“Hear, O Israel, today you are going into battle against your enemies. Do not be fainthearted or afraid; do not be terrified or give way to panic before them.4For the LORD your God is the one who goes with you to fight for you against your enemies to give you victory.” Deuteronomy 20:3-5ESV
Who We Are & What We Are About? Part 1
1.Critical to our legal defense identity, purpose, and direction is launching an effective fundraising arm whose objective it is to build, maintain, and develop a legal defense fund project to facilitate our Black Church preservationist ministry against those who would seek to deny said ministry.Unfortunately, we’ve had to learn this lesson the hard way. But we are quick learners. TEACHING BIBLE CHAMPIONS is our answer.
2.First, we are an independent (autonomous) local arm of the Saving Black Churches movement under the aegis of the National Trust For Historic Preservation’s African American Cultural Heritage Action Fund, Co-Founded and Executive Directed by Dr. Brent Leggs, African American Architectural Historian, author, Preserving Afican American Historic Places (2012) and contributor, Preservation and Social Inclusion (2020).
3.Secondly, by Champions we mean, according to Wikipedia, “a person or persons who has defeated or surpassed all rivals in a competition especially in sports.”The online reference goes on to add “a person who fights or argues for a cause on behalf of someone else.”More, “3rd person present.champions i.e., to support a cause, defend.”
4. CHAPIONS serves as a Legal Defense Fund Ministry.
5. By Legal Defense Fund Ministry we mean CHAMPIONS has a fundraising arm to support its line of development inside and outside Cook County Civil Court, City, County, State, and Federal governments.
6. We borrow the idea from the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) Legal Defense& Education Fund.
7. Upon recently receiving the unfair Civil Court ruling favoring Metropolitan Chicago Synod’s legally ungrounded complaint against our ministry’s property rights, we immediately decided to appeal and/or litigate.Understanding at the outset that said appeal would require effective legal representation to be successful and would in turn require extensive legal costs.
8. Accordingly, we are revisiting Reformation’s modest SAVING BLACK CHURCHES Legal Defense Fund (LDF) account at U.S. Bank in order to boost its financial capacity.
9. What is a Legal Defense Fund?According to Wikipedia, “In the United States, a legal defense fund (or LDF) is an account set up to pay for legal expenses, which can include attorneys’ fees, court filings, litigation costs, legal advice, or other legal fees. The fund can be public or private and is set up for individuals, organizations, or for a particular purpose. These funds are often used by government public officials, civil rights organizations, and public interest organizations.”
10. LDF History?Again referencing Wikipedia “The exact origins of legal defense funds are unclear. In the mid-nineteenth-century United States, a number of minority groups pioneered the practice of amassing funds to cover legal costs associated with their battles for civil rights and civil liberties.[2]“
11. LDF & Civil Rights?Finally, Wikipedia references LDFs in the area of Civil Rights as: “The exact origins of legal defense funds are unclear.In the mid-nineteenth-century United States, a number of minority groups pioneered the practice of amassing funds to cover legal costs associated with their battles for civil rights and civil liberties.[2]“
12. FROM START-UP TO ACCELERATED LDF. TEACHING BIBLE CHAMPIONS’ LDF meets Wednesday evenings weekly, 8PM for Bible Study via our recorded free phone conferences at our one number here: (727) 731-7760. Our TEACHING BIBLE CHAMPIONS’ meeting will consist of gathering our Production Team, as well as gathering invited guests on an open invitation basis.
13. The point of our weekly Bible Study free phone conferences is facilitate a grassroots monthly $20 subscriptions appeal.
“He (the late, Distinguished Norwegian American, Lutheran Seminary Professor, Georg Sverdrup) did not believe that the apostolic church was to be reviewed in passing as merely the most primitive form of church government…To his detractors, he queried in response, “Is it really wrong, then…to turn to the true, real picture of the congregation which the New Testament gives us?”3
“It was Sverdrup’s earnest conviction that “the congregation (local church) is the right form of the Kingdom of God on earth”4 The organized local congregation was for him the only entity portrayed in the New Testament entitled to the name “church” (ekklesia). No other ecclesiastical body was or could be superior to the congregation.” -Georg Sverdrup: A Biographical Sketch, By Francis W. Monseth, As printed in the 2004 Sverdrup Journal–
1.Georg Sverdrup (1848-1907) is considered a chief architect of the turn of the 19th Century (1897) Lutheran Free Congregations Movement. Accordingly, he is an important author of one of the chief documents that eventually led to the formation of today’s Association of Free Lutheran Congregations founded in 1962.
1.1Reformations’ Defense Vs. Metro Chicago Synodis inspired by the following four (4) models:
1.2 First, and foremost, we are influenced by Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ (LCMC) thereby positioning our selves to join via disaffiliation (separation) from the ELCA.
1.3 Second, we are influenced by Association of Free Lutheran Congregations (AFLC) whose President’s Office suggested we resource LCMC.
1.4Third, we are influenced by the work of the Georg Sverdrup Society (GSS)independently investigated by us and as a result we are positioning ourselves to join.
1.5And last, but not least, we are influenced by the scholarly Catholic Pocket Dictionary’s definition of Congregationalists as movement and congregationalism.
2. The above said, Reformation African American Lutheran Free Congregation Chicago understands itself as rooted in the tradition of the American Lutheran Free Congregation Movement wherein two of its key principles are: “Belief that the congregation is the right form of the Kingdom of God on earth, with no authority above it but the Word and the Spirit of God; Belief that Christian unity is a spiritual concept, not a man-made organization.”
3. We therefore stand in a local Christian Church (Congregationalist) tradition that, in the words of AFLC, “is a specific and direct rejection of the superior authority of every ecclesiastical organization above the congregation.”
4. We are especially opposed to the current Metro Chicago Synod’s attempt to bureaucratically dissolve us and thereby seek to illegally seize our traditionally owned congregational property byuse of Kangaroo court methods.
5. We use Kangaroo court here as a descriptive category and not as a mere pejorative or ad-hominem attack. Rather, we seek to liken the Synod’s Kangaroo court methodology with its open rush-to-judgement denial of our congregation’s constitutional right to be afforded due process, as provided by the 1st, 5th, and 14th Amendments, under the U.S. rule of law.
5.1 By Kangaroo court as a descriptive category we mean as follows:
“As a general rule, a kangaroo court is any proceeding that attempts to imitate a fair trial or hearing without the usual due process safeguards including the right to call witnesses, the right to confront your accuser and a hearing before a fair and impartial judge. Kangaroo court proceedings are usually a sham carried out without legal authority in which the outcome has been predetermined without regard to the evidence or to the guilt or innocence of the accused.” -Online Law Dictionary
6. We hold, then, that the Synod’s illegal attempt to bureaucratically dissolve our free congregation, and thereby illegally seize our traditionally owned congregational property, is as blatantly wrong as wearing two left shoes.
7. Although we have theological standing, we need a pro bono publico (Charge Free For Public Good) attorney to work with us on a contingency basis to effectively represent our small but strategically positioned congregation in order to advance our already well researched and crafted local congregational (as defendant’s) motion to dismiss the plaintiff Synod’s illegal case -primarily due to said Synod’s lack of legal standing regarding its own complaint.
7..1What we mean by pro bono publico (for the public good) on a contingency basis?We mean we need legal representation working with us on the following two bases:
7.2First, contingent on the sale of our illegally threatened property, at 11312 S. Union, by Metro Chicago Synod.We are looking to sell said property to two of our long term legacy members who currently occupy said property on a first option rent-to-buy basis.This said, part of the proceeds from our 11312 S. Union property sale will go to our legal defense attorney.
Respectfully curated and submitted, Rev. Joel Washington, Pastor/Council President, Reformation African American Lutheran Free Congregation Chicago, Mobile: 773-499-3323. Updated 12-26-23.
POST SCRIPT APPENDIX1
The above said, MCS’S rush to judgment meeting sequence follows:
A) Rapidly assembling, by Associate to the Bishop, Rev. Biekman, the Bishop’s African Descent Ministries Strategy Team to the meeting of 10/17/20 and to which we were “invited” on one day’s crazy short notice (10/16/20) and to which we rightfully and responsibly declined to attend. Previously Documented.
B) Deciding just one week later (10/24/20) via the Bishop’s African American led Council Meeting, without Reformation’s knowledge nor our even being afforded any prior proper notice nor opportunity to attend said meeting.
C) Announcing, by Certified mail fiat, three months later (2/5/21), MCS’S attempted illegal usurpation of Reformation’s properties by deliberately decontextualizing the denomination’s proposed model constitution.
POST SCRIPT APPENDIX 2
The Catholic Pocket Dictionary on Congregationalists and Congregationalism.
1.Congregationalists: Those Protestants who believe that each local church (congregation) is to be independent and autonomous. They profess to represent the principle of democracy in church government , a policy, they hold, claiming that Christ alone is the head of the Church he founded.
2. Since the members of the Church are baptized Christians, they are all priests of God. No one, therefore, may claim to have priestly powers others do not profess, or the right to teach or rule in Christ’s name, except in so far as he or she is delegated by the congregation. Where two or three are gathered together in his name, he is in their midst, and the local church comes into existence as an expression and representation of the Church universal.
3, Congregationalists say that this system of Church structure is the most primitive in Christianity and all other forms are later human additions and changes.
4. Although the congregationalist principle began with Luther (1483-1546), it was not put into consistent practice untl the English Reformation. With the rise of Anglicanism various separatists broke with the parent church to form what eventually became the congregational churches of Anglo-Saxon Protestantism.
5. In the United States, most local Protestant groups of churches follow the congregationalist pattern, even when they have other denominational names. -Pocket Catholic Dictionary, John A. Hardon. S.J.
POST SCRIPT APPENDIX 3
Ten (10) Points On What A Legal Due Process Fair Hearing Should Look Like.
An unbiased tribunal is required.
Notice of the proposed action and the grounds asserted for it.
The opportunity to present reasons for the proposed action not to taken.
The right to present evidence, including the right to call witnesses.
The right to know the opposing evidence.
The right to cross examine adverse witnesses.
A decision based only on the evidence presented.
Opportunity to be represented by council.
A requirement that the tribunal prepare a record of the evidence presented.
A requirement that the tribunal prepare findings of fact and the reasons for its decision.-“Some Kind of Hearing” by Judge Henry Friendly
POST SCRIPT APPENDIX 4
Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ via Wikipedia
LCMC is congregational in structure, rejecting the historic episcopate which was adopted by the ELCA, the denomination to which many LCMC members had previously belonged, in the Called to Common Mission agreement.
The beliefs of the LCMC are based on the Bible and the Lutheran confessions in the Book of Concord. On one important issue, LCMC stands apart from other conservative Lutheran denominations: it permits, but does not require the ordination of female clergy. Some congregations’ constitutions and bylaws allow only men to be installed into the Office of Holy Ministry.
The LCMC does not bless same-sex partnerships and requires all pastors on their clergy list to subscribe to their pastoral admonition on human sexuality: “We affirm that God created us male and female, and that it is God’s will and intention that human sexual expression and fulfillment take place only within the boundaries of marriage between one man and one woman (Genesis 2:24-25; Matthew 19:4-6; and Mark 10:2-9). And, we confess as individuals and as congregations that we have not fulfilled God’s will in our decisions, modeling, and teaching.”[5]
The LCMC has an evangelical catholic and charismatic strand. Many congregations hold to liturgical forms and vested celebrants when leading worship and administering the Sacrament of the Altar. The LCMC brings together the sacramental, evangelical, and charismatic nature of the church into one fold. The LCMC has ten geographic and three non-geographic districts. The non-geographic districts are theologically oriented.[6]
NOTE:) OUR CURRENT 2023-2024 YEARBOOK’S CENTRAL THEME: Defending Reformation Church Chicago: African American Lutheran Congregationalists Saving Black Churches -An SSBC Yearbook-As further outlined below:
Chapter II
2.1 Introducing STUDIO SAVING BLACK CHURCHES (SSBC): DEFENDING REFORMATION CONGREGATION-CHICAGO VIA OUR SACRED JAZZ-MEETS GOSPEL REVIVAL, 1920 W. 115th Street, Morgan Park, Chicago IL –
A) PLEASE NOTE: By Reformation-Chicago we mean we are organically self-identified as a Far Southside, but not limited to, African American Lutheran Congregationalist force multiplier following Jesus’ “Rebuild My Church.”
B) Please also see CHAPTER III and its link below for further explanation.
C) Both serve as our guiding SAVING BLACK CHURCHES rationale of being and becoming i.e.,
D) our self-assertion as Southside African American Churches Preservationists provides for our ongoing identity, purpose, and direction -albeit as a LIVING BLACK LUTHERAN force multiplier- against all odds.
E) While we always reserve our rightful Black Lutheran congregationalist autonomy (non-profit independence inside and outside MCS/ELCA),
F) we are historically also voluntarily in the orbit of MCS/ELCA (Metro Chicago Synod/Evangelical Lutheran Church in America)
G) We are, then, a SAVING BLACK CHURCHES congregational fellowship as comprehensively outlined in CHAPTER III via its link below.
H) We also stand in the tradition of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King JR’s Progressive Baptist Principle and Practice as a congregationalist ministry.
I) More, we understand Rev. Dr King’s Progressive Baptist Congregationalist thrust as the most democratic form of church polity not only within the Church of England Protestant Reformation but also within the Christian Church Universal as a whole.
IN WALKED DR. BRENT LEGGS (Re: 2022 Launching of Saving Black Churches Racial & Social Justice Movement): Our Forthcoming Work in Progress Linkto Follow
OUR OPEN EXCHANGE WITH REV. KEITH FRY, ELCA SECRETARY’S OFFICE below:
13.1 OUR OUTBOX:
Dear ELCA Office of the Secretary, My name is Rev. Joel Washington. I am on the Retired Leadership Roster of Metro Chicago Synod. I am also the Bi-Vocational Pastor & Council President of Reformation Lutheran Church Chicago, a voluntary congregation of MCS/ELCA. As such we are seeking an opinion of the ELCA Secretary’s Office on the status of our congregation’s parsonage property versus the current attempt of the Metro Chicago Bishop’s Office to illegally grab control thereof and thereby rob us of our property at 11310 S. Union, Chicago IL 60628.
A comprehensive outline of the legal position of our congregation versus the illegal attempted usurpation by current the MCS Bishop’s office can be found on the current Home Page of our congregation’s blog as follows:
We invite the ELCA’s Office of the Secretary’s reply.
13.2 OUR INBOX:
Pastor Washington,
Thank you for your email.
This matter is a local dispute between a congregation and the synod, and the ELCA churchwide organization has no authority to intervene or to adjudicate that dispute.
Peace to you, Pr. Keith Fry, The Rev. Keith Fry, Executive, Office of the Secretary Administration Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, 8765 W Higgins Rd., Chicago, IL 60631-4101
13.3 OUR OUTBOX:
Rev. Fry,
Thanks for your prompt reply. Implicit in your reply is the recognition of the separation of constitutional powers between the ELCA denomination as whole, its Synods, and its approximately ten (10) thousand autonomous Congregations.
Said separation of powers, in our congregation’s constitutional opinion, concurs with our local assemby’s view and practice regarding our very own exclusive property ownership and control of said property up-to and including our singular right of closure (dissolution).
Said closure (dissolution) has never been congregationally effected. Nor have we ever relinquished control of our real estate assets to anyone inclusive of Metro Chicago Synod.
Rev. Joel Washington.
CHAPTER XIV
WISTLEBLOWING RE: METRO CHICAGO SYNOD’S KANGAROO COURT DECISION MAKING PROCESS: A BOOMERANG AGAINST THE BISHOP CURRY ADMINISTRATION’S POSITION WHEREIN IT UNCONSTITUTIONALLY WROTE US 2-5-21, OVER THE BISHOP’S SIGNATURE, AS FOLLOWS:
“On October 24, 2020, the MCS council voted to close Reformation‘ Lutheran Church. Section C.701 of the Constitution of Reformation, states: ‘If this congregation ceases to exist, title to undisposed property shall pass to the Metropolitan Chicago Synod of the ELCA.’”
Re: OUR OPEN REPLY: Setting aside for the moment the hard fact that the October 24, 2020 MCS Council meeting cited above took place without our knowledge, absent said meeting’s proper notification to us, and absent our congregational leadership being afforded the procedural due process right to attend;
Setting aside for the moment that three months lapsed between the MCS flawed, nay illegal, October, 24, 2020 rush to judgement regarding our properties, and Bishop Curry’s February 5, 2021 so-called notification of its illegal decision;
Setting aside for the moment the hard fact that Reformation’s congregation has never, repeat never, held a constitutionally mandated dissolution meeting voting to go out of the ministry business and subsequently reporting the same in writing to MCS as is our sole (exclusive) constitutional obligation, right, and responsibility;
We have no choice but to point out to the MCS Bishop the obvious i.e., the word “if” is a little word with a big meaning especially given Reformation Lutheran Congregation Chicago’s ongoing active ministry status.BTW, our activist status is more than dramatically demonstrated by our body of work clearly documenting the MCS leadership’s rush to administrative failure.
More, to use the memorable words of Mark Twain (1835-1910), “Reports of our death have been greatly exaggerated (misrepresented).”
More too, the MCS Bishop’s lame, patently illegal, attempt to assume control of Reformation’s congregational properties, deliberately misunderstanding and misconstruing our Model Constitution’s dissolution clause, is as procedurally wrong as wearing two left shoes, and on its face, blatantly unlawful both inside and outside the ELCA.
CHAPTER XV
OUR OPEN EXCHANGE WITH REV. ROBERT BIEKMAN, MCS DIRECTOR OF EVANGELICAL MISSION, ASSOCIATE TO BSHOP CURRY
15.1 OUR OUTBOX:
TO: Rev. Robert Biekman, Associate to the Bishop: Director of Evangelical Mission, South and Northeast Conferences
FR: Rev. Joel Washington, Pastor and Council President of DECIDED TO FOLLOW JESUS: Reformation African American Lutheran Congregation Chicago
RE: The Status of Our Congregation Within MCS-ELCA
DA: November 8, 2021
Dear Rev. Biekman,
15.1 As you are well aware, a hidden and open controversy currently exists regarding the status of our congregation within MCS-ELCA.
15.2 Said controversy emerged in the open at the October 28, 2021 South Conference Luncheon/Meeting hosted by Augustana Lutheran Church and Campus Ministry, Hyde Park. The speaking guest of honor was BishopYehiel Curry. You were also in attendance as a part of your MCS Portfolio.The meeting was the first face-to-face South Conference meeting since the COVID–19 shutdowns 18 months ago. Although we continued to gather for SC check-in meetings virtually via Zoom however.
15.3 In his presentation to the SC, Bishop Curry made the unsolicited report that our congregation was officially closed i.e. we no longer existed on the Synod rolls. Perhaps he did this because our delegation of six (6) representatives of the Congregation’s leadership team was present, and accounted for, during the opening introductions of the SC business meeting.
15.4 This writer, in response to Bishop Curry’s unsolicited opinion statement was thereby challenged to intervene during the Q&A making the observation that contrary to the Bishop’s errant statement, reports of our congregational demise is exaggerated and so despite the good Bishop’s errant opinion.
15.5 Bishop Curry cited as his authority A) the October 17, 2020 meeting recommendation of his African Descent Ministries Council, B) the October 24, 2020 meeting decision of the Synod Council, as well as C) the Book of Reports of the Virtual June 2021 Synod Assembly.
15.6 By contrast, this writer took the position, standing on our congregational constitution and the MCS-ELCA polity, that the power of dissolution rests solely with the impacted congregation and its Council.
15.7 Both sides agreed that the discussion of our congregation’s status was beyond the scope of the October 28, SC meeting. It was then further agreed that a meeting between the Synod Officeand our Congregation’s leadership team should be arranged ASAP. Said meeting’s purpose being to further sort the issue out.Moreover, the proposed meeting would be further arranged via negotiating with Rev. Robert Biekman, Director of Evangelical Mission and Assistant to Bishop Curry.
15.8 The above said, we hereby propose convening a virtual meeting via our freeconferencecall.com account at the earliest convenience of Rev. Biekman -given proper prior notice.
15.10 We further seek to convene our Synod-meets-Congregation meeting based on the following quote of Appendix I of Steps wherein its opening two paragraphs state:
A) “When it becomes apparent that the ability of the congregation to remain effectively engaged in ministry is in jeopardy, schedule a consultation of the congregation with your synod bishop or designee to develop a plan for discernment. This plan will usually include conversation with the bishop, the synod’s director of evangelical mission, and leaders from neighboring congregations. Decisions about bringing a ministry to a close will only happen after a time of prayer, study and conversation. The decision to close a ministry will require a properly called meeting of the congregation as required by polity and statute.
B) “A sample resolution for discontinuance of ministry follows. Check your state law to make sure a resolution is sufficient and the necessary type of majority needed to approve it. After the appropriate resolution is adopted, signed and attested, a copy shall be forwarded to the bishop of the synod.”
15.11 Note: The above referenced resolution is solely made by the congregation only.
15.12 We invite Rev. Biekman’s reply to our virtual meeting request.
15.13 OUR INBOX:
Good day Rev. Washington,
I am in receipt of your email from yesterday and voicemail that you left today.
Bishop Curry along with Tom Anderson (MCS Business Manager) will be in direct contact with you regarding this email.
Peace and blessings!
The Rev. Robert E. Biekman, Director for Evangelical Mission/Associate to the Bishop (he/him/his)
Metro Chicago Synod, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, 1420 W. Dickens Avenue, Chicago, IL 60614
16.1 Although our ministry acted in good faith, Bishop Curry’s office chose not to reciprocate. To be sure, we proposed to meet on our own congregational terms. According to the ELCA “Steps” guidelines said meeting terms serves as the local congregation’s duty, right, and responsibility however.
16.2 Rather then accepting our meeting invitation Bishop Curry’s office stonewalled us for almost a year. He then blindsided us by posturing as a Cook County Court plaintiff in a blatant attempt, under the camouflage and color of law, to illegally seize control of Reformation’s property. Our reply then and now follows.
16.3 RE: THE CURRENT STATUS OF OUR CONGREGATION VS. METROPOLITAN CHICAGO SYNOD
Dear Family & Friends of Reformation African American Lutheran Congregation Chicago (MCS/ELCA)
FYI, Forwarded with this message is a recap of our Fall 2021 conversation with Metro Chicago Synod -Attention: Rev. Robert Biekman, Associate to the Bishop.
Our email outllines our Congregational/Church legal and constitutional position that the congregation. and the congregation alone, has the sole power of congregational self-dissolution and subsequent transfer of its property.
16.4 BTW, the Synod never agreed to a proposed date certain meeting-discussion request despite promising to do so almost a year ago.
OUTLINING THE KANGAROO COURT APPROACH CHARACTERIZING MCS’S TREATMENT OF REFORMATION LUTHERAN CONGREGATION-CHICAGO
17.1 The problem with the Bishop Curry administration’s rush to judgement is its lack of affording Reformation’s ministry procedural due process flowing from their Kangaroo Court style decision making practice.
17.2 Said practice blatantly contradicts the ELCA’s own Steps Guidelines outlining a process of very deliberate and prayerful congregational discernment, discussion, and consultation practice up to either deciding to continue congregational ministry in new directions or coming to the decision of congregational dissolution (ministry closure).
17.3 By contrast, the Bishop Curry administration’s sequence of abrupt meetings displays a classic case of Kangaroo Court style decision making.
17.4 The above said, MCS’S rush to judgment meeting sequence follows:
A) Rapidly assembling, by Associate to the Bishop, Rev. Biekman, the Bishop’s African Descent Ministries Strategy Team to the meeting of 10/17/20 and to which we were “invited” on one day’s crazy short notice (10/16/20) and to which we rightfully and responsibly declined to attend.Documented in our outline section V above.
B) Deciding just one week later (10/24/20) via the Bishop’s African American led Council Meeting, without Reformation’s knowledge nor our even being afforded any prior proper notice nor opportunity to attend said meeting.
C) Announcing, by Certified mail fiat, three months later (2/5/21), MCS’S attempted illegal usurpation of Reformation’s properties by deliberately decontextualizing our own model constitution.
“As a general rule, a kangaroo court is any proceeding that attempts to imitate a fair trial or hearing without the usual due process safeguards including the right to call witnesses, the right to confront your accuser and a hearing before a fair and impartial judge. Kangaroo court proceedings are usually a sham carried out without legal authority in which the outcome has been predetermined without regard to the evidence or to the guilt or innocence of the accused.” -Online Law Dictionary
CHAPTER XVIII
OPEN MESSAGE TO THE ATTORNEY OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO SYNODON THE SHENANIGANS OF DISGRUNTALED FORMER REFORMATION CONGREGATIONAL MEMBERS BAMBOOZLING MCS
Dear Mr. Beattie,
FYI, appended is the Cook County Jail & CPD profile of the case of Derek Terry who, along with his mother, Jenola Terry-Ward, masqueraded as legitimate active members of our Congregation to your client.
Meanwhile, Mr. Terry was committing statutory rape with a mentally challenged young female visitor to our vacant local church building. Said young female lives with a clinically certified adolescent mind. She was a volunteer ostensibly recruited by Mr. Terry, and his mother, for our vacant church building’s maintenance services without our authorization.
Because the teenager’s mother and legal guardian surprisingly caught them both in the act at her home, she posted formal charges against Mr. Terry with CPD whereupon he was subsequently arrested and since jailed pending trial.
Please Note: The dating of Mr. Terry’s criminal offense coincides with the very same period in which he was in active conversation with your client posturing, along with his mother, as aggrieved members of our Congregation from which they had long since voluntarily defected.
Question? Why would your client take the words of Mr. Terry and his mother, despite the position of this writer, serving as one of their rostered leaders, that the two disgruntled defectors were no longer active Congregation members and therefore were neither qualified, authorized, nor delegated to legally speak for the Congregation?
Could it be, your client, illegally coveting our Congregation’s property, sought to rush to errant judgement?
We invite your client’s reply.
Advance thanks,
Rev. Joel Washington (Khunanpu Sangoma), Bi-Vocational Pastor/Council President, DECIDED TO FOLLOW JESUS: Reformation African American Lutheran Free Kusantiko/Congregation of Chicago Voice & Contrarian Press -VOLUNTARILY MCS/ELCA
18.1 Please Note: Even MCS/ELCA’S own Congregational Dissolution Guide lines support, in principle, our Congregation’s autonomy (independence) up to and including either discerning dissolution or new Congregation directions going forward. Headed “Steps to Dissolution” -as linked again below here: Steps for Dissolution guidelines of MCS/ELCA here:https://mcselca.org/wp-content/uploads/Steps-for-Dissolution-of-a-Congregation-ELSA-MCSELCA.pdf
Respectfully Curated & Submitted: Rev. Joel Washington (Khunanpu Sangoma), Bi-Vocational Pastor/Council President & Co-Convener, Sankofa Chicago (Preserving The Black Church Teaching Moments Blog/Teleconference/Podcast}, Voice of Reformation African American Lutheran Free Kusantiko/Congregational of Chicago Voice & Contrarian Press (REFPRESS).
CHAPTER XIX
ABOUT REV. JOEL WASHINGTON (KHUNANPU SANGOMA), BI-VOCATIONAL PASTOR/COUNCIL PRESIDENT, REFORMATION CHURCH CHICAGO, CO-CONVENER, SBCP
19.1 Ordained and Commissioned August 28, 2011 by then MCS/ELCA Bishop Wayne N. Miller and endorsed by the then African American Strategy Team, Pastor Washington (Sangoma)voluntarily serves as an African-Centered, African American pastor on the leadership roster of MCS/ELCA.
19.2 Pastor Washington (Sangoma) regards his August 28, 2011 ordination date as significant A) because it marked the 48th anniversary of the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom which he attended as a young man and B) because it also marked the 2011 unveiling of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. statue of the King Memorial Park, Washington D.C., thereby giving special significance to Pastor Washington’s (Sangoma’s) distinct African American Lutheran Free Congregationalist ministry. -Updated: 11/4/22
19.3 EPILOGUE
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.” Margaret Mead
CHAPTER XX
20.1 OUR ILLINOIS ONLINE LEGAL AID MOTION TO DISMISS ADDRESSED TO COOK COUNTY COURT CLERK BELOW. RE: Case Number 2022 MI 718352.Filed 6/13/2023.
20.2 Defendant seeks a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s case, Re: 11312 S. Union,on the following grounds:
A) The Plaintiff lacks legal capacity Re: the current Eviction Summons. Plaintiff does not legally own nor manage the property of the Eviction Summons. Rather, the Defendant holds the predicate property’s deed. Said deed exists in the original name of Elim Lutheran Church itself succeeded by today’s Reformation Lutheran Congregational Church.
B) Constitutionally speaking, inside and outside the ELCA, the Defendant-Congregation owns and controls the property in question and not the Plaintiff.
C) The three (3) separate constitutions of the Churchwide ELCA, the Metropolitan Chicago Synod, and our local Reformation Congregation legally protect our Congregational property ownership rights. Said separation of powers prevents the Plaintiff’s current attempted illegal usurpation of our rightful ownership of the property in question i.e., 11312 S. Union.
D) Plaintiff’s Eviction Summons does not and cannot specify an actionable reason for its Eviction Summons.
E) Finally, Plaintiff executed a flawed Eviction Summons process. 1) Defendant was not served by Plaintiff at its primary address as required by Cook County Court’s Summons format. 2) Plaintiff’s Summons was not proceeded by a timely 30 Day Notice. 3) Neither the Court Clerk’s signature nor the Process Server’s signature appear on the Eviction Summons.
20.3 EPILOGUE
A) “All past is prologue.” Shakespeare’s Tempest
B) A Relevant Reading From Matthew 18:15-17 -Re: Discipline and Prayer
CHAPTER XXI IN WALKED DR. MAULANA KARENGA’S MASTER CLASS ON MAATIAN ETHICS, July 9, 16, 23, & 30, 2023, (Forthcoming Work in Progress i.e., Re: Doing the Right Thing Before God, Within Nature, and Within Society)-Our POV Re: the Baptist Principle -Albeit An African American Lutheran Congregationalist Ministry- in the Tradition of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King JR’s Service.
CHAPTER XXII
REFORMATION CONGREGATION CHICAGO’S COOK COUNTY CIVIL COURT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENCE NOTES RE: CASE NUMBER 2022 M1 718352 (Or 20221718352), VERSUS PLAINTIFF, METROPOLITAN CHICAGO SYNOD.
22.1 Re: Introduction to our Model Constitution of Congregations, An African American Lutheran Saving Black Churches Interpretation.
A) “Each expression of this church — churchwide, synod, and congregation — is held together in a relationship of interdependence that encourages each to respond to its context.”-Intro to Model Congregational Constitution
B) According to the Cook County Civil Court Glossary of Terms an “Affirmative Defense…is when a defendant asserts new facts in a case that are different from the plaintiff (claimant). If proven to be true, these are reasons why the plaintiff should not win.
C) *PREAMBLE 1 * “We, baptized members of the Church of Christ, responding in faith to the call of the Holy Spirit through the Gospel,desiring to unite together to preach the Word, administer the sacraments, and carry out God’s mission, do hereby adopt this constitution and solemnly pledge ourselves to be governed by its provisions. In the name of the Father andof the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”
D) Chapter 1. NAME AND INCORPORATION C1.01. The name of this congregation shall be REFORMATION LUTHERAN CHURCH CHICAGO_____________. C1.02. For the purpose of this constitution and the accompanying bylaws, the congregation of REFORMATION LUTHERAN CHURCH CHICAGO is hereinafter designated as “this congregation.” C1.11. This congregation shall be incorporated under the laws of the State of Illinois, Cook County. __________________.
E) Chapter 2. CONFESSION OF FAITH *C2.01. This congregation confesses the Triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. *C2.02. This congregation confesses Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and the Gospel as the power of Godfor the salvation of all who believe.
C.203. This congregation accepts the canonical Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the inspired Word of God and the authoritative source and norm of its proclamation, faith, and life. *C2.04. This congregation accepts the Apostles’, Nicene, and Athanasian Creeds as true declarations of the faithof this congregation.
*C2.07. This congregation confesses the Gospel, recorded in the Holy Scripture and confessed in the ecumenical creeds and Lutheran confessional writings, as the power of God to create and sustain the Church for God’s mission in the world.
F) Chapter 3. NATURE OF THE CHURCH *C3.01. All power in the Church belongs to our Lord Jesus Christ, its head. All actions of this congregation are to be carried out under his rule and authority.
*C4.03. To fulfill these purposes, this congregation shall: a. Provide services of worship at which the Word of God is preached and the sacraments are administered. b. Provide pastoral care and assist all members to participate in this ministry. c. Challenge, equip, and support all members in carrying out their calling in their daily lives and in their congregation. d. Teach the Word of God. e. Witness to the reconciling Word of God in Christ, reaching out to all people. f. Respond to human need,work for justice and peace, care for the sick and the suffering, and participate responsibly in society. g. Motivate its members to provide financial support for this congregation’s ministry and the ministry of the other expressions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. h. Foster and participate in interdependent relationships with other congregations, the synod, and thechurchwide organization of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.
G) Chapter 5. POWERS OF THE CONGREGATION *C5.01. The powers of this congregation are those necessary to fulfill its purpose. *C5.02. The powers of this congregation are vested in the Congregation Meeting called and conducted as provided in this constitution and bylaws. *C5.03. Only such authority as is delegated to the Congregation Council or other organizational units in thiscongregation’s governing documents is recognized. All remaining authority is retained by this congregation. This congregation is authorized to: e. adopt amendments to the constitution, as provided in Chapter 16, amendments to the bylaws, as specified in Chapter 17, and continuing resolutions, as provided in Chapter 18; f. approve the annual budget; g. acquire real and personal property by gift, devise, purchase, or other lawful means; h. hold title to and use its property for any and all activities consistent with its purpose; i. sell, mortgage, lease, transfer, or otherwise dispose of its property by any lawful means; j. elect its [officers][,] [and] Congregation Council, [boards, and committees,] and require [them] [the members of the council] to carry out their duties in accordance with the constitution[,] [and] bylaws[,] [and continuing resolutions]; and k. terminate its relationship with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America as provided in Chapter 6.
H) Chapter 6. CHURCH AFFILIATION *C6.01. This congregation shall be an interdependent part of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America or its successor, and of the (insert name of synod) of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. This congregation is subject to the discipline of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. *C6.02. This congregation accepts the Confession of Faith and agrees to the purposes of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and shall act in accordance with them. *C6.03. This congregation acknowledges its relationship with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America in which:
a. This congregation agrees to be responsible for its life as a Christian community. b. This congregation pledges its financial support and participation in the life and mission of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. c. This congregation agrees to call pastoral leadership from the roster of Ministers of Word and Sacrament of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America in accordance with its call procedures except in special circumstances and with the approval of the bishop of the synod. These special circumstances are limited either to calling a candidate approved for the roster of Ministers of Word and Sacrament of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America or to contracting for pastoral services with a minister of Word and Sacrament of a church body with which the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America officially has established a relationship of full communion. d. This congregation agrees to consider ministers of Word and Service for call to other staff positions in this congregation according to the procedures of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. e. This congregation agrees to file this constitution and any subsequent changes to this constitution with the synod for review to ascertain that all of its provisions are in agreement with the constitution and bylaws of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and with the constitution of the synod.
*C6.04. Affiliation with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America is terminated as follows: a. This congregation takes action to dissolve. b. This congregation ceases to exist. c. This congregation is removed from membership in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America according to the procedures for discipline of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America or in accordance with provision 9.23. of the constitution and bylaws of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. d. The (insert name of synod) takes charge and control of the property of this congregation to hold, manage, and convey the same on behalf of the synod pursuant to †S13.24. of the synod constitution. This congregation shall have the right to appeal the decision to the next Synod Assembly. e. This congregation follows the procedures outlined in *C6.05. *C6.05. This congregation may terminate its relationship with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America by the following procedure: a. A resolution indicating the intent to terminate its relationship must be adopted at two legally called and conducted special meetings of this congregation by a two-thirds vote of the voting members present at each meeting. The first such meeting may be held no sooner than 30 days after written notice of the meeting is received by the bishop of the synod, during which time this congregation shall consult with the bishop and the bishop’s designees, if any. The times and manner of the consultation shall be determined by the bishop in consultation with the Congregation Council. Unless he or she is a voting member of this congregation, the bishop and the bishop’s designees, if any, shall have voice but not vote at the first meeting. b. Within 10 days after the resolution has been voted upon at the first meeting, the secretary of this congregation shall submit a copy of the resolution to the bishop, attesting that the special meeting was legally called and conducted and certifying the outcome of the vote, and shall send copies of the resolution and certification to voting members of this congregation. c. If the resolution was adopted by a two-thirds vote of the voting members present at the first meeting, the bishop of the synod and this congregation shall continue in consultation, as specified in paragraph a. above, during a period of at least 90 days after receipt by the bishop of the attestation and certification as specified in paragraph b. above. d. If this congregation, after such consultation, is still considering termination of its relationship with this church, such action may be taken at a legally called and conducted special meeting by a two- thirds vote of the voting members present. Notice of the second meeting shall be sent to all voting members and to the bishop at least 10 days in advance of the meeting. Unless he or she is a voting member of this congregation, the bishop and the bishop’s designees, if any, shall have voice but not vote at the second meeting. e. Within 10 days after the resolution has been voted upon, the secretary of this congregation shall submit a copy of the resolution to the bishop, attesting that the second special meeting was legally called and conducted and certifying the outcome of the vote, and shall send copies of the resolution and certification to the voting members of the congregation. If the resolution was adopted by a two- thirds vote of the voting members present at the second meeting, the relationship between the
Model Constitution for Congregations | 8 |
congregation and this church shall be terminated subject to Synod Council approval as required by paragraphs f. and g. below. f. Unless this notification to the bishop also certifies that this congregation has voted to affiliate with another Lutheran denomination, this congregation shall be deemed an independent or non-Lutheran church, in which case *C7.04. shall apply. g. This congregation shall abide by these covenants by and among the three expressions of this church: 1) Congregations seeking to terminate their relationship with this church which fail or refuse to comply with each of the foregoing provisions in *C6.05. shall be required to receive Synod Council approval before terminating their membership in this church. 2) Congregations which had been members of the Lutheran Church in America shall be required, in addition to complying with the foregoing provisions in *C6.05., to receive synod approval before terminating their membership in this church. 3) Congregations established by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America shall be required, in addition to complying with the foregoing provisions in *C6.05., to satisfy all financial obligations to this church and receive Synod Council approval before terminating their membership in this church. h. If this congregation fails to achieve the required two-thirds vote of voting members present at this congregation’s first meeting as specified in paragraph a. above or fails to achieve the required two- thirds vote of voting members present at this congregation’s second meeting as specified in paragraph d. above, another attempt to consider termination of relationship with this church must follow all requirements of *C6.05. and may begin no sooner than six months after the meeting at which the two-thirds vote was not achieved.
*C6.06. If this congregation considers relocation, it shall confer with the bishop of the synod in which it is territorially located and the appropriate unit of the churchwide organization before any steps are taken leading to such action. The approval of the Synod Council shall be received before any such action is taken. *C6.07. If this congregation considers developing an additional site to be used regularly for worship, it shall confer with the bishop of the synod in which it is territorially located and the appropriate unit of the churchwide organization before any steps are taken leading to such action.
I) Chapter 7. PROPERTY OWNERSHIP *C7.01. If this congregation ceases to exist, title to undisposed property shall pass to the (insert name of synod) of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.
*C7.03. If the voting members of this congregation present at a legally called and conducted special meeting of this congregation vote to transfer to another Lutheran church body, title to property shall continue to reside in this congregation, provided the process for termination of relationship in *C6.05. has beenfollowed. Before this congregation takes action to transfer to another Lutheran church body, it shall consult with representatives of the (insert name of synod) . *C7.04. If the voting members of this congregation present at a legally called and conducted special meeting of this congregation vote to become independent or relate to a non-Lutheran church body and have followed the process for termination of relationship in *C6.05., title to property of this congregation shall continue to reside in this congregation only with the consent of the Synod Council. The Synod Council, after consultation with this congregation by the process established by the synod, may give approval to the request to become independent or to relate to a non-Lutheran church body, in which casetitle shall remain with the majority of this congregation. If the Synod Council fails to give such approval, title shall remain with those members who desire to continue as a congregation of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. In neither case does title to this congregation’s property transfer to the synod.
CHAPTER XXIII
PARTNERING REFORMATION CONGREGATION CHICAGO’S COMMENTARY ON THE ABOVE MODEL CONSTITUTION FOR CONGREGATIONS.
23.1 Contrary to the legal opinion of some who may privilege Metropolitan Chicago Synod’s authority over its congregations, as demonstrated by our reproducing the Model Constittuion of Congregations above, each congregation holds distinct self-governing balance of powersversus MCS. Thus, according to the Model Constitution’s introduction ““Each expression of this church — churchwide, synod, and congregation — is held together in a relationship of interdependence that encourages each to respond to its context.”
23.2 More implicit in the Model’s preamble statement “desiring to unite together to preach the Word, administer the sacraments, and carry out God’s mission,” is the notion of voluntary affiliation in the tradition of ecumenism i.e, voluntary Church unity and cooperation based on common faith in Jesus Christ.
23.3 As our Model says ““this congregation C1.11. This congregation shall be incorporated under the laws of the State of Illinois.” This means we cannot be governed outside of Federal & State laws.
My name is Rev. Joel Washington. I am on the Retired Leadership Roster of Metro Chicago Synod. I am also the Bi-Vocational Pastor & Council President of Reformation Lutheran Church Chicago, a voluntary congregation of MCS/ELCA. As such we are seeking an opinion of the ELCA Secretary’s Office on the status of our congregation’s parsonage property, versus the current illegal (unconstitutional) attempt of the Metro Chicago Bishop’s Office to unprincipledly grab control thereof, and thereby rob us of our property at 11312 S. Union, Chicago IL 60628.
A comprehensive outline of the legal position of our congregation versus the illegal attempted usurpation by the current MCS Bishop’s office can be found on the updated Home Page of our congregation’s blog as follows:
We invite the ELCA’s Office of the Secretary’s reply.
SEC
May 26, 2023, 11:54 AM (3 days ago)
to me, SEC, Marsha, Dessi0615@gmail.com, derrcotsproduction@yahoo.com, JOEL, Echerrylaw@gmail.com
Pastor Washington,
Thank you for your email.
This matter is a local dispute between a congregation and the synod, and the ELCA churchwide organization has no authority to intervene or to adjudicate that dispute.
Peace to you,
Pr. Keith Fry
The Rev. Keith Fry Executive, Office of the Secretary Administration Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 8765 W Higgins Rd., Chicago, IL 60631-4101
Thanks for your prompt reply. Implicit in your reply is the recognition of the separation of constitutional powers between the ELCA denomination’s churchwide organization, its Synods, and its approximately ten (10) thousand autonomous Congregations.
Said separation of powers, in our congregation’s constitutional opinion, concurs with our local assemby’s view and practice regarding our very own exclusive 11312 S. Union, Chicago IL, property ownership and control of said property up-to and including our singular right of closure (dissolution).
Said closure (dissolution) has never been effected by us. Nor have we ever relinquished control of our assets to anyone inclusive of Metro Chicago Synod.
Rev. Joel Washington.
Dear Partners of Reformation Lutheran Chicago,
Linked following is Metropolitan Chicago Synod’s Attorney Beattie’s current EVICTION SUMMONS dated 5-11-2023: Note: Because the Fed/Ex link was not transferable with this message, I’ve sent it to you separately as a forward document under Fed/Ex office scan. Please reference.
The above said, our Defendants response stands on the following points enumerated once again below:
1) We are (voluntarily) an autonomous congregation in the faith orbit of the Metropolitan Chicago Synod of the Evangelical LutheranChurch in America. As such, we always reserve the right of congregational independence (self-governance) including exclusive control of our property up to and including formal congregational dissolution.
2) Reformation Lutheran has never dissolved either informally or formally. The latter first needs, to be effective, a formal congregational dissolution meeting and a properly adopted and recorded resolution signed, sealed, and delivered to the active congregation membership as well as to MCS/ELCA.
3) Accordingly, MCS/ELCA has no legal jurisdiction over our property according to their own constitution and certainly not according to our very own model congregational constitution.
More, a keenly relevant quote from the STEPS Appendix below:
A) “When it becomes apparent that the ability of the congregation to remain effectively engaged in ministry is in jeopardy, schedule a consultation of the congregation with your synod bishop or designee to develop a plan for discernment. This plan will usually include conversation with the bishop, the synod’s director of evangelical mission, and leaders from neighboring congregations. Decisions about bringing a ministry to a close will only happen after a time of prayer, study and conversation. The decision to close a ministry will require a properly called meeting of the congregation as required by polity and statute.
B) “A sample resolution for discontinuance of ministry follows. Check your state law to make sure a resolution is sufficient and the necessary type of majority needed to approve it. After the appropriate resolution is adopted, signed and attested, a copy shall be forwarded to the bishop of the synod.”
Note: The above referenced resolution is solely made by the congregation only!
5. Additionally, a close reading of Mr. Beattie’s EVICTION SUMMONS document reveals it was improperly filed.
A) Derick Terry and Jenola Terry Ward are not defendants, rather they are disgruntled members who defected from our congregation years ago and have nothing to do with our property;
B) Although this writer is named as a defendant, the form’s plaintiff’s instructions clearly calls for including this writer’s primary address and service thereof neither of which has been done;
C) Plaintiff’s EVICTION SUMMONS is absent a timely prior 30 Day Notice;
D) The Court Clerk’s signature does not appear on the Plaintiff’s document; and finally
E) the Date of Service has not been entered by a process server.
Accordingly, we will take further appropriate action regarding this matter.
Forwarded with this message is the email & link I sent to Mr. Beattie, Attorney for Metropolitan Chicago Synod in response to his October 2022 Thirty Day Notice of 7 months ago Re: Reformation’s Parsonage @ 11312 S. Union. FYI, Said email and link is here:
More, linked following is Beattie’s current EVICTION SUMMONS dated 5-11-2023: Note: Because the Fed/Ex link was not transferable with this message, I’ve sent it to you separately as a forward document under Fed/Ex office scan. Please reference.
The above said, our Defendants response is on the following points:
1) We are (voluntarily) an autonomous congregation in the faith orbit of the Metropolitan Chicago Synod of the Evangelical LutheranChurch in America. As such, we always reserve the right of congregational independence (self-governance) including exclusive control of our property up to and including formal congregational dissolution.
2) Reformation Lutheran has never dissolved either informally or formally. The latter first needs, to be effective, a formal congregational dissolution meeting and a properly adopted and recorded resolution signed, sealed, and delivered to the active congregation membership as well as to MCS/ELCA.
3) Accordingly, MCS/ELCA has no legal jurisdiction over our property according to their own constitution and certainly not according to our very own model congregational constitution.
More, a keenly relevant quote from the STEPS Appendix below:
A) “When it becomes apparent that the ability of the congregation to remain effectively engaged in ministry is in jeopardy, schedule a consultation of the congregation with your synod bishop or designee to develop a plan for discernment. This plan will usually include conversation with the bishop, the synod’s director of evangelical mission, and leaders from neighboring congregations. Decisions about bringing a ministry to a close will only happen after a time of prayer, study and conversation. The decision to close a ministry will require a properly called meeting of the congregation as required by polity and statute.
B) “A sample resolution for discontinuance of ministry follows. Check your state law to make sure a resolution is sufficient and the necessary type of majority needed to approve it. After the appropriate resolution is adopted, signed and attested, a copy shall be forwarded to the bishop of the synod.”
Note: The above referenced resolution is solely made by the congregation only!
5. Additionally, a close reading of Mr. Beattie’s EVICTION SUMMONS document reveals it was improperly filed.
A) Derick Terry and Jenola Terry Ward are not defendants, rather they are disgruntled members who defected from our congregation years ago and have nothing to do with our property;
B) Although this writer is named as a defendant, the form’s plaintiff’s instructions clearly calls for including this writer’s primary address and service thereof neither of which has been done;
C) Plaintiff’s EVICTION SUMMONS is absent a timely prior 30 Day Notice;
D) The Court Clerk’s signature does not appear on the Plaintiff’s document; and finally
E) the Date of Service has not been entered by a process server.
Accordingly, we will take further appropriate action regarding this matter.
1.In Part 1 we outlined the nature of the controversy between the legal view of our congregation’s rightful autonomy as Reformation African American Lutheran Church-Chicago on the one hand, and on the other, the Metro Chicago Synod Bishop’s wrongfully illegal view that our congregation was “closed” (dissolved) via a series of “Synod organized” packed meetings during each of which our congregation was not present (conspicuously absent) and thereby blatantly not allowed (denied) the iceberg tip (first principle) of due process rights.
2. The above said, the Synod Bishop’s office, then, as now is all at once arrogantly, errantly, and openly attempting, under the color and camouflage of law, to wrongfully assume the unbalanced (unchecked) power of its office by trying to illegally over-ride our autonomy and unconstitutionally usurp (seize control) of our congregation’s rightfully owned parsonage propertyat 11312 S. Union.
3. Consequently, we now have no other principled choice but to legally resist the Synod Bishop’s attempted unconstitutional grab (highway robbery) of our property by standing on our congregation’s constitutional rights of self-governance and property controlaccording not only our very own congregational constitution but also according to Bishop Curry’s own Synod Constitution, the ELCA’s Denominational Constitution, as well as the State of Illinois and the U.S. Constitutions.
4. Our Part 1 memo to Rev. Biekman, then MCS Director of Evangelical Mission and Bishop Curry’s Assistant, outlined the two divergent Congregationalist versus Synod Bishop’s office views and practices. The former rightful and constitutional the latter unconstitutional i.e., wrong as wearing two left shoes.
5. The crux of the two conflicting Congregationalist versus Synod Bishop’s office views and practices was stated in our Part 1, November 2021, memo to Rev. Biekman, then MCS Director of Evangelical Outreach and Bishop Curry’s Assistant, as following:
1.As you are well aware, a hidden and open controversy currently exists regarding the status of our congregation within MCS-ELCA.
2. Said controversy emerged in the open at the October 28, 2021 South Conference Luncheon/Meeting hosted by Augustana Lutheran Church and Campus Ministry, Hyde Park. The speaking guest of honor was BishopYehiel Curry. You were also in attendance as a part of your MCS Portfolio.The meeting was the first face-to-face South Conference meeting since the COVID–19 shutdowns 18 months ago. Although we continued to gather for SC check-in meetings virtually via Zoom however.
3. In his presentation to the SC, Bishop Curry made the unsolicited report that our congregation was officially closed i.e. we no longer existed on the Synod rolls. Perhaps he did this because our delegation of six (6) representatives of the Congregation’s leadership team was present, and accounted for, during the opening introductions of the SC business meeting.
4. This writer, in response to Bishop Curry’s unsolicited opinion statement was thereby challenged to intervene during the Q&A making the observation that contrary to the Bishop’s errant statement, reports of our congregational demise are gravely exaggerated and so despite the good Bishop’s errant opinion.
5. Bishop Curry cited as his authority A) the October 2020 meeting recommendation of his African Descent Ministries Council, B) the October 24, 2020 meeting decision of the Synod Council, as well as C) the Book of Reports of the Virtual 2021 Synod Assembly.
6. By contrast, this writer took the position, standing on our congregational constitution and the MCS-ELCA polity, that the power of closure (dissolution) rests solely with the impacted congregation and its Council.
7. Both sides agreed that the discussion of our congregation’s status was beyond the scope of the October 28, 2021 SC meeting. It was then further agreed that a meeting between the Synod Officeand our Congregation’s leadership team should be arranged ASAP. Said meeting’s purpose being to further sort the issue out.Moreover, the proposed meeting would be further arranged via negotiating with Rev. Robert Biekman, then MCS Director of Evangelical Mission and Assistant to Bishop Curry.
PLEASE NOTE #1:WE STAND ON THE ELCA DISSOLUTION GUIDELINES WHICH SUPPORTS IN PRINCIPLE OUR POSITION OF CONGREGATIONAL AUTONOMY
In support of our position our memo to Rev. Biekman cited the ELCA Guidelines on Dissolution as follows:
8. The above said, we hereby propose convening a virtual meeting via our freeconferencecall.com account at the earliest convenience of Rev. Biekman -given proper prior notice.
10. We further seek to convene our Synod-meets-Congregation meeting based on the following quote of Appendix I of Steps wherein its opening two paragraphs state:
A) “When it becomes apparent that the ability of the congregation to remain effectively engaged in ministry is in jeopardy, schedule a consultation of the congregation with your synod bishop or designee to develop a plan for discernment. This plan will usually include conversation with the bishop, the synod’s director of evangelical mission, and leaders from neighboring congregations. Decisions about bringing a ministry to a close will only happen after a time of prayer, study and conversation. The decision to close a ministry will require a properly called meeting of the congregation as required by polity and statute.
B) “A sample resolution for discontinuance of ministry follows. Check your state law to make sure a resolution is sufficient and the necessary type of majority needed to approve it. After the appropriate resolution is adopted, signed and attested, a copy shall be forwarded to the bishop of the synod.”
11. Note: The above referenced resolution is solely made by the congregation only.
12. We invite Rev. Biekman’s reply to our virtual meeting request.
PLEASENOTE # 2: BISHOP CURRY, BY HIS ELEVEN (11) MONTHS SILENCE, STUDIOUSLY IGNORED OUR MEETING REQUEST AFTER WHICH WE WERE THEN TO BE BLINDSIDED BY HIS ATTORNEY’S 30 DAY NOTICE -OUT OF THE BLUE
PLEASE NOTE #3: Our Comprehensive Response to Bishop Curry’s Attorney’s 30 DAY NOTICE of October 2022 “Served” on our Parsonage @ 11310 S. Union by Mr. Adam K. Beattie, Attorney of MCS Some Seven (7) Months Ago is linked following:
I) OUR NOVEMBER 2021 MEMORANDUM TO THE METRO CHICAGO SYNOD BISHOP’S OFFICE
TO: Rev. Robert Biekman, Associate to the Bishop: Director of Evangelical Mission, South and Northeast Conferences
FR: Rev. Joel Washington, Pastor and Council President of DECIDED TO FOLLOW JESUS: Reformation African American Lutheran Congregation Chicago
RE: The Status of Our Congregation Within MCS-ELCA
DA: November 8, 2021
Dear Rev. Biekman,
1.As you are well aware, a hidden and open controversy currently exists regarding the status of our congregation within MCS-ELCA.
2. Said controversy emerged in the open at the October 28, 2021 South Conference Luncheon/Meeting hosted by Augustana Lutheran Church and Campus Ministry, Hyde Park. The speaking guest of honor was BishopYehiel Curry. You were also in attendance as a part of your MCS Portfolio.The meeting was the first face-to-face South Conference meeting since the COVID–19 shutdowns 18 months ago. Although we continued to gather for SC check-in meetings virtually via Zoom however.
3. In his presentation to the SC, Bishop Curry made the unsolicited report that our congregation was officially closed i.e. we no longer existed on the Synod rolls. Perhaps he did this because our delegation of six (6) representatives of the Congregation’s leadership team was present, and accounted for, during the opening introductions of the SC business meeting.
4. This writer, in response to Bishop Curry’s unsolicited opinion statement was thereby challenged to intervene during the Q&A making the observation that contrary to the Bishop’s errant statement, reports of our congregational demise is exaggerated and so despite the good Bishop’s errant opinion.
5. Bishop Curry cited as his authority A) the October 2020 meeting recommendation of his African Descent Ministries Council, B) the October 24, 2020 meeting decision of the Synod Council, as well as C) the Book of Reports of the Virtual 2021 Synod Assembly.
6. By contrast, this writer took the position, standing on our congregational constitution and the MCS-ELCA polity, that the power of dissolution rests solely with the impacted congregation and its Council.
7. Both sides agreed that the discussion of our congregation’s status was beyond the scope of the October 28, SC meeting. It was then further agreed that a meeting between the Synod Officeand our Congregation’s leadership team should be arranged ASAP. Said meeting’s purpose being to further sort the issue out.Moreover, the proposed meeting would be further arranged via negotiating with Rev. Robert Biekman, Director of Evangelical Mission and Assistant to Bishop Curry.
8. The above said, we hereby propose convening a virtual meeting via our freeconferencecall.com account at the earliest convenience of Rev. Biekman -given proper prior notice.
10. We further seek to convene our Synod-meets-Congregation meeting based on the following quote of Appendix I of Steps wherein its opening two paragraphs state:
A) “When it becomes apparent that the ability of the congregation to remain effectively engaged in ministry is in jeopardy, schedule a consultation of the congregation with your synod bishop or designee to develop a plan for discernment. This plan will usually include conversation with the bishop, the synod’s director of evangelical mission, and leaders from neighboring congregations. Decisions about bringing a ministry to a close will only happen after a time of prayer, study and conversation. The decision to close a ministry will require a properly called meeting of the congregation as required by polity and statute.
b) “A sample resolution for discontinuance of ministry follows. Check your state law to make sure a resolution is sufficient and the necessary type of majority needed to approve it. After the appropriate resolution is adopted, signed and attested, a copy shall be forwarded to the bishop of the synod.”
11. Note: The above referenced resolution is solely made by the congregation only.
12. We invite Rev. Biekman’s reply to our virtual meeting request.
II) REV. BIEKMAN’S REPLY TO OUR NOVEMBER 2021 VIRTUAL MEETING REQUEST
Robert Biekman <rbiekman@mcselca.org>
Nov 9, 2021, 12:39 PM
to Yehiel, Tom, me
Good day Rev. Washington,
I am in receipt of your email from yesterday and voicemail that you left today.
Bishop Curry along with Tom Anderson (MCS Business Manager) will be in direct contact with you regarding this email.
Peace and blessings!
III) BISHOP CURRY’S ACTUAL BAD FAITH “FOLLOW-UP”
The ice cold fact is neither Bishop Curry nor the Synod’s Business Manager ever contacted us regarding our virtual meeting request.
Instead, eleven (11) months latter we were blind-sided by an illegal 30 DAY NOTICE served on our congregation’s parsonage at 11312 S. Union by Adam K. Beattie, attorney for MCS/ELCA.
NEW DIRECTIONS: Reformation African American Lutheran Free Congregation Chicago's Legal Defense Fund Saving Black Churches 
