith is that we believe the Apostle’s Creed.

* The short answer to question 2 should be No, it cannot.

* Regarding question 3, I remember reading some of the issues addressed more than 10 years ago, and I summarily dismissed them as “Satan’s jealousy.” Today, as I read them again, it would seem to me that some/much of it is legitimate. But for any loyal committed UBF person to read it, it would be like being bludgeoned and sledge-hammered without ceasing, which would make it very, very difficult to read. It may be like reading about your own dear brother or sister whom you love being clobbered by hearing only bad and horrible things, while you know that your siblings also have a lovely aspect to them.

* Question 4 is easy: Without a doubt UBF should not and should never have denounced anyone who left/leaves UBF. Though it is easy for me to say so today, I myself denounced those who left during my 1st two decades in UBF.

These are surely my short, incomplete, and very likely unsatisfactory answers. Though I fail again and again, I do wish from my heart to love those who left UBF, and also to love those who are still in UBF.

It is tough! So I might plead for some leniency and some slack on both sides. But then again, I’m supposed to be a “spiritual Dirty Harry.” So, I think I can handle not being treated with kid gloves. So, “Go ahead, make my day!”

Here is a list of questions. Maybe we could understand each other better if you would share your thoughts? Chris already asked more than once. So did I.

And James, you are the President of UBF. How can you not be their spokesman?

What is the “worst infuriation” of an ex-ubf member? Silence.

1. What is the definition and qualifications to be a UBF Member Shepherd?

2. Can the problems really be explained away as cultural or time related misunderstandings, when even senior members living in the same Korean culture and time of the 1970s found the practices of Samuel Lee abusive?

3. Were the questions and issues addressed by the reformers of 1976, 1984 and 2001 legitimate or was it just unfounded slandering?

4. Was it ok to solve the problem by denouncing these people as rebels, ignoring what they had to say, and expelling them?

> So…. wouldn’t listening to each other require some answers to questions? Even if those answers are just opinions, dialogue requires questions and answers. Oh wait. I’m sorry, not if the person is an ex-ubf member. Then we can just ignore the questions.

For one, it would be very hard for me to adopt and conform to a culture where I am not able to question my elder. Or after I pose a question, I do not receive a “straight” answer.

Likewise, it would be hard, if not impossible for our missionaries to adopt and conform to other cultures that are more informal, less structured, and may be seemingly more “laid back.” If our missionaries do adopt and conform to American culture, they should NEVER EVER say “proud Americans,” or “lazy Americans.” It would be the same as an American missionary going to Korea and saying, “You wife-beating Koreans.”

That is why the Incarnation of Christ that led to him bleeding and dying is the way to love other cultures, instead of judging them based on our own cultural experiences and preferences.

Nevertheless, of course, we all try to understand Korean culture, and are willing to understand it even more. But this one point should not be forgotten in the discussion.

Sharon, maybe the word “tactic” is a bit too harsh here, but intended or not, it’s a red herring if you tey to explain all problems as “cultural misunderstandings”. Yes, all these problems have to do with culture, and are sometimes amplified by Korean culture, but that is not the crucial thing. Otherwise why have all the reform attempts been started by Koreans? It only shows the seriousness of the issues when they “revolted” despite the fact that they were raised up to be always loyal and cover up problems. On the other hand, why do we find very similar problems in American groups like the ICOC (see http://www.reveal.org/library/stories/people/hkriete.htm for instance) if these things are caused by Korean culture only?

I read Underwood’s article some years back, and it was a Eureka moment of sorts, where I said, “Wow, that’s why UBF is the way it is.” It was enlightening.

It especially explained why virtually “every” UBF chapter in 80 countries is virtually “homogenous.” Without a doubt, UBF has adopted Korean culture into every UBF chapter, regardless of what country it is in. This is an explanation, not a criticism.

Regarding answering questions, in my opinion, it is just plain unusual and uncomfortable and unfamiliar for an older Korean person (Christian or non-Christian) to answer to any younger person period! Even if and when they do answer, it will be on their terms and according to their terms. This again is an explanation, not a criticism.

For sure understanding must be a two way street. Nonetheless, I concur with Brian in that the initiative in seeking understanding must come “from the top,” i.e. from the missionary, just as God incarnated (humbled) Himself.

Therefore, it should primarily be the missionary who should seek to understand the culture of the indigenous person. If the missionary wants the indigenous person to understand the culture of the missionary, then in my opinion, I would have to say that it is a form of imperialism and domination, which is the very opposite of Christianity.

As a computer scientist, I’ve had to interact with many cultures the past 25 years, Indian, Chinese, Russian, Korean, Pakistan, etc. Yes it is challenging. But such challenges are nothing like dealing with ubf.

What we need to be talking about and examining is the *ubf* culture. Let’s examine the ubf teaching material, ubf lectures, ubf mission reports. Then we can see ubf culture (which transcends even Korean culture) in light of Christianity.

Yes I know Christianity is going through changes, as it does continually. But the broad-stroke, basic doctrines of Christianity are rather sound, and soundly rooted in the bible. In light if these fundamental doctrines, ubf’s own material, publicly available, demonstrate the problems that ubf needs to address.

It’s not so “difficult” or time-consuming to understand.

This is all bass-ackwards. Missionaries are supposed to understand and adopt foreign culture. So I say Korean missionaries to America (and just how odd is that?) should first attempt to understand Americans, and by “understand” I mean a deeper understanding than “eat Big Macs” and condemn “lazy, smelly, ungrateful” people.