United Church of God, an International Association

Council of Elders Quarterly Meeting Report

Milford, Ohio

Monday, August 10, 2026

Chairman Tim Pebworth called the meeting to order at 9:03 a.m. Eastern, at the home office of the United Church of God near Milford, Ohio. Peter Eddington opened the session with prayer. All 12 Council of Elders (Council) members were present. Rex Sexton joined by video conference. The members of the Council are Scott Ashley, Jorge de Campos, Aaron Dean, Peter Eddington, Andy Lee, Ben Light, Len Martin, Darris McNeely, Tim Pebworth (chairman), Gary Petty, Rex Sexton and Paul Wasilkoff.

Approval of Agenda and Prior Minutes—Tim Pebworth

Mr. Pebworth welcomed everyone. The last Council meeting minutes from May, along with minutes from special meetings on May 14 and June 24, were approved. The agenda for the week was reviewed and approved.

President’s Report—John Elliott

Mr. Elliott greeted everyone and remarked on the declining state of the world. Throughout biblical history, there have been intense pressures on God’s people. We find ourselves in a “sweet spot”—a time of peace and abundance where our main objectives are how to reach more people and manage good budgets. However, a return of persecution is prophesied to the point where the influence of God’s holy people will be unable to flourish (Daniel 12:7). So, how can we take advantage of this moment in time? We need to work together in prayer to see where there are open doors and opportunities to do the work God has given us.

In Exodus 31, God named certain individuals whom He had filled with His Spirit. We have many different roles and responsibilities in the Church, and it is God who gives us these spiritual gifts for the works that He has assigned to us. In 1 Corinthians 12:4, Paul talks about a diversity of gifts but the same Spirit.

When we look at the Church, we should be amazed at the talents of artisans that God is aiding with His Spirit. Mr. Elliott additionally referenced the business skillset contributed by members of the Council and administration who, with varied backgrounds and perspectives, bring a level of expertise that God has brought to us to enhance our operations.

We recently concluded a fiscal year, and several enhancements have begun to be brought to the fore and refined. The President’s role has included the clarification of job descriptions within the administration. Positions are being benchmarked throughout the organization. We are process-oriented and have discovered some gaps where guidelines are yet to be developed.

We have now reached a position where we are ready to perform—to do the Work in an enhanced way. We have a number of quality publications like Beyond Today, United News and Compass Check. With Council collaboration, we will begin focusing on setting other objectives for enhancing our target initiatives.

Operations for Ministerial and Member Services have been enhanced with the addition of new senior managers specifically managing Member Services and International Services.

Media and Communications Services has a beautiful opportunity to provide our members with quality material. There is so much advertising everywhere that our message is getting lost to the public. We need to pray that God will open doors and show the way to reach those whom He wants us to reach.

In 1 Corinthians 12:25, we read that all of the members of the body should have the same care for one another. Mr. Elliott thanked everyone for pursuing oneness over the past year. Biblical unity and harmony are some things that Jesus Christ died for so that we can be one with God and each other. We will really shine as Christ’s disciples by the love that we will show and the oneness that we will demonstrate.

Mr. Elliott thanked the Council and the administration for a great year of growing relationships and the wonderful strides that have been made in collaboration, respect and doing our work in harmony. He mentioned that he meets with Chairman Pebworth each week and with the Council Committee heads monthly. We need each other and we are growing together in cohesive modules that are doing the work of God.

Mr. Elliott is encouraging discussions about how we can accomplish this work ever more effectively. A new generation is coming on—we need to encourage them with a firm foundation for the great work that God wants to do. There is a tendency to compare accomplishments in our current work to the work that was done in the past. In Haggai, there is an important lesson urging us not to compare today’s efforts with those of the past. To those who had returned from Babylon and constructed a less spectacular second temple, God said, “‘…be strong, all you people of the land,’ says the Lord, ‘and work; for I am with you,’ says the Lord of hosts” (Haggai 2:3-4).

It is time to busily shore up these elements before the night comes when no one can do the work. As we look to accomplish our strategies and objectives, we ask for your prayers.

MMS Operation Manager Report—Steve Myers

Mr. Myers greeted everyone and, in reference to the work of Ministerial and Member Services, cited 1 Corinthians 3:6, “I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase.” He then reviewed four years of MMS statistics, highlighting key trends and conclusions from the data.

Major indicators remain steady: attendance, baptisms, congregations and ministerial manpower. The Church is not declining—but the numbers show a plateau rather than a sustained growth cycle. The strategic question is how we move with God’s help from stability to healthy, sustainable growth. God expects results.

Attendance is holding steady, with 2026 being the highest average attendance over four years, including remote hookups. Remote connections generally run about 1,300-1,700 per month and have become a permanent part of Church life. We do need better data on who is connecting remotely—and why.

The number of baptisms is encouraging but hasn’t translated into net attendance growth. Possible factors include deaths, aging, reduced mobility—and baptisms are typically people who are already attending. Our next step will be to track retention over the coming years—are people still attending, serving and taking part in their congregations?

Several elders and wives have died since our last meeting. Elders Bruce Dean, Art Morris and Randy Stiver have died. Norma Holladay and Aggie Reyes are wives who have died since the May meeting.

We have 443 congregations across the world, with 186 congregations and Bible study groups in the United States. That is about 33 people attending per location, roughly 5.5 percent higher than 2023. How sustainable will our congregations be over the next 5-10 years?

Ministerial manpower is stable today, with the number of elders reaching a four-year high in 2026. About 72 percent of U.S. elders are non-pastoral. We have 74 pastors covering the U.S. congregations and Bible study groups—about 2.5 locations per pastor. Our trainee pipeline is positive, but still small relative to future needs. Compared with our anticipated needs, we face some challenges. It is our most significant long-term concern.

Three priorities going forward include: 1) understand retention and integration after baptism; 2) identify vulnerable congregations despite overall stability; 3) continue developing manpower to address retirements and transitions.

One of our strategic directives focuses on mentoring and developing manpower for the future. The “Laborers for the Harvest” mentoring program has begun to help develop people for future service and leadership. We are working to make mentoring an ongoing habit, not merely a formal program. We want to prepare people to serve after us. This program integrates with our new elder mentoring manual.

At the moment, we have 151 total mentees working with 70 mentors. In the United States, we have 89 mentees with 41 of our 72 pastors participating. 40 percent of our mentees are outside of the United States.

We also want to improve our speaking. We have reviewed and categorized 6,425 unique messages given from 180 congregations between January and July of this year. Christian living is the largest category every month, with 70.5 percent of messages; doctrine with 26.4 percent and prophecy with 3.1 percent. Going forward, pastors will self-report the categorization for each message given.

Our United Youth Camps have been amazing once again this year. At our summer camps, we had 380 teen campers and 471 preteen campers; we had 275 teen camp staff and 556 preteen camp staff.

Reviewing information about the Feast of Tabernacles, we’ve found that about 37 percent of U.S. members attend a Feast site that is local to them, 37 percent choose a more distant U.S. site, and 25 percent attend a site outside of the United States. Members make Feast site decisions based on much more than just mileage.

As we evaluate Feast site selection, we will compare member distribution, travel distance, local support and registration patterns. We are considering a move from the current 14 sites down to 10 strategically placed sites. This is a starting point for discussion, as many factors, including pastoral, family, facility and international considerations, must be analyzed.

Our international areas are served by nine national councils and 14 senior pastors who serve over 55 countries around the world. We are planning 41 international Feast sites to serve brethren worldwide this year.

In Japan, we are trying an exploratory Japanese-language Beyond Today social media campaign; in South Korea we are identifying entry points and building relationships; in Thailand we have renewed a university relationship through Chulalongkorn University; and in Latin America we held an ABC/Leadership seminar in Santiago, Chile with 65 attendees from seven countries.

We are trying to determine what works best in each area. We don’t want to simply export a U.S. model and assume it will translate culturally or practically to other parts of the world.

We are planning six regional ministerial conferences around the world over the next three years. We also hope to streamline Feast timelines and registration across all sites. We are continuing translation into Twi, Hindi, Urdu, Japanese, Greek and other languages. We are testing scalable digital outreach through WhatsApp and Spanish-language media.

Mr. Myers concluded by stating that the Church’s stability needs to be our platform for what comes next.

Mr. Martin asked whether there is a goal for the percentage of sermons on Christian living, doctrine or prophecy. Mr. Myers said that there is no set percentage for each category at this time, but the goal is to reach a healthy mix of the three.

Media Operation Manager Report—Scott Delamater

Mr. Delamater shared the Key Performance Indicators for Media for the year, including watch time, total clicks, download/order/subscribe and “time on site.”

Awareness-stage engagement is measured by clicks and watch time. The total number of hours that our viewers watch our content from YouTube and Ottera is 3.6 percent over baseline. For the current 12-month period, we have exceeded our one-year target based on a rolling average, with 287,117 hours watched compared to a baseline of 277,135 hours. There has been significant growth in Magnified.

We have released three new episodes of Beyond Today with Ben Light; we have five episodes queued and eight additional episodes just recorded last week. We have filmed three additional screen tests for future hosts, with two more scheduled. There will be panel reviews planned for later this year to incorporate subscriber feedback. We are planning a new format pilot for November of this year.

We are also tracking overall watch time for the 25-44 age range. We are currently 15.2 percent over baseline. However, the trend line is actually moving in the wrong direction. Our Magnified demographics have been shifting significantly toward the teenage segment. We want to continue to engage that group but also want to continue to grow the 25-44 demographic.

Another key indicator is “clicks,” which are an aggregate of several different sources. We have seen double our efficiency on paid Google ad clicks, about double the response and audience; however, we have seen some tapering in our organic search clicks. Microsoft paid and organic clicks trended downward from February to June but have responded well to renewed efforts in July.

Response-stage engagement indicators include our download, order and subscribe numbers. These numbers are currently 8.5 percent below the baseline. We are offering a new digital subscription to Beyond Today, which was launched on July 1. We currently have 688 subscribers and are growing organically 10-20 per day. We are planning a promotional push to accelerate growth further. The landing page is ucg.org/subscribe.

We have launched a new Beyond Today print edition that is on heavier paper stock and has four additional pages. We have now shifted it to a quarterly cadence beginning with the July issue.

We are also working on increasing our renewal rate by using lead qualification. This will likely cause a circulation drop as we begin to “weed out” subscribers who are not really interested in having a subscription. We are expecting digital subscription growth to help offset reduced print circulation. A cost-per-renewal analysis against prior cycles is underway.

Our subscriber development letter that went out at the beginning of July had more visuals and more concise language to drive response. It offered two study aids and was a smaller mailing group; we had a good overall response rate of 2.62 percent. We had 337 new donors for the month of July.

United News has an updated physical format on heavier archival-quality paper with a larger font and a new layout. The next issue of El Comunicado (the Spanish-language member newsletter) will move to full color as well.

The Bible Study Course refresh has been a long-running project over the past 10 years and is on track to wrap up this month. The course is in a new digest format with modernized language, updated terms and statistics, along with new typesetting and layout. Those enrolling in the Bible Study Course next year will begin to receive it in the new format.

The department is in the process of restaffing its doctrinal review teams and revising the tools it uses to help meet faster turnaround needs and lighten the volunteer load.

Mr. Pebworth asked about our renewal rates. Mr. Delamater said that our current renewal rate is about 9 percent with a goal of raising it back toward 20 percent, with an interim goal of 12 percent in the near term.

Treasurer/Financial Services Operation Manager Report—Ted Budge and Linda Api

Mr. Budge introduced the financial topics that would be covered during the morning session: a review of the June 2026 financial dashboard, an investment advisory committee update, a discussion on some trends and a discussion about planned giving.

Mrs. Api shared the financial dashboard for the year-to-date period ending June 30, 2026. The dashboard is one easy-to-read page that shows a snapshot of our financial position. In June, the total revenue was lower than anticipated—this is primarily because the Pentecost offering was scheduled to come in during June but actually came in during May.

General contributions, estates, stock and grants are trending lower than the budget, but they are offset against Holy Day offerings and the release of restricted funds that are now being recorded as they are released. Year-to-date revenue was $560,000 positive versus the budget.

We had higher expenses than anticipated for the month. It’s not unusual for the expenses to be higher in the last month of the fiscal year because people are trying to catch up with expenses not submitted earlier in the year. Assistance, noted in Organizational Stewardship and Administration, was over budget by approximately $385,000. Of this amount, $365,000 was related to the release of restricted funds in the revenue section. The Media Department had savings in printing, which were offset by higher postage and shipping for a positive net effect of $110,000. MMS had approximately $199,000 in savings for travel as well as $53,000 in festival costs. Expenses are only $33,000, or 0.1 percent over budget for the year.

The GCE indicated that we could use up to $925,000 from our net assets (reserves) during fiscal year 2026, but we only spent $397,000 of net assets during the fiscal year.

Mrs. Api said that the department is making use of artificial intelligence to analyze invoices and to help them with their daily work. The department is also trying to handle more things electronically, such as having local congregations transfer the funds from an offering to the home office electronically instead of through the mail.

Mr. McNeely mentioned the importance for the Council of Elders to have a discussion about offerings being donated online as it compares to the Biblical requirements for offerings.

Mr. Budge listed the members of the Investment Advisory Committee: Caryn Alles, Linda Api, Ted Budge, Drew Efimov, Jonathan Garnant and Jessica Govoni. They had their first introductory meeting on July 7. The Committee is putting together a request for proposal for brokerage and advisory services.

Mr. Budge reviewed a contribution and income summary covering the past five years. There is a concern that general contributions went down in the past year. There have been similar decreases in the past. One year does not make a trend, but our congregational demographic is aging. We should make plans for the future by increasing the rate of return on our investments, seeking to gain operational efficiencies, leveraging debt to maintain cash, incorporating capital planning and forecasting, and doing our part and trust God to do the rest.

Mr. Budge revisited planned giving. The scriptural foundations include, “A good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s children” (Proverbs 13:22) and “that you may walk properly toward those who are outside” (1 Thessalonians 4:11-12). Many of the challenges to planned giving involve children or inheritors fighting about what their parents decided to do with their estates.

We need to equip members with clear guidance on wills, trusts, and giving options so that their own families are cared for first. We need to provide dedicated support, tools and coordination for charitable planned gifts that advance the mission of the Church. We also need to offer fiduciary-level personal guidance that aligns estate goals with the Church’s mission.

We want to educate our members about planned giving options but not coerce them in any way. We need to place the needs of the donor first in every conversation and recommendation, providing one-on-one guidance tailored to each member’s situation and goals.

The recommendation is to hire a part-time staff member to support planned giving program administration and donor coordination.

Committee Reports:

Doctrine Committee—Rex Sexton

Mr. Sexton said that there are currently several projects remanded to the Doctrine Committee, and he gave some status updates on their current tasks:

1. The project about the Modern Tribes of Israel is currently under review.
2. The Committee is reviewing and standardizing the process for submitting doctrinal and prophecy papers. They finished that project and will bring recommendations later in the week.
3. For the project about Understanding Isaiah 28, a lead has been assigned, and work will begin this month.
4. Work on guidelines for credentialing and reordination will begin this month.
5. Work is being performed analyzing the differences between what we call “doctrine” or a “teaching.”
6. For the project about self-defense and firearms, the Committee needs further direction from the Council, and it will be discussed later in the week.
7. For the project about Forsaken and Remez that was tabled in 2024, the Committee needs to decide whether to work on it again.

Members of the Doctrine Committee: Jorge de Campos, Len Martin, Gary Petty, Rex Sexton (chair) and Paul Wasilkoff.

Education Committee—Aaron Dean

Mr. Dean said that the latest version of the committee paper on marriage is available for Council members to review and that it will be discussed later in the week.

Members of the Education Committee: Scott Ashley, Aaron Dean (chair), Ben Light and Gary Petty.

Ethics Committee—Andy Lee

Mr. Lee said that the Ethics Committee has met three times since the May meetings and will bring up a matter later in the week.

Members of the Ethics Committee: Scott Ashley, Peter Eddington, Andy Lee (chair) and Rex Sexton.

Media Committee—Jorge de Campos

Mr. de Campos said that he has regular meetings with Mr. Delamater and that the Committee receives monthly reports from him and that they are working well together.

Members of the Media Committee: Jorge de Campos (chair), Darris McNeely, Gary Petty and Paul Wasilkoff.

Roles and Rules Committee—Len Martin

Mr. Martin said that since the May meetings, the Committee has held two meetings. The Committee has gone through 12 apparent open issues that had been identified and discovered that four of those items had previously been completed.

Of the eight remaining “open issues,” the Committee is prepared to present the following this week:

1. Policy 1.7.6 edits to clarify how an elder can notify the Secretary regarding admittance/removal/re-admittance to the GCE.
2. Result of research to identify any possible conflicting resolutions of the Council and GCE.
3. A Job Description for the Council of Elders.
4. A review of our Scopes and Responsibilities document resulted in several minor edits.
5. Ordination Request Form, add a check box – “Do you attend the closest congregation to where you live? If not, why not?”

The three remaining items on our open issues list are as follows (which we hope to bring back in December 2026):

1. (August 2023 remand): Review Pastor Policy Manual section 4.4.3 policy regarding attendance, specifically as it may relate to Registered Sex Offenders.
2. (February 2024 remand): Work in conjunction with the Ethics Committee to conduct a review of all the standing committees’ Scope and Responsibilities for matters of conflict of interest.
3. (May 2024 remand): Review age requirement (number of years as an elder) for selecting men to serve on committees.

The Committee wants to know whether the Council wants to remand to the Committee a review of the Annual Assessment of Officers and the Process and Timeline for selection of President.

Members of the Roles and Rules Committee: Scott Ashley, Peter Eddington, Ben Light, Len Martin (chair) and Paul Wasilkoff.

Strategic Planning and Finance Committee—Darris McNeely

Mr. McNeely greeted everyone and reported that the Committee met once to review a Faithful Service Leave program. The Committee has made some proposed edits to the program and will bring it to discussion later in the week.

The Committee anticipates working closely with Mr. Budge on the capital plan and investment plan. The Committee also plans to develop a process for monitoring progress on the strategic plan.

There is also further clarification needed about modifications to the scope and responsibilities for the Committee.

Members of the Strategic Planning and Finance Committee: Aaron Dean, Peter Eddington, Andy Lee, Ben Light and Darris McNeely (chair).

Update to Retiree Discretionary Assistance Policy—Peter Eddington

Mr. Eddington presented a proposed change to the Discretionary Retirement Assistance policy, specifically the section about a Pension Offset.

Instead of saying that a pension earned from non-Church employment “will normally be considered toward the employee’s 60 percent income target,” it will now state “may also be considered toward the employee’s UCG discretionary 60 percent income target.”

Mr. Pebworth mentioned that this is a sensitive discussion and asked who the decision makers would be for such a decision. Mr. Eddington said that the Human Resources department would bring this type of decision to the Council for approval.

The Council will decide on the change later in the week.

The Council took a scheduled break for lunch at 11:56 a.m., after a prayer by Scott Delamater. The Council resumed its agenda at 1:02 p.m., after a prayer by Gary Petty.

Five-year Forecast/Capital Planning Framework—Ted Budge

Mr. Budge presented the results of the Capital Plan strategy and priorities survey sent to the Council of Elders. He felt that some interesting analysis came from it.

The first question was about funding allocation priorities. Preaching the gospel and outreach ranked highest, followed by staff/ministerial compensation and benefits; international subsidy and support; local congregation support; purchase or construction of new facilities; recruiting, training and supporting new ministers; and maintenance and improvement of existing facilities.

Over half of respondents felt that projects should be considered individually with no predetermined emphasis. No respondents felt that the capital plan should primarily be about local congregational buildings.

The most important criterion for a facility to qualify was its long-term operating and maintenance sustainability. The majority of respondents felt that independently incorporated congregations (and those collecting donations locally) currently hold an advantage in facility purchases—a goal would be to make the process more equitable in the future.

The majority of respondents felt that we should keep the current debt limit. Half of the respondents felt that we should develop a formal plan for how to repurpose or divest a Church-owned building after attendance has declined.

The survey pointed toward these key findings for strategic priorities:

1. Gospel First: Preaching and outreach received the highest average allocation (29). Capital decisions should remain subordinated to the primary mission.
2. Case-by-Case Preference: 58 percent favor evaluating projects individually rather than a fixed local versus regional emphasis. Flexibility is valued over rigid categories.
3. Sustainability is Essential: Long-term operating and maintenance sustainability ranked as the most critical qualification criterion across respondents.
4. Local Adaptation: 75 percent prefer a square-foot guideline that is adjusted for local needs, configuration, parking and code—not a rigid formula.

It was determined that one of the steps we need to take to go forward is to develop a five-year cash forecast incorporating MMS and Media cost projections, viewed against target reserve levels, to determine capital purchasing capacity.

Based on these results, the survey has given the team the input that they need to start drafting an initial capital plan.

Mr. Pebworth mentioned that there is a current resolution that pauses any building purchases until this capital plan is formalized. The Council discussed whether to continue this “pause” now that it has been six months since it was resolved. Mr. Lee was asked to develop an amendment to the resolution from February 2026 to bring back to the Council for discussion later in the week.

Key Operating Statistics—Andy Lee

Mr. Lee made a presentation to propose that the Strategic Planning and Finance Committee review/update the Key Operating Statistics measures used by the Council of Elders. The discussion is not meant to identify the measures themselves—which is out of scope for the day’s discussion.

Measures drive organizational outcomes. Measures help to determine whether we are on track to meet strategic goals, and whenever there is a refresh of strategy, this should drive a refresh of measures. Measures also ensure that operational priorities are aligned.

The existing Key Operating Statistics predate the strategic plan and could be more balanced across the four goals of the strategic plan. We are early in the execution of the new strategic plan, so it is an ideal time to ensure alignment of measures with the plan.

The work to be performed under the proposed remand would be to analyze the strategic plan to determine key governance measures related to each of the four goals, to work with the administration to understand the operational measures currently in use, and then to rationalize the results of those two steps in coordination with the administration, to recommend refreshed Key Operating Statistics measures for Council discussion and approval.

The Council of Elders approved the requested remand to the Strategic Planning and Finance Committee.

The Council moved to a planned executive session at 1:36 p.m. to discuss the following agenda items:

1. Hiring decision.
2. Treasurer update—Compensation Committee.
3. Review of ordination, credentialing and hiring requests.

Adjournment of Monday Session

The Council moved out of executive session at 5:00 p.m. and adjourned for the day. Jorge de Campos closed the day’s session with prayer.

Tuesday, August 11, 2026

Chairman Tim Pebworth called the day’s session to order at 8:30 a.m. Eastern, at the home office of the United Church of God near Milford, Ohio. Ben Light opened the session with prayer. All 12 Council of Elders (Council) members were present. Rex Sexton joined by video conference.

Church Building Policy—Tim Pebworth

Mr. Pebworth began a presentation with recommended clarifications to our Local Church Building policy. He feels that there are places in the current policy where the language seems to be ambiguous or internally inconsistent.

In the current policy, the phrase “local church building” currently does not seem to contemplate regional offices, residences and international facilities. International areas may need facilities that the policy does not describe. This makes such facilities difficult to justify—and the Building Review Team is bound to apply the criteria as written.

The policy states that there must be a preliminary evaluation by the president of UCGIA and the operation manager of Ministerial and Member Services. However, section three states that the Building Review Team determines whether a proposal satisfies policy criteria. Is the preliminary evaluation a gate or an input?

Mr. McNeely indicated that these two policies really should be coordinated under and within the larger discussion about the Capital Plan.

Building Review Team membership definition is inconsistent between the international policy (3.5.1) and the U.S. policy (3.3.5.1) from which it was drawn. Both policies permit professional advisors to assist the assessment, but neither requires real estate expertise on the team itself. It is suggested that at least one experienced real estate professional serve on the Building Review Team. This would allow concerns about whether a purchase “makes monetary sense” to be stated as specific, addressable findings rather than a general reservation.

The policies also have no stated appeal process. They commit the team and the submitting area to a joint analysis, but provide no remedy if that coordination does not occur or if a proposal is declined on grounds the submitting area believes are factually resolvable. It is suggested to define an appeal path to protect the Building Review Team as much as the applicant.

The policy currently states: “A church building should only be pursued if it makes monetary sense or there is substantial difficulty with local rentals.”​ As it is written, the word “or” is in there, making these alternatives. A purchase may demonstrably make monetary sense regardless of whether a rental remains available. The policy says that “Ownership will not be pursued where reasonable rental or lease solutions remain viable.” The suggestion is to state the Council’s intent directly: is a favorable monetary analysis sufficient on its own, or is demonstrated rental difficulty a separate and necessary condition?

The service level expectations are unclear. Neither policy sets any expectation for how quickly a proposal is acknowledged, reviewed or answered. In a live market, a delay of a week or two could end a transaction. The people involved are conscientious and stretched thin—the current policy gives them no standard to work to.

General Counsel Jim Pastor mentioned that he feels it is cleaner that there is a provision in every contract that it is subject to review by the Building Review Team and subsequently the Council of Elders.

The Council consented to put off until later in the week a potential motion that the Council remand these policies to the Strategic Planning and Finance Committee for review and clarification of the seven areas identified.

Doctrine Committee Remand Process—Len Martin

Mr. Martin presented the material on behalf of Rex Sexton. The Committee is suggesting that there be a cover sheet attached to doctrinal and prophecy papers that will provide information about the author, submission and approval history.

Proposed edits to the Scope and Responsibilities document are mostly in Attachment A. The Council discussed various questions to understand the workflow.

The proposal has added a section stating that “Any paper that is submitted to the Doctrine Committee without following this process will not be reviewed.”

There was some discussion about whether the Doctrine Committee is required to remand papers to the Doctrinal Advisory Committee or the Prophecy Advisory Committee, or whether it is optional.

A number of minor changes to the description of the process were discussed. There was some concern that the document being reviewed had been edited since the Committee had posted it, so the Committee plans to go back and ensure that their original intent is still accurately reflected.

Mr. Pebworth asked whether the author of a paper that rises to a certain level should have an opportunity to respond to the reasons why a paper is rejected. Mr. de Campos recommended that those submitting doctrinal papers need to focus on a single point of doctrine in their paper—in many cases, so many points are submitted that if any of them are rejected, then the Committee must reject the entire paper.

Mr. Light suggested that each time a paper is appealed to go to the next level, it would be good to require the author to make some type of effort that would justify the appeal, such as responding to some of the reasons why the paper was rejected.

Mr. Pebworth suggested that there could be a step where the author is given some of the reasons for rejection and allowed to resubmit the paper to address those reasons.

Mr. Petty suggested an enhanced documentation process that would expand Attachment B, the proposed cover sheet, to document more information about the paper and responses to that paper at each level in the process.

A new section states that any paper rejected cannot be resubmitted for a period of at least two years from the date of the rejection letter sent to the author.

Mr. Martin said that the Committee would take all of the comments and plan to bring back a proposal at the December 2026 meeting.

Policy on Songleaders—Len Martin

Mr. Martin asked the Council of Elders whether there should be guidance on the question of whether non-baptized men should be songleaders, particularly mature, older teens.

Some pastors allow older teens to lead songs in the worship service in their congregation. Is there anything that we have in writing on this topic?

Our Constitution defines a member of the Church as someone who has been duly baptized and remains in good standing. The Pastor’s Policy Manual 2.6.4.7, the Feast of Tabernacles Women Choir Directors Policy says, “We do not believe that a choir director performs the same role as the songleader in congregational singing. Songleaders are in a leadership position. They speak and set the tone for the service. Oftentimes, they are the ones who make the announcements. They are often chosen for their speaking and personality skills, in addition to their musical skills. Choir directors are often much more musically qualified than songleaders! We do not believe that the participation of women in the musical roles outlined above is the ‘thin edge of the wedge’ in granting women leadership roles in the Church.”

On page 169 of the Ministerial and Pastoral Development Notebook, under songleader guidelines, point #8 states: “Remember that you are the first official ‘public speaker’ a new person will see and hear in action—and that you represent Jesus Christ, God the Father, all the holy angels and the entire true Church of God; therefore, do your job to the best of your ability.”

However, we do not have an explicit statement that a songleader must be a baptized member.

Mr. Pebworth said that his experience and preference from working with developing international areas, it is not always practical to have a baptized member lead songs, although that would be his preference. Some congregations have two baptized men in a group of twenty and they have to perform all duties from the prayers to the messages.

Mr. Sexton suggested that we leave this to the pastor’s discretion. We need to develop new leaders, and this is a way to let people feel like they can have a role in the Church and grow toward baptism.

Mr. de Campos mentioned that there are Youth Day activities, and also that in large congregations an unbaptized songleader would not be suitable, but in small congregations they are needed to perform that service. He feels it is better to leave it open to the pastor’s discretion. For the opening and closing prayers, it is a different situation.

Mr. Wasilkoff reminded the Council that growth and development happen in many areas and channels besides someone serving at the podium. He prefers baptized members because it is a holy convocation.

Mr. Ashley suggested that the policy state our preference for a baptized member, but also mention that practicality should also be considered.

Mr. Lee suggested a simple statement such as, “A songleader does not necessarily need to be baptized.”

The Council of Elders consented without resolution that a songleader does not necessarily have to be baptized.

Strategic and Operating Plan Monitoring—Peter Eddington

Mr. Eddington explained what is being done to monitor progress on the Strategic Plan and Operation Plan. There will be monthly, quarterly and annual monitoring.

Monthly, we will review whether we are doing what we said we were going to do. We will review the status of strategies compared to action plans and distribute a scoreboard.

Quarterly, we will review performance against objectives. Are the action plans on target? Do objectives or strategies need to be adjusted?

Annually, we will update the Strategic Plan, identifying new barriers and critical success factors. That would also be the time to change objectives and re-establish priorities and action plans.

For each step in the action plan, we will record whether the due date was met or what percent progress has been made toward completing that step.

Mr. Pebworth said that the Council agreed previously to engage Michael Wilkinson to review the scoring that we have developed. We currently have a contract for a day and a half of his time in December and need to decide whether it is a part of the December meetings or whether the Council will meet with him separately.

Benefiting from Council Alumni—Jorge de Campos

Mr. de Campos began by sharing that many prior Council of Elders members are no longer serving on the Council. We have a pool of very experienced and well-seasoned men who have expertise that we are not benefiting from. Some of these men could add value to our way of thinking.

He felt that it would be of benefit to the Church to have a process established so that we could make use of that experience when it is appropriate.

Mr. Light proposed having some sort of committee of Council alumni that the Council could interface with.

Mr. de Campos will develop some language for a remand and bring it back to the Council later this week.

The Council moved to executive session at 11:42 a.m. to discuss the following agenda items:

1. Continued discussion about financial matters from the discussion on Monday afternoon.

The Council moved out of executive session and took a scheduled break for lunch at 12:03 p.m., after a prayer by Darris McNeely. The Council resumed its agenda at 1:01 p.m., after a prayer by Andy Lee.

Conflict of Interest Proposal—Ben Light

Mr. Light presented some background about conflict of interest. He reminded us that the God whom we serve is a God of impartiality, justice and righteousness. As His followers, we are expected to exhibit those same qualities. As elders of God, we strive to be above reproach in our actions and service to God.

When UCGIA began, the President initially served on the Council of Elders. Operation Managers and the members of the Ministerial Services team (a team of three elders serving under the Ministerial Services operation manager) were not prohibited from serving on the Council.

Initially, as far as external guidelines, members of the ministry and Council were governed by a formalized Code of Ethics approved in 1995 and 1996, respectively. Human Resources policy 2.12 governs Conflicts of Interest by Employees of UCGIA. It governs employees in the line of report to the President. It does not cover the President or the Council in their roles of governance.

In May 2011, an amendment was passed that prohibited UCGIA corporate officers and operation managers from concurrently serving on the Council as an additional layer of checks and balances against conflict of interest.

Concerns have been raised periodically regarding conflicts of interest about membership on Council committees. A February 2024 resolution remanded analysis of these conflicts of interest to the Roles and Rules committee.

A proposed amendment in 2025 about conflict of interest narrowly failed to pass. This demonstrates that there is broad support for some sort of guideline on conflicts of interest, but perhaps different viewpoints on how to do that.

To be clear, the presence of a conflict of interest does not equal misconduct. Such conflicts of interest can be actual, potential or perceived. For a perceived conflict of interest, that is when an outside person reasonably thinks bias or personal gain influences another’s choices. Managing these conflicts (regardless of classification) requires an intentional framework of identification, disclosure and clear mitigation.

Mr. Light presented a spectrum of approaches that are used to manage conflicts of interest that range from zero-tolerance, where the conflict is eliminated through prohibition and disqualification, to pragmatic management where the conflict is managed through disclosure, recusal and independent oversight. In the middle, you have a skeptical/realist position where people are often blind to their own bias, so structural safeguards are put into place.

The Council adopted a resolution to amend the scope of the February 2024 resolution and remand to the Roles and Rules Committee in conjunction with the Ethics Committee to research and develop a policy providing guidance on any matters of conflict of interest related to a member of the Council of Elders, officers of the corporation and members of the General Conference of Elders in a governance or managerial capacity on behalf of UCGIA. A proposed policy would be presented to the Council no later than the February 2027 meeting.

The Council moved to a planned executive session at 1:43 p.m. to discuss the following agenda items:

1. Building purchase proposal.
2. Populating committees.
3. Council norms discussion.
4. Ethics Committee matters.

Adjournment of Tuesday Session

The Council took a break for dinner from 6:00 p.m. to 6:25 p.m. The Council moved out of executive session at 8:09 p.m. and adjourned for the day. Paul Wasilkoff closed the day’s session with prayer.

Wednesday, August 12, 2026

Chairman Tim Pebworth called the day’s session to order at 8:00 a.m. Eastern, at the home office of the United Church of God near Milford, Ohio. Aaron Dean opened the session with prayer. All 12 Council of Elders (Council) members were present. Rex Sexton joined by video conference.

Faithful Service Leave Program—Darris McNeely

Mr. McNeely presented a draft of a proposed Faithful Service Leave policy. A draft was presented to the Strategic Planning and Finance Committee by the administration. The purpose of the proposed program is to recognize that employees need periods of extended rest and renewal as a means of maintaining faithful, productive and dedicated service.

The proposal lists five biblical principles that support the purpose of the program. Up to six weeks of leave may be approved when essential responsibilities can be covered without creating an undue burden on others. There is a requirement that a request for leave must include a detailed coverage plan for the employee’s duties.

Mr. Pebworth suggested the policy shift more toward a shared responsibility between employee and employer for scheduling and development of coverage plans.

Mr. Lee suggested some transition rules for the policy since a significant number of employees would immediately qualify to apply for the leave. There will need to be an on-ramp for the program.

The Council discussed various opinions on the number of years before eligibility and the structure of the blocks of time in which the leave could be taken.

The Council decided that the leave could be taken in split blocks of as small as two weeks at a time, although six weeks of consecutive leave would be encouraged. The Council also decided that the minimum number of years of employment before an employee would become eligible to apply for the leave would be after 15 years of employment.

Language was added to the policy to state that the employee and his or her supervisor will proactively work together on a leave plan well in advance. The best practice would be to submit a request at least nine months in advance of the fiscal year that leave is anticipated to be taken.

The Council of Elders approved the proposed policy.

Roles and Rules Policy Reviews—Len Martin

Mr. Martin brought up the “Admittance to the General Conference of Elders” policy (Pastor’s Policy Manual 1.7.6). The proposed changes to the policy rename it to “Admittance/Readmittance to the General Conference of Elders.” The revised policy is a little more specific about who makes decisions when readmitting an elder to the Conference, and is more specific about a process to follow where the elder is not considered “in good standing.” The Council approved adoption of the revised policy.

Mr. Martin brought up the Scope and Responsibilities document for the Roles and Rules Committee. There were a number of editorial style updates. In December 2011, the Council of Elders designated the Roles and Rules Committee to also serve as the Nominations Committee as prescribed by Bylaw 8.1.

In February 2023, there was a resolution to define a Nomination Committee, which appears to be in conflict with the December 2011 resolution. Mr. Martin asked to rescind the December 2011 resolution and affirm the Nomination Committee that was established in February 2023.

Mr. Light brought up the concern that Bylaw 8.1 indicates that the Nominating Committee is a committee of the Council. In response to Mr. Light’s comment, Mr. Martin decided to table the rescission decision until further research could be done. The Council of Elders approved the revised Scope and Responsibilities document.

Mr. Martin asked the Council of Elders whether there was a desire to remand to the Roles and Rules Committee a review of forms, processes and procedures related to the selection and review of corporate officers, to identify any inconsistencies that need to be addressed. The Council consented to remand this task to the Roles and Rules Committee.

Mr. Martin reviewed the job description for an elder serving on the Council of Elders. There is a section of the job description that indicates the level of education and/or experience required for an elder to serve on the Council. There was discussion about whether a member of the Council of Elders should be required to speak English and be able to get clearance to travel to the United States for four meetings per year.

Mr. Pebworth mentioned that this may be an issue for the Nominating Committee to research. Mr. Eddington suggested that we make a couple of amendments to Bylaw 8.4.2 if there are additional qualifications needed for an elder to serve on the Council of Elders.

Mr. Lee suggested that the document be turned into a job expectations document instead of a job description format.

The Council decided that the Roles and Rules Committee should come back at the February 2027 meeting with their recommendations.

Good Works Proposal—Darris McNeely/Ted Budge

Mr. McNeely presented a proposal to explore Good Works as an IRC 501(c)(3) entity. Good Works is currently within the structure of the Church as its humanitarian arm, but there is no formal legal status for Good Works as a separate entity. The Good Works program is inspired by Galatians 6:10 to “do good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith.”

By making Good Works a 501(c)(3) charity, it would make it eligible for corporate matching funds. We do have ample funds right now for Good Works, and whenever there is a need, the targeted amount is quickly met and exceeded. We presently have a large balance that is continuously maintained as members generously support it.

Mr. McNeely has concluded that Good Works could benefit from a study of its origins and understanding how it fits within the larger mission of the Church. It would benefit from a more proactive approach and has the potential to become a significant arm of the Church’s mission to take the gospel to the world, but it would take some planning and “big thinking” to get there.

The present proposal involves considering Good Works and the works that could be done in a way that could resonate with young people in the Church and the next generation of the work of the Church. Young people want to see the Church make a difference by doing good works in many parts of the world where there is opportunity. We need to tap the commitment and energy of our younger generations—it will go a long way to help present the gospel, change lives and promote the hope of God’s coming Kingdom.

We have an opportunity to create something that fits our culture and is a part of our governing structure. This idea of a recast Good Works program should resonate, and this new entity should capture the heart of our next generation. It is important that we capture their hearts to the work and anchor their commitment to the Church.

Mr. Budge explained that by establishing a separate IRC 501(c)(3), there would be expanded revenue opportunities, such as corporate matching and an expanded donor base. That is because many individuals and employers are not comfortable giving to a church but will support a project or an independent charity. It would also create leadership opportunities, including new director and officer roles to give members real, hands-on governance experience.

The separate entity would have some separation, allowing program-related liabilities to be isolated, allowing the Church’s core assets and operations to stay better protected. It would enable specialized fundraising, grant applications, and messaging aimed at a clear charitable purpose.

Mr. Budge explained several charitable relationship types that could be pursued. There are also other items that need to be evaluated, such as its relationship and coordination with LifeNets. We would likely need to expand our mission to community service and be a “light to the community.” We would need to examine the cost of establishing Good Works as its own entity and determine whether it would have employees, lease employees, or have no employees. There would also need to be coordination with the home office financial system to treat it as a separate “company” on the books.

The proposal is asking for approval of the concept of forming a new IRC 501(c)(3) and directs a legal review of applicable church and nonprofit law.

Mr. de Campos brought up a concern that this path would be detrimental to the future of LifeNets. Mr. Pebworth mentioned that it might be helpful if this project were coordinated with LifeNets so that the roles of each organization would be clarified so that members are not confused. There are some things that Good Works has envisioned to be involved with internationally that are beyond the LifeNets mission.

Mr. Lee said that we need to make sure that it is clear that this initiative would not want to get in the way of or pre-empt LifeNets. We would need to define what our lane would be. He likes the idea of younger people working together on a board and learning how to make governance decisions.

Mr. McNeely said that when he was working with Good Works, he coordinated with LifeNets so that they would not be promoting competing projects in the same part of the world. The members of the United Church of God have benefited greatly from the good work that LifeNets has done through the years. An organization like this can be a means to enter new areas of the world.

The Council approved a resolution to remand to the Strategic Planning and Finance committee the task of exploring with the Treasurer and others in the administration ways to position the Good Works program as an instrument of advancing the mission of the Church and to bring a preliminary proposal to the December 2026 Council meeting.

The Council took a scheduled break for lunch at 12:03 p.m., after a prayer by Scott Ashley. The Council resumed its agenda at 1:02 p.m., after a prayer by Tim Pebworth.

Review of Fundamental Belief on Military Service and War—Scott Ashley

Mr. Pebworth stated that the Council of Elders has received questions periodically regarding the Church’s fundamental belief on military service and war, and questions about self-defense. An example question is whether someone who carries a firearm during the week can give a prayer at a worship service.

Mr. Ashley presented a document titled “What Does the Bible Teach About Self-Defense?” What is being presented today is a 35-page paper which is intended to be a synthesis derived from a number of different sources: Doctrine Committee discussions, comments from the Roles and Rules Committee discussion, comments from reviewers on the Doctrinal Advisory Committee and Prophecy Advisory Committee, as well as Mr. Ashley’s own work. It is written from the standpoint of a Council document, in case the Council wants to use any portions of it in its own paper to submit to the General Conference.

Mr. Ashley said that the only fundamental belief the United Church of God has never produced a booklet about is military service and war. He shared an excerpt from Radio Church of God literature, advising members how to respond to potential questions that might be asked by a military draft board that conflates military service with self-defense.

What does the word “arms” in the phrase “bearing arms is contrary to this fundamental belief” encompass? Along the same lines, no distinction is made between “bearing arms” for military purposes versus “bearing arms” for hunting or recreational shooting. As literally worded, this phrase would prevent any UCG member or attendee from carrying any kind of weapon or tool for self-defense.

The fundamental belief states: “We believe that Christians are forbidden by the commandments of God from taking human life directly or indirectly.” This is certainly true when it comes to military service and war, but it also prohibits any type of self-defense or any forceful intervention against an assailant or other criminal.

God has not always protected His people from violent attacks and death.

The paper states that our Creator recognizes and confirms the duty to love and preserve innocent life, but not all life.

Mr. Eddington pointed out that the content of the paper needs to be narrowed down to only give what the Bible teaches about self-defense, and to remove the many examples of executing national justice and authorized military actions described in the Old Testament. Mr. Martin agreed that this additional content is not very relevant to the main question of the paper.

Mr. Lee said that the paper needs to more clearly address the problem that it is trying to solve. The current content of the paper could be used to justify actions that we do not support if we are not properly precise in what we are trying to say.

Mr. McNeely mentioned that he has taught the fundamental belief on military service for years at Ambassador Bible College. On the matter of self-defense, he thinks we came to a day of reckoning on the day in 2005 when a man came into a Living Church of God Sabbath service and opened fire. We began to take security measures for our own congregations. The Council approved a policy that permits a congregation that feels an imminent threat to hire an armed security guard. There are some discussions that we need to have on this issue. God forbid the day comes when some crazed lunatic of whatever persuasion thinks that we are Jewish and walks into one of our congregations because we are meeting on God’s holy Sabbath day.

Mr. Pebworth said that this is an opportunity for us as a General Conference to follow norms of respectful dialogue as we share our opinions about what we have heard today.

The Council moved to a planned executive session at 3:15 p.m. to discuss the following agenda items:

1. Legal update including Burundi status.
2. President discussion with the Council.
3. Italian senior pastor/national board discussion.

Adjournment of Wednesday Session

The Council took a break for dinner from 6:49 p.m. to 7:09 p.m. The Council moved out of executive session at 8:25 p.m. and adjourned for the day. Len Martin closed the day’s session with prayer.

Thursday, August 13, 2026

Chairman Tim Pebworth called the day’s session to order at 8:00 a.m. Eastern, at the home office of the United Church of God near Milford, Ohio. Gary Petty opened the session with prayer. All 12 Council of Elders (Council) members were present. Rex Sexton joined by video conference.

The Council moved to a planned executive session from 8:01 a.m. to 9:05 a.m. to discuss the following agenda items:

1. Ballot on ordination requests.
2. Proposal to accept real estate donation.
3. Meeting highs/lows—how could we improve?

Review of Marriage Paper—Aaron Dean

Mr. Dean presented a draft paper on the subject of marriage.

A concern came in from an elder in the Netherlands that we need to provide a statement in our literature for our European audience that answers the question of at what point a marriage is truly contracted/performed according to the Bible. In Dutch law, a religious ceremony may only occur after the civil marriage, and a minister who performs a church wedding before the civil one is acting unlawfully.

Mr. Dean proposed answering that concern in an appendix to the paper about marriage. A marriage needs to be considered a covenant, not just a contract. Entering a biblical marriage is also entering into a covenant before God. Any marriage union among Christians must agree with the biblical teachings of the permanency of the marriage covenant. This means that the couple, while agreeing with the biblical principles of a God-ordained marriage, should choose a legal contract that satisfies legal requirements most closely related to biblical norms. They should choose to do both the legal and religious ceremony but must follow correct legal procedures.

Mr. Pebworth suggests that a section on this subject be handled as a separate project, due to its complexity, based on his experience dealing with issues related to the circumstances of marriages in Europe and Africa.

Mr. Martin asked whether marriage is a covenant before God or a covenant with God. Our marriage ceremony states that we covenant with God, so we need to ensure that the paper reflects that.

The paper is being constructed so that the body of the paper will describe the biblical concept of marriage, and the appendices will deal with cultural and legal ramifications of marriage in a civil context.

Council members provided input and edits for various sections throughout the paper.

The Council brought up some questions about a hypothetical situation where someone makes a public covenant with God in a religious ceremony but has not filed a civil marriage with the state. Would the Church recognize that marriage?

The Council will return to this paper at the December meetings.

Annual Meeting of GCE Date for 2029—Peter Eddington

Mr. Eddington proposed the annual meeting for the General Conference of Elders in 2029 to be May 5–7. The Council adopted the proposed dates.

High-Level Capital Plan Resolution—Andy Lee

Related to a prior topic during this week’s meetings about the capital planning framework, Mr. Lee shared a resolution that would direct the treasurer to work with the Strategic Planning and Finance Committee to develop a temporary high-level capital plan that can be approved for implementation at the December 2026 Council meeting. This plan would need to give guidelines for the evaluation of building projects prior to the completion of the long-term capital plan.

The resolution also allows projects previously submitted to be evaluated before a high-level capital plan is approved. The Council approved the resolution.

Local Church Building Policy—Tim Pebworth

Related to a prior topic during this week’s meetings about the Church Building Policy, Mr. Pebworth shared a resolution that would remand the two building policies to the Strategic Planning and Finance Committee for review and clarification of the areas enumerated in the earlier discussion on Tuesday. The Council approved the resolution.

Benefiting from Council Alumni—Jorge de Campos

Related to a prior topic during this week’s meetings about benefiting from Council alumni, Mr. de Campos shared a resolution that would direct the Roles and Rules Committee to develop policies and processes to establish and govern consultation with Council alumni, and to present them at the February 2027 meeting. The Council approved the resolution.

Retiree Discretionary Assistance Policy—Peter Eddington

Related to a prior topic during this week’s meetings about updates to the retiree discretionary assistance policy, Mr. Eddington shared updates to the Pension Offset section of the policy. The Council approved the amended document.

Adjournment of Council Meeting

At 12:00 p.m., the Council meeting was adjourned. Tim Pebworth closed the meeting with prayer.

-end-

Council Reporter

Chris Rowland

[These are not the official minutes from the Council meeting. Elders can find those at the home office with the Council Secretary. Video recordings are posted for the elders on the UCG Ministerial Resource Site.]

© 2026 United Church of God, an International Association