HELD IN PORT HARCOURT, NIGERIA
FROM WEDNESDAY, 1ST TO SATURDAY, 4TH OF MAY, 2019
ATTENDANCE
The number of names recorded in the attached list of participants at the event is forty-one. It shows that seven brethren attended from Imo State, four from Delta, two from Akwa Ibom, one each from Edo and Bayelsa, and twenty-six from Rivers State, which includes the host congregation, in Port Harcourt and the other congregations within the State.
ARRIVAL
On the arrival day, Wednesday, 1st of May, 2019, only brethren from Rivers, and Edo State were present for the welcome service. The others arrived after the scheduled date.
ADOPTION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES
The following day, during the first session, minutes of the ministers’ meeting held in Port Harcourt on the 18th of January, 2019 was read by Bro Eric Okhuakhua. Bro Joshua Okike moved for its adoption and Bro Peter Nwosu supported it.
PR0CEEDINGS
The Seminar was in five sessions.
The first session started around 12:40pm and ended at 4:23pm, on Thursday, May 2. The delay was due to the late arrival of ministers from the remaining States. After joyful choruses and singing of ELS 17 and 230, Bro Barth Nwachukwu led the prayers and read the welcome address on behalf of the host church. His admonition was taken from Jude 1:20: “Building up ourselves…” He also added 1Tim4:16 to show the need to take heed to the doctrine that is able to save us and our hearers. Bro Alalibo prayed for the message. After a fervid deliberation, the long reading of the article “Functional Unity” by Brothers Damian Uba and Chinwendu Nwachukwu brought the session to an end.
The second session began at about 8:33pm and ended by 11:08pm on the same day. The discussion was full of passions that almost ended the meeting abruptly. Intermittent objections and counter objections persisted until the latter part of the session when sobriety prevailed, by the grace of God. Two topics were covered successfully to the glory of God.
The third session started by 9:30am and ended around 12:12pm, on Friday, May 3rd, 2019. One topic was handled conclusively. The break period afforded some ministers the opportunity to visit the proposed 2019 camp meeting venue for inspection of its facilities.
The fourth session lasted for about three hours, ending at 5:43pm same day. The topic treated was Head Covering. The fifth and final session kicked off at 7:20pm and closed at 10:49pm on the same day. The fifth topic, Plaiting of Hair, was handled. At the end of the lesson, Bro Francis Anapuwa exhorted the house, showing how Paul was zealous in ignorance until God showed him the light (1Timothy 1:13, 16). He also gleaned from Prov.2:1-9 and 1:23-30, declaring that we do have work to do but our slackness is delaying the Lord’s return.
ISSUES
It would be recalled that Bro Barth Nwachukwu had, in the course of his welcome address for the January 17th to 19th 2019 Ministers’ meeting in Port Harcourt, expressed concern about the state of health of the Nigerian ecclesiastical movement for unity, which was well captured in Bro Ogbonnaya Okike’s article: “Functional Unity”. He called for action to address the issues thrown up in the presentation, so that our much desired unity would work in the Bible way. This call gave weight to the need for a Bible Seminar among the ministers.
The main issue brought to the fore by the paper “Functional Unity” is the different approaches to achieving unity among the churches of God, as we know in this part of the world. The author preferred the approach to unity that allows amicable interactions among the congregations, their doctrinal differences notwithstanding. He opined that the differences in doctrines are actually in minor areas, which are negligible and can be overruled by the major points of agreement, of which a determinate building up of friendly associations will be very useful. This approach appears to gain covert acceptability among some ministers. This group of ministers acknowledges the doctrinal conflicts among the congregations, but they would rather work to strengthen what they consider as major points of agreement than to demonstrate visible support for a clear-cut resolution of the perceived minor differences. Efforts made to stymie the straightforward consideration of the issues, which they judge minor, ranged from overtures before the Seminar and outright confrontations in the course of the programme.
Obstacles
The obstacles faced during the meetings were so enormous that it could only take the mercy of the Lord to surmount them. The first challenge was the late arrival of participants, especially those who came a day behind schedule. It affected the early kick off of the first session, which, in effect, reduced the time available for the meetings. Another challenge was the intermittent disruptions as a result of opposition from those who did not want certain topics to be discussed.
Ordinarily, it is expected that those who profess the same faith ought to believe the same thing and speak the same thing (1Cor. 1:10); having no grey or “no-go” areas in matters that border on their relationship. When this is not the case, sincere efforts are made to understand why things are not how they should be and how they can become what they ought to be. While not a few brethren were fasting and praying for this very purpose, that they all “may with one mind and one mouth glorify God” (Rom. 15:6), it should be a wonder that some others should yet think that every member of the family need not have one mind and one mouth on the same thing that concerns their faith. The witness of conscience should normally kick against such position for those who profess unity of the church; however, in this particular case, they grant that the areas of differences in doctrines are actually non-essential. This argument of non-essentialness would have been tenable if the matters involved had nothing to do with clear scriptural instructions, but based upon such things as vegetables, meat, spoons, or other opinions of men that have no eternal consequences. Men have no authority to conclude any part of God’s word as non-essential because they are pure (Proverbs 30:5) and profitable for doctrine (2Timothy 3:16).
Nevertheless, when the question of non-essentialness is answered, another issue is brought up: misinterpretation and misapplication of the scriptures. This is given as a justifiable cause for differences in doctrines, since not every man may have the proper understanding of the inspired word. If this were truly the case, everyone would have desired a forum where the sincere hearts would wait on the Lord to help the multitude of seekers to arrive at the proper understanding of the Scripture. Thankfully, this is the purpose of Bible Seminars. It is better to address the doctrinal conflicts than to suppress them by shying away from them.
The author of the “Functional Unity” did not shy away from the issues. He addressed them to the best of his ability, with all clarity. However, those who opposed the consideration of the issues touched by the article did not conceal their reasons for doing so. Bro Francis Anapuwa mentioned openly that he had called on Bro Barth Nwachukwu to suggest that the discussion of this particular article should be set aside. Reasons given for this include the opinion that the write-up was a mere academic exercise. It was feared that addressing the issues would lead to needless disputations.
Another reason given for opposing the discussion is the absence of the author of the article. It was argued that since he was unavailable for the defence of his presentation, it should be stepped down to avoid misrepresentation of his views, which he alone can explain. Bro Joshua Okike even opined that the insistence on the discussion of the article was being used as a means of scattering the meeting and the church. This accusation was a cause for no small stir that threatened the continuation of the proceedings as Bro Barth Nwachukwu refused to ignore it but insisted on its recantation. The Lord granted that the intervention of meek brethren should prevail and avail calm for the unsettled brethren.
Bro Winston E. Dagogo stood up in the heat of the discussions and spoke from Paul’s words in 2Cor. 10:12-16 to the end that ministers who have received the body of truth [as delivered from the times of old] ought not to stretch themselves beyond the measure distributed to them by God, so as to reach other men’s labors; since it is the Lord who will declare every man’s work of what sort it is, and ours only is to wait on our own ministering according to the proportion or measure that God has dealt to us. Such a venture (out of measure and into other regions not assigned from above) would only lead to a mix-up of people with conflicting buildups that leave men unwise, measuring or comparing themselves with themselves. Bro Dick Seleiyi recalled that nine years ago some leading ministers from various backgrounds had approached the Port Harcourt brethren to request for the unity of the congregations. They were then given the condition of accepting the light of truth of God’s Word, to which they gave their word of acceptance. But the events down the years have proven the case otherwise.
Fortifications
Meanwhile, the reasons adduced for discussing the article include the following: first, while it was acknowledged that the author was absent, it was also recalled that he had gotten and used ample hours to exhaust his thoughts on the lesson about three years ago. There was no ambiguity in his teaching to warrant misrepresentation. His views were expressed in very plain language and cheered by a number of individuals who were present. It is not actually about him or his personal defence but about the position of the church on the views expressed in the paper in the light of the Holy Scripture. As for his absence, no reason was given; even though he was present at the previous ministers’ meeting where the decision was taken to have this Seminar in order to address the article among other issues. The article raised issues that are too critical to be put aside. The argument that it is a mere academic exercise is not a commendation for the efforts of the writer who should have been received as spiritual brother that is sincerely concerned about the affairs of the church and is desirous of her prosperity.
From the minutes of the previous ministers’ meeting, read and adopted before the commencement of the Seminar, it can be seen that it was decided that this paper, among other issues, should be discussed in the Seminar. It was not objected then, neither was it objected at the reading of the minutes, before its adoption. Surprisingly, it is the same brethren who moved for the adoption that later swelled the number that opposed the discussion. This did not follow acceptable standard and norms.
Finally, the benefit of hindsight has proved unfounded the fears that the discussions would portend grave consequences for the church. The atmosphere of the discussions became serene after those who opposed the discussion ceased from restiveness. At the end of the Seminar, testimonies came from different quarters and appreciation to the Lord for making His truth known to sincere hearts and bringing every apprehension to naught.
No comments:
Post a Comment