July 15, 2003
FSM 344 CM
9/99
Dear Family,
We love you very much and pray for you always. God bless you for the tremendous job you are doing in reaching the lost and caring for His children. We marvel at the testimonies you share, and praise God for the mighty miracles He is doing in helping you to win the world for His Kingdom.
We are encouraged to hear from so many of you that the Love Charter has been a blessing and has allowed you greater freedom in following the Lord's leading in your lives, Homes and ministries. Please continue to write in to your Office, or to us directly if necessary, when you have questions that don't seem to be answered or covered in the Charter, or if you have suggestions on how the Charter might be amended for the better. We welcome your questions and ideas.
As you will see, we have compiled many of the questions we have received over the past months — either in letters from you or comments on your TRF — and answered them here. Sometimes we received several similar questions, so we used the one that was the most representative of the questions on that topic. We hope this FSM will help answer most of the questions you have sent in to us concerning the Charter and its implementation.
We pray the new, revised, A5-sized Charter book, which includes 99 amendments since the first edition of the Charter (all of which are results of your suggestions and comments — see LNF 275), is a help to all. Our hope is that between the Charter Responsibilities GN (ML #3197, GN 803), the revised Charter and amendment booklet, this FSM and FSMs 278 and 287, you will find your questions answered. We want to do all we can to answer your questions and to help all live in accordance with the Love Charter. If you don't find the answers to your questions in any of these pubs, please send your questions to us again, and we will try to answer them as soon as possible. Thank you! We love you!
Your WS Leadership
Q: Why do the Fellow members get some CM-rated MLs and other pubs on the HomeARC, which the Charter says they can't have in print?
A: The updated Charter (which includes 99 amendments) states what pubs Fellow members can have. Among those is the FM version of the HomeARC Text Library (Classifications of Family Membership and Literature, B.1, Charter, p. 358). Here's some background:
HomeARC 97 (Vol.1, the first HomeARC issued at the end of 1996) generously made all the electronic versions of the MLs that we had at that time (and their equivalent DB versions) available to both CMers and FMers (up to ML #3023). About 1,000 MLs were not in electronic format for this edition.
HomeARC 98 separated the Text Library into CM and FM versions. However, the FM Family already had all the electronic versions of the MLs available up to ML #3023, so only the MLs after this were separated according to classification. There remained about 800 earlier MLs that were still not available for the Text Library CD. The other pubs were issued according to their ratings.
The HomeARC 99 Text Library continues with separate CM and FM versions based on pubs ratings, yet with the FMers also receiving the CM MLs (and DBs) up to ML #3023. Nearly all of the 800 previously missing MLs have been included in HomeARC 99. (See also question 71 below.)
Q: What age groups can read the GNs? I understand that it is for the parents to decide and that it depends on the maturity and maybe interests of each child. I often feel like letting my OCs read the new GNs. One reason is because they often see them anyway, and when the GNs deal with problems such as in the Problems and Solutions and Crisis of Faith series, the front-page drawing and captions often highlight the problems; for instance, Teens Leaving the Family, Unchallenged Kids. When an MC or OC sees that he memorizes: Problems: Teens leaving the Family, I am unchallenged!
If we don't read them the explanations in the GNs, the OCs will likely draw their own conclusions. It might even give them doubts or fears! This could be more of a problem than having the GN read to them with explanations, even though it deals with some serious topics that might not necessarily be needed for OCs. That is where I am not too sure! It looks like the kids have heard a lot of things about problems and it seem logical that they need to hear about the answers! In other words, it might not only be a matter of maturity but also a need!
I am wondering if it is necessary to have a front-page illustration dealing with very heavy topics, which attract the eye and bring questions to the kids' minds? I personally like them but I don't know if they are helping the kids? Maybe it's better not to hear of a problem, than to have access to it, even if inadvertently, without explanation?
A: Our policy has been that it is up to the parents to decide what portions of the GNs may be read to or by their children. The PER (ML #2865:65) says that the lit cabinet should be open for junior teens and up, and we have added the following explanation in the revised Charter:
Lit Library: Home library containing all Family literature, fully accessible to Charter voting members. Ages 14 and 15 are also allowed to read all Family lit unless specified otherwise or designated for voting members only. Children under 14 can have access to certain pubs or have portions read to them at their parents' discretion (Charter, p. xxiii). (The same principle should apply to use of the HomeARC.)
As far as giving more explanations to the younger kids about the contents of the GNs, that's what our team at Family Care is attempting to do through the Hope TKs and MLKs. These take time to edit and illustrate, though, so if you as parents want or need to get the message in the GNs to your kids sooner, you can ask the Lord if it's OK to read and/or explain whatever portions of the Letters you feel are needed to your JETTs on down. — Or at least you could give some of the older kids a brief explanation of the new Letters when they come out, so that they don't draw the wrong conclusions from seeing the GN covers. (See Passing Current Pubs on to Kids, in Junior FUN #2. This article has been reprinted in the Childcare Reference Handbook, pg. 827.)
Regarding cover pix that present the problems or are meaty: We do take the kids into account when praying about the cover pictures, but sometimes it is necessary to portray the serious side of things. We have to gear the GNs to the majority of our readership, although we are concerned that our younger ones are not adversely affected. It seems the solution to this needs to lie on the Home level, in that if you as parents and concerned adults feel an illustration could have a negative effect on your kids, you could make a concerted Home effort to keep those pubs out of their hands and sight.
Q: The Charter doesn't seem to prohibit photocopying GNs for another Home, but I remember it used to be a no no. Is it still?
A: The Charter does not forbid it, though it does forbid giving GNs to non-Charter members. If the other Home is a Charter Home, they should be getting their own mailings and can therefore photocopy their own if need be. It seems that the only cases where another Home would need to ask for photocopies of your Home's GNs is if they are missing older GNs in their Home library and would like to get a copy from you, they would like extra copies for their Home and you have a photocopy machine and they don't, their mailing got lost, they are a brand-new Home and are having to wait for the CRO office to processed their paperwork, or members of a Home on a road trip find it easier to photocopy the pubs from a Home in the vicinity of where they're traveling rather than having their Home mail it to them.
If you do plan to give copies of GNs to other Homes, you should be sure that they are truly Charter member Homes (and not on Probationary Notice), as otherwise you could be contravening the Charter and committing an excommunicable offense by giving CM lit to non-CM Family as per section G of the Offenses Warranting Excommunication (Charter, p. 236). (It is permissible to photocopy extra copies of GNs and other CM pubs for eligible members of your own Home, if you feel you need more copies than you are getting in your mailings.)
(See also Charter Questions and Answers — Part Two, question 57, FSM 287.)
Q: In the Offences Warranting Excommunication section of the Charter (p. 236) it expressly forbids giving CM lit to non-Charter members. I feel it is good to have this rule, but I feel it would be good to have a bit more of a gray area and not have things so black and white. If someone's intention is just to compromise the Family's security and give the latest pubs to backsliders and enemies, then it should be an excommunicable offense. But sometimes in certain pubs there are very pertinent points of counsel, which I feel would be just the key to help some of our closer live-out members gain victories in areas that they are battling. In such a case, I feel it might not be necessary, nor should it necessarily warrant that person receiving the same correction as someone who is purposely trying to leak our pubs.
A: Giving CM lit to non-Charter members is still an excommunicable offense. The Classification of Family Membership and Literature states that live-out members are not eligible for newer CM GNs. — They are free, however, to come to the CM Home and hear or read older CM publications that Fellow members are eligible for at the Home teamwork's prayerful discretion (Classifications of Family Membership and Literature, B.1, Charter, p. 358). They are also permitted to read new CM/FM GNs, which many of the new GNs and other pubs are. (See question number 77 below.)
If you meant friends, contacts or former members, please see question number 8.
Q: I know as a CRO, we can't let people get off the hook by their ignorance of the Charter, saying, They didn't know. You would think that folks in a Home which has been put on Probationary Notice and has had their mailings suspended would see that it is a real no no for them to go to other Homes and ask them for a CM-only mailing. But I found that all the young people in our Home, both SGAs and senior teens — most of them smart and faithful — and even one a VS trainee, didn't see it. So I was surprised to see that they never thought about it being wrong. Whereas the adults in the Home knew in the spirit that it was forbidden for a Home on Probationary Notice to solicit CM mailings from a nearby CM Home—or for a CM Home to give CM lit to a Home on Probationary Notice.
If any of our Charter members have had sexual contact with non-Charter members, there is no exception made, even if they were ignorant of the excommunicable rule. But with the infraction of members of a Home on Probation soliciting CM literature from other Homes, and those in other Homes supplying them with it, do you feel we should go forward with the excommunication even if it was done out of ignorance?
A: (Jesus speaking:) If a Home member allows members from another Home that they know are on Probationary Notice to read strictly CM lit, they have violated the Charter and should be punished. Ignorance of the Charter rules, especially the excommunicable rules, is not an acceptable defense. The Family has been warned that they should familiarize themselves with the Charter, so it would behoove them to study the Fundamental Family Rules in general and the Offenses Warranting Excommunication (Charter, p. 233), in particular. If leeway is allowed with one excommunicable offense, how do you justify not allowing it for another?
My will is for the Charter to be obeyed, and CM Family members must follow the rules if they want to retain their Charter member status. If they do not wish to abide by the CM rules, they can move to FM status. (End of message from Jesus.)
The discipline for knowingly giving CM lit to those on Probationary Notice or non-Charter members would be partial excommunication for both parties — those giving the CM lit and those on Probationary Notice that received it, that's of course, barring the extreme measures in the prophecy above, of those offending moving to FM status.
Q: An SGA from our Home, which is on Probationary Notice, felt there was nothing wrong in him going to another Home to read the Grapevine. Since the Grapevine is CM/FM, is it OK that he read a CM/FM pub?
A: The Charter does not forbid members of Homes on Probationary Notice from reading pubs that Fellow members are eligible for. That would include the Grapevine, since it is a CM/FM pub. Those allowing members on Probationary Notice to read pubs at their Home, however, should be sure they are not allowing them access to strictly CM lit, as the Charter forbids members of Homes on Probationary Notice from receiving new CM pubs from other Homes. (See Procedures for Placing a Home on Probationary Notice, 5.a.1, Charter, p. 205.)
Q: A Charter member let a previous live-out member read a copy of one of the CM/FM World Currents GNs. The Charter says that it is excommunicable to give Family literature classified CM to those you know are non-Charter members, but does this also apply to CM/FM literature?
A: The Charter makes it clear that non-Charter members are only eligible for GP and DFO publications. However, if a Home's full teamwork feel particular portions of a CM/FM pub would be beneficial to an outside friend or former member, they could ask the Lord if it would help the person to read portions of it. We know the Lord will direct them on how to proceed.
So in summary, you can share portions of CM/FM publications with friends or contacts as part of their feeding, as long as you ask the Lord about it first and the Home's full teamwork agree.
Live-out members are eligible to read older CM lit and all CM/FM lit while visiting the Home. Usually the World Currents GNs are CM/FM, so if the member asked the Lord and also checked with the teamwork before allowing the former live-out to read parts of a Currents GN, it was probably OK. If they did it without praying or checking with the teamwork, then it was a probably a mistake, and we pray this counsel will help avoid this in the future.
Q: Is it okay to share parts of CM/FM publications with DF/Follow-Up members? The Charter says that we can share some DFO pubs with them but we are not clear if FM on a publication is similar to the DFO classification!
A: The present FM classification is different from the DFO classification. CM/FM publications are for Charter and Fellow members. See the following point D, in the Classifications of Family Membership and Literature (Charter, p. 360):
D. Other Members
This category includes what used to be DF/Follow-up members, Outside witnessers, Active supporters, Mail ministry and GP members. Homes or areas may still need to keep separate categories for your Other Members, but for WS stats purposes we will now include all these former categories as simply Other Members.
Eligible for GP and DFO publications only.
But as stated above in question 7, you may share parts of CM/FM pubs with friends and contacts as part of their spiritual feeding, if you have asked the Lord and gotten His OK as well as that of your Home's teamwork.
Also, edited versions of new Letters for other members and friends are being included in the WinePress, a monthly pub designed primarily for former members, but which can also be used for feeding friends and sheep. The WinePress can be downloaded from the Members Only Web site. Or if you don't have an Internet connection and would like a printed copy, please contact the WinePress team via NACRO.
Q: In the Family we have an unwritten agreement that items bought or provisioned for a Home belong to the Home and not to individuals, even if it happens to be in the individual's name. For example, even though a Home's vehicle may be in someone's name for legal purposes, if the Home raised the funds, or a friend or contact of the Home purchased it for the Home, it belongs to the Home and not the person whose name it's in. However, we had a Home member who moved away from our Home who wouldn't sign a paper to enable us to get our mobile phone turned back on. She demanded we pay her money she felt we owed her. (When the Home originally purchased the phone, we put it in her name.) Can anything be done to avoid things like this coming up in our Homes?
A: When it comes to items that belong to the Home (such as those provisioned by the Home or purchased with Home funds), we suggest you have the titles or deeds changed over to someone else in the Home before the titleholder leaves your Home with the items still in his name and therefore legally belonging to him. If the person leaves before this can be taken care of or if there is an oversight, the item still belongs to the Home and the person is obligated to turn over the title or deeds even if no longer in the Home. Please don't misinterpret the phrase above and therefore legally belonging to him to mean that possession is nine-tenths of the law and that once the member leaves the Home he has the right to claim the article just because it's in his name legally.
If, after investigating incidences such as the example of the mobile phone given above, the continental or area office determines that the offending member is guilty of a Charter infraction, they could recommend that the member be moved to Fellow member status, or the new Home in which the member resides could place the member on Probationary Status.
At the same time, there may be designated gifts which a contact of the Home made to a specific individual, i.e., a trailer, and should that individual move to another Home, the person who gave the gift may expect that it go with that person rather than remain with the Home. In these cases, it's usually best to abide by the donor's wishes. However, it's not possible to make a black-and-white rule, as each situation is different, so you'll have to lovingly discuss and hear from the Lord in prophecy and then decide each case together as a Home.
As a general rule though, it is our belief that Acts 2:44,45 and 4:34,35 applies to all Family members: All that believed were together and had all things common and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according to his need. So this should be the yardstick by which you should decide such matters in your Home.
Q: The Charter says that designated gifts don't need to be tithed. Does that apply to birthday money from relatives where a specific gift is not mentioned? Or sometimes an individual family might receive money from relatives with a note saying it's for a family treat, etc. Thanks for helping us clarify it.
A: In searching through the Charter, we couldn't find anywhere where it says that designated gifts don't need to be tithed. To the contrary, the Charter clearly states that all cash income to the Home — whether designated gifts or not — should be tithed. (See definition of Tithe, Charter, p. xxiv, and Basic Responsibilities of the Charter Home, C, ibid., p. 89.) See also FSM 331, Answers to Your Tithing, FAF, HER, Pioneer Gift and Home Loan Questions, question 13, for a further answer to this question.
Q: The Charter states: The percentage from a departing member's fundraising, which the Home has decided he should turn over to help support the Home while continuing to live in the Home, is meant to cover his share of the Home's current monthly operating expenses, which include rent, phone, utilities, etc. He cannot be charged again for the Home's monthly expenses from the percentage the Home agreed that he be permitted to use to pay off his share of the Home's debts and liabilities and to keep as travel/landing funds (p. 44).
My question is: What if the people leaving the Home plan to do most of their fundraising after they leave the Home, and therefore 50% of their income does not cover their share of the Home's current monthly operating expenses? Would it be possible, in such a case, to ask the departing members, toward the end of their stay in the Home, to give a donation to the Home to help cover these expenses? The amount of the donation could be determined by what they have given so far to the Home and what their proportion of the current expenses would be, or less depending on what the Home agrees to do.
A: As long as the departing person is a member of the Home, then up to 50% of the income they raise for their departure should go to the Home for Home expenses. Or if the departing member was not a witnesser, this would simply be in the form of their normal monthly services such as in the case of a childcare worker, etc. However, after he leaves the Home, he is no longer a member of the Home or incurring Home expenses, and therefore no percentage of the income he raises after leaving the Home (even if he remains on the Home's TRF for a month or two while moving to his new location) is subject to use by the Home under the 50% rule. Therefore, he cannot be required to give an advance amount to account for whatever funds he may raise after his departure.
If the departing member already has funds on hand (that he has raised so far), and will be raising most of his fare after leaving the Home (that is, while visiting relatives or contacts), and say the Home was counting on part of the income from further fundraising by the departing member to help pay for the rent at the end of the month (at which time the member would be gone), the Home could ask the departing member if he is willing to help with some funds to cover the Home's bills for the remainder of the month after he leaves. However, since it is a pledge the Home is requesting, the decision to give is voluntary and if the departing member does decide to give, the amount should be left up to him and not the Home teamwork or council.
Q: We opened a new Home three years ago. It was very well cared for, and we emphasized taking measures to protect walls, floors, etc. Another family moved in for two years, wonderful people, but they had ill-behaved children. They recently moved to a very new house, and while I was happy for their blessing, I felt bad that we were left with the damages. Here in Japan they may fine us a huge amount to cover everything, which we won't be able to afford. There is nothing specifically written in the Charter about this, so if I were to ask them to pay expenses I feel it would be a source of contention.
Often when people move out of one Home with a new team and new responsibilities they no longer feel responsible for the old Home. Could people who live in a Home for a certain amount of time be held financially liable and responsible for any damages, wear and tear?
A: Amendment No. 59: Fulfilling Obligations to Other Family Members — October 1998 says: To require Family members to fulfill their obligations, legal and otherwise, to other Family members, we have added point S to the Responsibilities of Individual Members:
S. Endeavor to conduct themselves as good Christians, showing outgoing love and concern for others and fulfilling their obligations, legal and otherwise to them.
An important part of showing love and concern for others, whether in the Family or not, is to fulfill your obligations, legally, morally or otherwise, to them. For example, if someone lends you his or her vehicle, your duty as a good Christian is to return the vehicle in the condition in which it was lent to you. Or if you borrow an expensive piece of equipment from someone and break it, the loving thing to do would be to get it fixed or replace it before returning it to them. Another example of fulfilling your obligations to others would be if you were to sell your car to another Family member. Your obligation to them would be to ensure that they receive the title to the car, and that all other necessary paperwork is in order. Being faithful in business dealings with others — whether Family members or not — is an important part of your sample as a good Christian (Charter, p. 15).
It seems that once a family has left, it's a bit late to start asking for funds to help with damages. This is something that would need to be worked out while the family is still living in the Home. In this particular case it seems that if the couple had been living with you during a period of two years, they should have been repairing the house on an ongoing basis. Sometimes a Family house changes hands for many years and many different Family members pass through, but you couldn't really go back and ask everyone who had lived there to be responsible at the time the house is returned.
Q: It seems to be an unnecessary hassle to have people send in the Home Self-Evaluation Checklist separately as indicated in present wording of the Charter clause, and TeleTRF users get confused by this since the program gives the option of filling it in. Could the current wording of the instructions in the Charter for sending in the Home Self-Evaluation Checklist be changed from: This form is meant to be an easy-reference summary of the Charter, as well as a self-help, voluntary Checklist which you can avail yourselves of at any time. However, you must fill it out in a Home Council Meeting every six months, prior to your Home election (March 1 and September 1), and send the results to your continental office at that time. Change to read: This form is meant to be an easy-reference summary of the Charter, as well as a self-help, voluntary Checklist which you can avail yourselves of at any time. However, you must fill it out in a Home Council Meeting every six months, prior to your Home election (March 1 and September 1), and send the results to your continental office no later than with your February and August TRFs.
A: Good point, thanks for your suggestion. You Homes may now send in your Home Self-Evaluation Checklists with your February and August TRFs. We have made this change in the new revised Charter (p. 386).
Q: M., a childcare teamworker, takes care of six kids, ages 4 to 6. Five of these kids are boys and they need discipline and a swat sometimes. But the childcare disciplinary rules say that to discipline a child or to give them a spanking or a swat, you have to call in another teamworker or another person, discuss the issue and decide together whether you're going to administer discipline or not. Oftentimes M. doesn't administer that discipline because either the parent is away or not available; or you have six kids you are trying to keep busy, and if you have to stop and get the parent and discuss the issue, the discipline doesn't get administered. If the Family discipline guidelines have tied her hands in that way, then we might want to consider an alteration or amendment to that clause.
A: Let's take a closer look at what the Family Discipline Guidelines say and how much autonomy a teacher has to administer needed discipline in such a situation. The Charter says, Child discipline in the Family is governed by the rules published in the `Family Discipline Guidelines,' ML #2919, GN 591 (Child Discipline Rules, 46.A, Charter, p. 247). Following is what the Family Discipline Guidelines has to say about correctional taps and swats, and the difference between swats and a spanking:
Corporal punishment should only be administered by the parents of the child in question, or those standing in the place of the parents, i.e., teachers and childcare workers or those at that time who are in charge of the child (ML #2919:154).
Children may receive simple correctional taps or swats at the time correction is needed, as long as it is not done in anger, or with excessive force. The use of, and frequency of, a single correctional tap or swat should be discussed regularly with the parents or guardians of the children, and with the childcare personnel responsible for the group (ML #2919:157).
If the discipline involves more than simple correctional swats — for example, a spanking (several swats on the bottom) — please keep the following in mind: The reasons for giving a spanking should have already been agreed upon, as in Counsel Ahead of Time, on p. 17. The need for a spanking should be agreed upon at the time an incident occurs in counsel with one other adult, YA or senior teen. The child's parents, or guardians acting on behalf of the parents, and the childcare teamworker should be informed of all spankings that are more than simple correctional taps or swats (ML #2919:158).
So, M. would be free to administer a swat to the boys who are misbehaving without having to consult the parents first. As far as spankings, she could have it worked out with the parents ahead of time as to what conditions she could give a spanking. And at the time that an incident occurs, she just needs to get the consent of another person in the Home (which doesn't need to be a big discussion, especially if she's already worked out the conditions meriting spankings with the parents ahead of time).
Q: Can the Charter state something to the effect that a Home is not obligated to provide a room for a former member teen who wants to visit his CM parents? — Or that the Home is not obligated to send support in the form of a monetary gift to help them to live in the System?
A: The Charter does not obligate the Homes in either of the matters you've mentioned above. — Therefore, whether to provide him with a place to stay and/or support him are entirely Home decisions. In the case of the first point, it is to be decided by a simple majority vote, and in the case of the second point, a two-thirds majority vote, since it is a financial matter.
We understand that parents are particularly burdened for their children who have left the Family, and we of course do want to be a sample of love. Each situation is different, so a black-and-white rule cannot be made that covers every case. So we suggest you seek the Lord's will in prayer and prophecy concerning these decisions, and vote to confirm your final decision, lovingly considering the needs of the Home, the parents and the former member teen.
Q: Does the rule concerning underage visitors needing written parental permission to stay overnight in a CM Home apply only to FM and non-Charter members' children, or also to CM kids?
A: We have clarified in the revised Charter point C.2.b), Definition of a Charter Home (Charter, p. 85), that this requirement only applies to non-Charter members.
b) Overnight non-Charter visitors who are minors must either be accompanied by their parents or guardians or have written permission from a parent or legal guardian.
Q: We've recently heard that in some cases, people have understood that they couldn't use the name The Family for their local work. In various countries, they have registered under different names, such as Faith in Action, which they then use in all aspects of their work.
A: While it's true that in order to officially register with a governmental body as The Family, Homes must have CRO approval as outlined in the Authority of Continental Officers, G (see below), nevertheless in their overall work and ministering they can use the Family name, or at least include The Family in their local name. Even if registering, it's okay for Homes to use some variation of the Family name.
For example, the Family in Kenya wanted to use Kenfam, and explained that if they can't use the Family name or some variation of it, it makes it difficult for them to use Family materials, FARs and all the rest, because it doesn't relate. Also the Family in such a situation might fear that their friends and contacts would eventually find out that they are the Family, and then feel that they've been deceived. So there are many advantages to using The Family or some variation thereof, as the name for your local work.
It is OK to use the Family name for a local work; and, with agreement from your CROs, you can register your local work using some variation of The Family in your official name. The CROs have the authority to:
G. Decide, in counsel with WS Leadership, all matters regarding registration of any form of organization or association, whether in the name of the Family or as an affiliate of the Family, of Family Homes or individuals (Authority of Continental Officers, Charter, p. 164).
Q: We would like to suggest that road teams find out from their ABMs the whereabouts of Homes in the areas they'll be visiting or passing through before hitting the road — and then for them to check with those Homes if they are planning to fundraise in their area. Technically the local Homes only have jurisdiction in their city, but in reality most Homes fundraise not only in their city but also in the metropolitan area and surrounding small towns. Although the road team will not suffer if later there are problems or complaints — because they were just passing through — the local Homes will be affected and could even lose friends or contacts. We ourselves have been sending out road teams, but we've called the local Homes to coordinate things with them and it has worked out fine.
A: The Charter says in the explanation after C.2, in the Right of Mobility:
If you are a road team Home, or if you go on a road trip from your Home, and want to witness in a metropolitan area that already has a Charter Home, you must receive permission from the present Home(s) in the metropolis before doing so. It would be wise to check with your ABM about what cities or metropolitan areas have Homes in them so that you can either go witnessing in other cities, or seek permission from the Home(s) in the city/metropolis you want to witness in before you get there (p. 55).
We believe that if you are going to be in nearby towns to where there are Homes, they will be happy to try to accommodate and aid you as best they can, but please remember, road teams, that the loving thing to do would be for you to inquire about the nature the work a local Home takes in nearby towns.
Also, if your road team comes in contact with friends or contacts of local Homes in the cities you are passing through, please be sure to be a good loving sample to them that will help and not hurt the local Home's standing with them. Let all your things be done with love! (1Cor.16:14).
Sometimes the kind thing would be not to go to a certain town if you find that the local Home regularly witnesses in the town and depends on it for support. Even if you have been respectful with their contacts, the Home team might be counting on tool distribution in that particular city. So if a road team comes through and hits the city, it makes it hard for the Home team to come afterwards. It's a controversial question as we can't mark off areas, but road teams please be aware that local Homes do sometimes depend on some of the nearby towns, and although they are not under their exclusive jurisdiction, they are an extension of their work — so it's good if there is love and consideration on both sides. Thank you.
Q: We decided to become FM in order to be able to distribute our own CDs worldwide and thus reach more people and generate more funds. If we were CM this would either be impossible or simply too long and too much red tape and time-consuming. My question is about a possible amendment to the GP tools section of the Charter. Could there be exceptions to this rule? For example, could a CM Home, or even like in our case, some individual sign some sort of agreement with WS to discharge the Family of any responsibility regarding a certain tool, like in this instance our CDs? It could be stated that the contents of that particular tool is not necessarily a reflection of the Family's views on the subjects treated in the tool.
To me it seems like it could do a few positive things besides the side-effect of opening the door for other Homes to produce their tools and maybe having some occasional wildfire. It could provide some sort of a market for a wider variety of tools for the Family; it could re-inspire the witnessing fire of our younger generation with various tools with which they might feel more at ease; it could boost the Homes' finances with many more tools available. Some of our contacts have all of our tools and are more tool supporters so to speak, in that they might take any tools we have, but not necessarily want to support us in a different way. It would also give our young musical talent another purpose for their talent other than just supply the Family with inspirational tapes, a real witnessing push for all. If there were such a possibility, then of course we would immediately start moving back towards CM status.
A: Any CM Home can produce a GP tool for its own distribution, as some have done. Other Homes have produced tracts or their own follow-up lit, and in some cases, Web sites. All Homes have to do is send their tool to the CRO office to be looked over or listened to, and if it's not a bad reflection on the Family or doesn't preach any questionable doctrine, then the CRO office can approve its distribution. (The Charter states that WS must approve tools that will be distributed in more than one country, in which case the CRO office will pass the tool on to WS for approval. However, the Charter also states that WS may grant permission for the CRO Office to approve the tool for use throughout their continental area, which we have done. This speeds up the process by eliminating the need to send the tool to WS.)
Q: After the meetings that Peter held in Eastern Europe in June of `97, and the renewed emphasis to learn the local language, I decided to try taking some Hungarian language classes. My wife and I used some reserve funds and I enrolled in a 10-week, 60-hour class. Before taking the class I asked the Home for approval to take the classes and I received it.
The class is now continuing from the advanced beginner to the intermediate level for another ten weeks. I just asked the Home if I could enroll, and the vote was one short of the needed two-thirds majority. So that's the end of my Hungarian lessons.
This brings to mind a question I have had off and on. I've wondered if we, as an organization, put enough emphasis on learning languages. Peter, I know that you see the value in speaking the local language as you shared in the meetings about becoming one. But could there be more landing gear on it? Could classes of this sort be encouraged, or even suggested for newcomers or veterans who plan to stick it out on a certain field? Some brethren do well with foreign languages and are quick to learn, but for those of us who need to take the extra study time, classes, etc., it is a big help. As far as suggestions, perhaps language classes could be permitted with a 50% majority, rather than the 67% as it is at present.
A: While we can't start making certain financial decisions 50% and others 67%, we do certainly encourage people to learn the local language. We hope that Homes will see the need, and as much as possible accommodate the needs of those who are trying to learn the language in order to be a better witness. Additionally, as a result of learning the language and witnessing more, they'll likely be able to bring in more funds as well, and so the funds expended for language school could be looked at as an investment in that sense.
Q: When it asks if all our members' personal legal papers are in order and up to date, in the Home Self-Evaluation Checklist, question 137 (Charter, p. 396; see also Home Life Rules, F, ibid., p. 264), does this include passports? This has been a controversial point to me as to what is a priority to the Home, in keeping documents updated. Usually it has been said in the Home that I live in that if a member is a national, it's enough if he has a valid ID card or birth certificate, and that a passport is not necessarily a priority unless the party is due to travel soon. So the passport application gets postponed endlessly, usually for lack of funds.
A: Even though it is difficult and expensive to get passports in some countries, we suggest that everyone have a valid passport, if possible, in the event they have to travel internationally. However, it is not a Charter requirement. A valid passport is an important piece of picture ID, and it is a general trend that passports are becoming more difficult (and expensive) to obtain, so it's better to try to get one now, if possible, rather than put it off until later.
Q: We've checked the Charter, and it says that people can room together, though not married. But it also says that when senior teens are engaged, they should wait three months before rooming together. This has been dropped from the revised Charter. We have been wondering what applies when two teens that are not engaged still want to room together. Could this be clarified?
A: Yes, the requirement for senior teens that are officially engaged to be married not rooming together during part of the engagement has been dropped from the Charter. If non-engaged senior teens wish to room together and have heard from the Lord about it, then it would be between the teens and their resident parents or guardians to decide, as there is no ruling concerning this in the Charter. Of course, the teens not living with a resident parent should counsel with their shepherds. They would also need to get the OK to room together from the Home council because the Home would have to provide a room. Providing a room, however, might not always be possible, in which case the teens would have to wait until one opens up or else move to another Home that has more room.
Q: Since the Charter does not expressly forbid it, and it is not an excommunicable offense, do CMers have the right to have in their possession swords, switchblades, BB-guns, handguns or rifles?
A: We of course, can't make a Charter rule or policy forbidding every single thing that could be bad or harmful, so you parents, shepherds and Home councils have to be led by the Word and the Lord, and use common sense. You can vote those things out of your Home if you wish, by making a Home regulation. Dad discouraged having guns in the Homes. But he did give the following good counsel concerning protecting yourselves:
You know that Daddy has been very cautious about security — conscious and cautious — and we do everything we possibly can to protect ourselves to begin with, and to show the world outside that we are protected! — Armed, Jesus said! Dad, you don't mean we keep guns around here? We don't have to have guns to be armed; we've got clubs! You don't have to be armed with guns; you can be armed with wariness! — Not weariness, wariness! — Being security-conscious! You can be armed with good walls and good fences! You can be armed with good night security lighting! You can be well armed with protection of every kind without having to shoot guns! (What to Do in a Robbery! ML #2244:83).
We also took this question to the Lord and following is His reply:
(Jesus speaking:) David's counsel above is wise and sound. Weapons are extremely dangerous, and in the wrong hands deadly, especially guns of any kind. So unless the gun is legal, and you are trained in the use of these weapons and have received permission from Me directly in prophecy that it is needful for you to have a weapon for your Home's protection, it would be unwise to have them on your premises. I am able to protect My children, even in dangerous situations, so be armed with My Spirit and My wisdom and do your part as David instructs above and I will keep you. (End of message from Jesus.)
Knives are also very dangerous, and some types, like switchblades, are illegal in many countries. If you do keep any knives in your Home for protection, they should be legal, and they, or any kind of weapons, should be kept in the Home only if a majority vote of Home members agree it is needed, and if they are kept in a safe place where a child or young teen is not going to be able to handle them by accident. Only have one if you know how to use it properly.
Q: Should the teamworkers we elect for certain positions be those who are gifted in that certain area which they are elected for, or those that are more gifted as shepherds and/or administrators? For example, sometimes there is a person who knows how to take care of children, but might not have the organizational gifts that are needed to hold a teamwork position, or even more importantly, doesn't have the spiritual gifts. Also there could be those who have a burden for witnessing and are on the front lines everyday, but they don't have the spiritual gifts necessary to shepherd, or maybe haven't learned how to exercise them well enough yet. Let's say the one who gets elected is somebody who only goes out witnessing the minimum hours required, but he knows the ropes so to speak, and he usually gives better suggestions or he does other things better, so he is chosen between the two.
I think there are two sides to this: One is that with the Charter, most of the decisions are made by the whole Home, so it doesn't really matter who is on the teamwork. The other side is that shepherding is a job that can be learned by practical life experience and having to make decisions, etc. Of course, the members of the Home have the right to decide, but maybe the one who has the burden for the job, not for the position, should get it? Which one should be the priority?
A: There doesn't seem to be any black-and-white answer to your question regarding the types of people who would be most suited for teamwork responsibilities. As you pointed out, the voting members of the Home have the right and responsibility to decide whom they will elect. They must determine who they feel will do the best job in a given teamwork position, and therefore after praying and counseling they must vote and choose whoever they want to entrust to help with the running of the Home, regardless of who seems to have the most on-the-job training, or desire for the position.
Q: One sister in our Home is a childcare worker — we have four children and one junior teen in our Home. All the children are hers, except for one OC. She has served as the CC teamworker because she is the main one that takes care of the kids' schooling, etc. When we had recent elections, we voted her in again even though she has spiritual problems, because the Charter says that there's supposed to be a CC teamworker. Do we need to have a CC teamworker?
If we have three people in the Home who are anointed for the teamwork position, and they come under shepherding, outreach and business teamworkers, who could do a very good job shepherding the Home, wouldn't that be sufficient for a Home teamwork, and then the CC worker could do her job properly without having to get involved with all the other things that a teamwork has to do?
A: We do feel that a Home having three or four children does warrant having a childcare teamworker. However, just because a person in the Home has the most children certainly does not mean he or she must to be appointed as the childcare teamworker. The Home could choose whoever it feels would do the best job as its childcare teamworker, whether he or she has children or not.
Also the Election Rules, B.2.c) says:
c) Homes of more than three voting members must have at least three Home officers who are responsible for Personnel, Outreach, Business, and Childcare (if there are children). If there were only three officers, then one would have to take two of these portfolios. The Home can decide by a simple majority if they want to have more than three Home officers (Charter, p. 310).
Therefore, a Home can have only three teamworkers if it wants, but since your Home has children, one of the three teamworkers would have to assume two portfolios. Either the Personnel, Outreach or Business teamworker would have to take the responsibility of the Childcare teamworker.
Q: The Charter gives the example of a teamworker's visa being denied, and therefore the Home having to hold new teamwork elections (Home Election Guidelines, Appendix D, Charter, p. 405). There are also situations when one or more of the Home's teamworkers have to go on a long faith trip to another country and are away for two or three months, thus leaving the Home with one less teamworker to operate, sometimes with only one or two at Home, which affects things in the Home quite a bit. I think, at least in the situation when this is happening in the last three months of the teamwork term, instead of a simple vote of confirmation in May and November, there should be new elections held.
The situation might be different when the Home is made of only four voting members, or less (with special permission), and in that situation you don't have too much choice of who else to elect, but when the Homes are bigger, I think new elections should be held.
A: In the example you use, of a teamworker being away on an extended visa trip, it would be best to still hold a vote of confirmation for this teamworker. If you don't confirm the teamworker who is away, then you can hold an election to vote in a new teamwork. If Home elections fall during the time when the teamworker is away, he can either be reelected in his absence, or a new teamworker elected in his place.
Also, if a teamworker knows that he is going to be gone from the Home for several months, he and the Home could agree together on someone who could temporarily replace him on the teamwork until his return.
Q: Can a 16-year-old, who has never had experience with shepherding or being on the teamwork, take full charge after being elected, or does he have to be a trainee with no authority?
A: To answer your question we will repeat here what the Charter says. In the Election Rules, A.2.d.(2), it states:
Members 16 through 20, and voting members who have been live-in Charter members for less than one year, will be considered trainees for their first six months as a Home officer if it is their first time ever as a Home officer, as outlined in point 6 of the Home Election Guidelines in Appendix D, page 403 (p. 310).
Q: I know the Lord is teaching us that we are all responsible for the Home in which we reside, and it's not just the responsibility of the Home teamwork. On the other hand, I wonder sometimes just how seriously some take their shepherding responsibilities when elected to a Home teamwork. I know it is much easier to shepherd a smaller Home these days, but I wonder if some of the Home teamworkers are fulfilling the responsibilities they have as shepherds, for example, ensuring that as a Home they are having their prayer days, devotions, Home meetings, etc.
And while we all play a much more active role in our Homes than before, Dad has also said that sheep need a shepherd, and that they are not always going to want what they need. I feel one thing which would be very good to do is suggest that the teamworkers read the sections in the Charter on what their responsibilities and their jobs are each time they get elected, and possibly even when confirmed, and even take time to hear from the Lord for any specifics for their jobs, areas they can continue to work on and grow in when it comes to their care of their home, etc?
A: We very much agree. In the Election Rules, B.9 explanation it says:
Once elected, new Home officers should read the Obligations of All Family Officers on page 151, and the Responsibilities and Authority of Home Officers on page 172, and take time to hear from the Lord in prophecy for any specifics He has for them in their new job, and areas they can continue to work on and grow in when it comes to their care of their Home and its members.
Love Charter Amendments (41-99), LNF 275 contains a large number of additions and modifications to the original Charter, so it is important that all you teamworkers read and study them if you want to do an effective job for your Home. Better yet, you should read through the updated Charter book in order to not only refresh yourselves on the original Charter clauses but also all the changes that have been made.
Q: Could there be guidelines about how to recruit personnel from other Homes?
Just to paint the picture, imagine yourself with a big family and for various reasons you find yourself temporarily working without helpers for some time. You keep going by faith and eventually the Lord brings along some helpers, and after that long period you are just rejoicing and praising the Lord that you have a team to work with. As you can see, building a strong team takes time. Then out of the blue, for another team to come along to recruit somebody from your newly built team can be a hard saying. Perhaps they didn't even ask you first but went directly to the member they were interested in.
A: Perhaps a Home recruiting members from another Home could pray about informing the Home teamwork of the Home they're recruiting from, so that the teamwork knows about it and doesn't just have it sprung on them when all of a sudden the person in their Home they were counting on turns in his or her 30-day notice. But while it can be difficult to lose personnel that you are counting on, at the same time, the Right of Mobility is a fundamental right in the Charter.
Requiring people to go through Home teamworks to ask someone to join their team would bring with it a few complications, and many Family members would not be agreeable to this procedure. No one likes to lose good personnel, but by the same token if a person is not happy or fulfilled in their present Home, maybe the Lord has another plan for them.
In any case, people should be praying and hearing from the Lord about whether to go or stay. The way things are presently in the Charter, as long as people are prayerful and operate in love, it works towards the benefit of people's happiness because the Homes and their teamworks are motivated to keep their people happy if they want to keep them.
Q: A single mom with three children joined our Home recently. When she decided to leave her Home and go to China, she presented her plans to the Home and counseled with them about how to raise her travel and landing funds.
Her Home interpreted the Charter that she could not keep any percentage of her outreach funds as outlined in the Charter until she actually presented her 30-day notice. They would only allow her thirty days to raise her fare, keeping aside 50% of the net funds, and then after that she'd have to leave the Home.
Since this was an unrealistic time frame, as she was a single mom with three kids and a very large fare to raise, her only alternative was to go out on her free days to do the fundraising for 10 months before giving her 30-day notice. The Home agreed to let her keep that money, but that was all she could put aside until she presented her 30-day notice.
Is a Home allowed under the Charter to only give 30-days for someone to keep 50% of their funds from fundraising for departing to a mission field?
A: The Charter does not say that only upon turning in your 30-day notice may a member begin to raise funds to leave the Home. Once 30-day notice is given, then certain procedures and guidelines do officially take effect. But this is not to limit or restrict the good and loving thing to do, or the counseling and prayer needed in order to make it possible for someone to raise funds for their move. In fact, in the example that is given in the Right of Mobility (Charter, p. 35), it talks about not giving your 30-day notice until you have most of your funds raised and are about ready to go. So we're not sure how the Home in question interpreted the Charter to say that only upon giving 30-day notice can the person raise funds for their move.
While we did leave it up to the Home and the departing member to work out an equitable arrangement regarding raising funds for a move, it was not the intent of the framers of the Charter to make it difficult for members, and especially single parents, to raise their funds for the mission field. Lord help us all to give and be willing to sacrifice to get our brethren to the mission field!
The explanation under Rights of Parents, F.1, says:
Being a single parent is difficult in that you must be both father and mother to your children. Of course, it is much easier to be a single parent in the Family than out of the Family, as within the Family you have a great deal more help and support. But even with that help it is still difficult. Homes must therefore pay special attention to the needs of single parents and their children (Charter, p. 76).
(Jesus speaking:) Bear ye one another's burdens and so fulfill the law of Christ. It's possible to keep the letter of the law, but to break the spirit of the law and thereby lose the blessing that I would otherwise bestow. Give and it shall be given unto you is My law of love, and I will bless those that give by faith, knowing in their hearts that I will repay.
You will never lose by giving, My children. So give freely and I will give a hundredfold in return. I long to give to you all that you need and want, but I can only give a hundredfold if you are truly giving from your hearts. It's still all by faith and the just shall walk by faith. Be not faithless, but believing, be not miserly, but generous, and I will bless your Homes, your lives and your children's lives a hundredfold of all you give.
I love faith and those that trust Me to supply all their need according to My riches in glory. I have riches untold and I wish to give them to My giving and sacrificial loves. (End of message from Jesus.)
Q: There seems to be little in the Charter about Family visitors staying in a Home, other than that they and the Home should agree together on the conditions of their stay. We had two Family members stay with us who agreed to stay and work with us for a few weeks, but didn't want to become Home members because they didn't want to take on the responsibility of being Home members. Then one of them determined that she was going to get a System job rather than help in the Home and go witnessing with us. When she heard that she would need to have the agreement of the Home Council, her reaction was, Why? I'm not a Home member. I can do what I want.
A: There is nothing in the Charter requiring Homes to take in Family visitors, nor does it say how long Homes must let visitors stay before requiring them to become Home members, if they wish to remain.
Dad quoted the following Arab custom: You can only be a guest for four days; after that you go to work like the rest of the family, like anybody else. You can't stay as a guest just eating and drinking and enjoying their hospitality longer than four days, unless you go to work and start going into the fields and working with the rest of them (ML #1473:29). So while it's true that she can do what she wants, it doesn't mean she has the right to do it in your Home, and as Dad used to say, You can do as you please, but do it somewhere else, please!
If you are a visitor in someone else's Home, then it's only common courtesy to abide by the wishes of your hosts. If you refuse to do so, the Home has every right to ask you to move on.
Charter Amendment No. 18 in LNF 257 also mandates that all Family members tithe and appear on a Charter Home's TRF each month (see also Responsibilities of Individual Members, I, Charter, p. 8; World Service Reporting and Mailing Rules, A, ibid., p. 338;). So if she's no longer a member of her former Home, then she must either get voted in as part of your Home and be reported as part of your Home on the next TRF, or find another Home to take her in, or apply for an extension from her CRO office (as per Amendment No. 18, see also Right of Mobility, A.7, ibid., p. 50), or move to Fellow member status.
Q: We have a question concerning Homes with most of their voting members away on visa trips and/or extended road trips much of the time. Presently we have four of our voting members at home and seven on the road. It has been like this for most of the time we've been a Home, since many of our members go to raise funds for extended trips. Because of this, voting for different situations concerning the running of the Home, including teamwork elections and confirmations, can be difficult, especially since according to the Charter those who abstain can come back and tip the voting a different direction.
Out of the seven voting members who are not at Home, six of them have a different vision for the running of the Home and have voiced their desire to change the Home in the future.
According to the Charter we don't have to wait now, but can go ahead with the result of the votes, which we are doing, but with each one coming back they might tip the scale back and forth with their late votes. It might be quite time-consuming, pretty much paralyzing our activities.
A: If you want to continue to have these people in your Home and they are away raising support or getting visas or whatever, then you can ask them to abstain, send their votes or vote by proxy as outlined in the Election Rules, point 5 (Charter, p. 309).
Alternatively, if people are going to be gone for such long periods of time from their Home raising funds that it results in problems with the running of the Home, we suggest that those who are away pray about becoming a Road Team Home. Or, in the case of the members who have been away for several months, we suggest they try to join Homes in the areas in which they are presently living and working. They can always rejoin your Home if and when they return to your field. Both of these approaches could help to make it easier for Homes to vote on matters and make final decisions. As a last resort, if you and they cannot agree on the above or on the running of the Home, you can vote them out of your Home, if you have the majority necessary to do so, or you can move out and form your own Home with those who have similar goals if you don't.
On the other hand, if they are in another country for an extended period raising necessary support for your Home, and you and they wish for them to remain a part of your Home, then you will need to come to an agreement with them regarding the running of the Home in their absence. Either they could vote by proxy, as explained above, or just leave the running of the Home with those actually in the Home, and upon their return, if they disagree with any Home policies, they can bring them up to a Home council and if the majority agree, changes can be made at that time.
Q: Someone recently was voted out of a Home but didn't feel comfortable asking his former Home to keep him on the TRF. However, if it were a rule that it is the former Home's responsibility to carry the member on their TRF as simply a procedure, not a favor, it would make situations like this easier for people. Can it be made a rule that when members leave a Home or are voted out, that the Home automatically keeps them on their TRF for up to two months in accordance with the Floaters Amendment?
A: First of all, the Floaters Amendment (No. 18) made it possible for a Home to voluntarily allow a former member to remain on their TRF for a maximum of two reporting periods after they physically leave, but it is not a requirement or responsibility of the Home to do so. One problem with doing as you suggested is that if the departing member were still to be reported on their former Home's TRF for an additional two months as a requirement, but in the meantime the member found a new Home and started reporting on their TRF, there would be an overlapping and they would appear on two TRFs.
If members are voted out of a Home and haven't yet found another Home or opened their own Home by reporting time, they can keep in touch with their CRO office concerning the matter. If their CRO office knows they're legitimate Charter members who are attempting to, but haven't yet found a new Home, they can give the member an additional month before changing their status if they feel it is appropriate. (See Charter Amendment No. 18, in LNF 257, as well as the Right of Mobility, 7.a)(1)(i), Charter, p. 50 for more details on this.)
Q: Should there be a policy that when you leave a Home you'll still receive copies of the mailings that you miss from your old Home until you're included on a new Home's TRF? Should it be the responsibility of your former Home to send you copies since you had been included in their report and counted on their stats for the mailings?
A: It would depend whether they are OPD mailings or OP4D. If OPD, then you could request your former Home send you the mailing you missed during the time you were in transit but still on their Home TRF. However, unless you are four voting members in transit, it would probably be difficult for your former Home to send you the OP4D mailings, since they are for four people. In that case you would just have to read those missed mailings in your new Home, or if on the road, you could ask either your former or new Home to mail it to you.
Q: When a person receives a designated gift to go to a certain field, then for some reason he doesn't go to that field, what happens to the money? We gave money to a brother once towards his fare to China; he then moved to another Home but ended up not going to China. We don't know what became of our donation to him for his fare.
We read ads in the Bulletins and want to help certain people, but are reluctant because we're not sure if they will ever reach their destination.
It is possible that someone really wants to go to a field, but that they don't raise enough funds and end up not going. In that case, shouldn't they write to the people who gave the money and ask their donors what they should do with the money now that they are not going? If the donor should want it back — in order to send it to someone else — they should be able to get it back, right?
A: Although the following from the Financial Rules, D.1 — referring to a Home member receiving designated gifts — is a little different from the situation you describe, we feel it shows that Dad's intent and that of the Charter is that designated gifts are to be used for the designated purpose given. It follows that if designated gifts are not going to be used for their designated purpose, that the gift recipient should contact the donor and they should decide together what is to be done with the funds. Since the Charter covers the principle, it doesn't seem there is a need to further spell it out in another amendment. The Charter states in Financial Rules, D.1:
1. Solicited designated gifts must be used for the purpose for which they were designated according to the prior agreement of the Home.
There are times when members are given financial gifts for a specific purpose; these are known as designated gifts. When a Home or an individual are given such gifts, they must use them for the purpose for which they were given.
Designated gifts are a holy responsibility to be given to whom and for what they were given! And if you want or need them for something else, then you must not give them to something else without asking the permission of the donor. Many a time I've been tempted to use something for something else, but thank God, I think I've always used it for what it was given for. So when God found out I could be trusted to be honest and use it for what He wanted it used for, or for what the donors had expressed their desire to have it used for, then both God and the donors found out I could be trusted, so I get more and more and more. — Because I don't want it for myself. I ask for it for others and I give it to others just as fast as I can! Praise the Lord! [ML #2447:15,42] (p. 322).
Q: Shouldn't the Charter make it clearer that area officers include ABMs as well as VSs, which would also mean that a Vote of Confirmation would also be needed for ABMs?
A: ABMs are not area officers unless specifically appointed as such by their continental officers (see the Responsibilities and Authority of Area Officers, C). It is not necessary for ABMs to be confirmed unless they are also area officers. (For more on this see questions 5 through 7 under section C, Role and Authority of the Area Business Manager [ABM], in FSM 278.)
Q: Is it still Family policy to publish a list of Homes on Probationary Notice (PNs) in the CRO area Bulletin?
A: During Summit `96 a discussion was held as to whether the continental offices should continue to publish a list of Homes on Probationary Notice in their Area Bulletins. This matter was voted on and the result was that the CRO offices should continue to publish the names of Homes that are on Probationary Notice for major infractions. It was decided that it would no longer be necessary to publish the Homes on Probationary Notice for office-related or technical infractions, such as late or low tithe or FAF gift, late TRF or no Home Self-Evaluation Checklist, etc. However, if a Home is placed on Probationary Notice for minor infractions three or four times in a period of six months to a year, they should also be published in the Area Bulletin.
If a Home were to have already made right whatever circumstances called for them to be put on Probationary Notice for a major infraction by the time the Area Bulletin is ready to go out, it would not be necessary to publish their name.
Q: The Charter says that two hours per week is the required minimum for witnessing outside the Home. — What about those who use it as an excuse for not witnessing more?
A: We took this question to the Lord and Dad again responded:
(Dad speaking:) Boy, I tell you, the church people used to hate to go out witnessing because it just killed their pride. I sure hope that Family members are not getting proud or losing that burning desire to get out there and save the world for Jesus!
The Charter does say that two hours is the minimum.Some people are unable to witness more for different reasons, and others are free to justify not witnessing more if they choose to. If they aren't motivated by the love of Christ for the lost, then upping the required witnessing hours isn't going to help them because it's a spiritual problem! The Lord put you there to witness and win the lost, my dear Family, and if you're not giving your all to do that then you are losing the vision, and you'd better get desperate with the Lord and soak yourself in His Word until that undying conviction and sense of urgency to reach a dying world burns brightly in your hearts again!
When you get up Here the thing you will be the most thankful for is when you were a faithful witness and gave your all to win souls for the kingdom. Be not weary, for in due season ye shall reap. Hallelujah! Believe me when I tell you that verse is so true and you will reap a wonderful everlasting reward and a Well done, thou good and faithful servant from our loving Husband and King! Praise the Lord! (End of message from Dad.)
Q: For a number of reasons some nationals wish to return to their countries, and have trials because they are not automatically granted clearance to open their own Homes in the city of their choice within their native country, but have to first request permission of the already existing Homes. The Charter states that nationals of a country cannot be denied clearance to return to their home country. Some nationals feel that they should also be given automatic clearance to return to their home city without having to get the permission of any already existing Homes in that city.
A: Although the Charter automatically grants nationals the right to return to their home countries, it also stipulates that Homes in a city are to prayerfully decide whether they feel a city can hold more Family Homes. Thus, nationals of the country will, like everyone else, have to follow the Procedures for Opening a Home in a City that Already Has a Charter Home (p. 195). To change that would be unfair to the Homes already in the city. We trust that the Lord will show the Homes in a city to welcome the nationals if the city can sustain more Homes, but if not, then the returning nationals are free to open a Home in another city within the same country where there are no Homes or where the Homes feel the city can accommodate one more Home.
Q: If a teamwork from another Home recommends a movie that is on the WS non-recommended list could we watch it, even if it's not recommended?
A: A teamwork or teamworker from another Home has no authority over your Home, and following his or her recommendations over WS recommendations is not recommended! If WS has recommended that you don't watch it, that is because we feel it best you don't. It would be better to watch an uplifting rerun than to put on a movie that WS has discerned will be unedifying, and which drags you down spiritually.
Q: Concerning Amendment No. 29 in LNF 257 on video watching: We were wondering if these same guidelines apply to movies watched outside of the Home in movie theaters. We feel that it does, but the teens and YAs in our Home are contending that it only applies to movies watched in the Home by groups of teens or JETTs. This still then leaves quite a bit of freedom to our older teens, YAs and SGAs when it comes to movie viewing.
A: WS has tried to aid you busy Homes by informing you of which movies we feel are watchable and those that we don't recommend. We've encouraged the previewing of any un-rated movies you are considering watching as a Home, and have discouraged the watching of movies that have not been rated by WS or recommended by a preview team from your Home. (See Home Life Rules, K, Charter, p. 267.)
The Charter does not specifically cover movies watched by individuals at movie theatres, but it does make it clear that you are to minimize unedifying and ungodly influences in your life (p. 1). Don't forget that since outside movie viewing is not covered in the Charter, your Home is free to vote on how you want to handle it and make Home regulations concerning these matters.
A diet of unedifying movies will wear down your spiritual convictions and strength — and those of your teens and children. Don't be deceived into thinking you can get by with it. The impressions you get from movies are real, and will affect you. WS has tried to set a standard for you by telling you which movies we feel are acceptable. What more can we possibly do? You voting members now need to read and pray, and sit down and devise a standard for movies you are going to view and allow your young people to view. God help you to minimize unedifying and ungodly influences in your lives!
Q: Is there any specific counsel about allowing children to play computer games, where the characters are sword fighting or blasting others with various types of weapons? We have tried to explain to the children that these types of computer games are not really good for them, but any other type of game seems to them to be too boring. The games they have now on the computer don't have evil-looking characters, but if this weapons thing could be specifically addressed, it would certainly help to verify what we have been trying to get across to the children and even some teens and YAs. The Charter says unedifying games should not be used, but then the interpretation of unedifying comes into play. So if you can help us on this question we would be very grateful, thank you!
A: The Charter has laid out rules, such as the one on minimizing and resisting ungodly or unedifying influences into our Homes and lives and the lives of our children (Responsibilities of Individual Members, A, p. 1; Responsibilities of Parents, C, p. 67). Therefore it is the responsibility of you teamworkers, parents and Home councils to seek the Lord and ensure that these rules are interpreted and kept as the Lord leads and the majority of your Home feels is best.
While WS has put out a list of some educational computer programs that we have researched, we are not able to specify exactly which of the vast array of computer games are kosher and which are not, simply because we have not tried them all. Neither is it possible to specify in black-and-white exactly what constitutes unedifying, although a pretty good rule of thumb is wherefore by their fruits you shall know them (Mat.7:20). The shooting and blasting that you describe above certainly does not sound edifying to us.
It is up to you as a Home to counsel, pray and decide together on which games are edifying and that you should or should not allow and make Home regulations accordingly.
We asked the Lord and Dad if they could share more on the topic of unedifying computer games. Following are their answers:
(Jesus speaking:) The Homes and Family members have had enough years of training and discipline and guidance and instruction and teaching from their Father David and from their Queen Maria and their King Peter. They see the fruits of these things in their children's lives, they know what bears good fruit and they know what bears bad fruit. They have to have the faith to stand up for the truth, to have the conviction that they're not going to allow tools of the Devil into their Homes — that they're going to close these avenues that the Enemy uses to seep in with his garbage — his violence and killing, his deceit and lies, his ugliness, his worldliness.
That was the purpose of giving the Homes the right to make Home regulations. These regulations should be posted so that each member and each new or prospective member that wishes to join their Home can see. The Home should say, These are our rules. These are our convictions. These are what we live by — and if you want to live in our Home, these are the rules that you must follow, unless the Home council changes or amends them. (End of message from Jesus.)
(Dad speaking:) The Devil is always trying to get in through any crack or hole that he can. He's had thousands of years to learn all the techniques and ways to get in; so to try to block all of these cracks and holes and leaks via the Charter is more than WS leadership can do. Each Home, and the shepherds, parents and individuals in it have to block these cracks and holes and leaks from seeping into their own hearts and lives and minds and those of their children. They are not ignorant of the Devil's devices. But they need to be prayerful and they need to have conviction and stand up against the onslaughts of the Enemy — whether through music, books, movies, television, computer games, the Internet or whatever other avenues the Devil likes so much to use.
People have to pray and get ahold of the Lord, and know that what they're getting is from the Lord. They have to learn to hear the Lord's voice and His checks, and have the faith to know that what He's telling them is right. Then they have to have the strength of spirit to follow what the Lord says to do. The shepherds and parents certainly know if a computer game is evil and bad, so they need to be on the lookout for these things. (End of message from Dad.)
Q: In the Sex and Affection Rules, P (Charter, p. 305), it says we are not to partake of pornography. It seems the main criteria are: If it is perverted, ugly and unloving, with the sexual organs as the main characters, and the sole purpose to sexually arouse, then it is ungodly and should be avoided. A while back in FSM 287 (question 48), someone asked about nudie cuties, etc., and the answer indicated that as long as it's not vulgar, crude and the sexual organs are not the main characters, then it's OK.
As a single man I find the need to masturbate often, and feel at times the need for more excitement or variety when I do, so usually have to fantasize about someone. I was wondering where to draw the line or how much according to our faith this would be. For example, would magazines such as Playboy that do not emphasize sexual organs, but usually have artistic, sexy photos, be OK?
A: Our answer remains the same as the one given in FSM 287 (answer 48): The Charter merely outlaws crude, vulgar pornography where the sexual organs are the main characters, something which Dad made very clear in the Letters that he was against.
Here's what Dad had to say, If it's something beautiful and right and clean and decent, including artistic nudity and romantic scenes, sex that is beautiful and pretty, artistic and romantic, I think that's fine. But I don't like ugly porno photography! (ML #935:5).
Q: What's the acceptable measure for coffee? Is there a volume quota? The Charter says the quota is 2 cups per day, but some people take the two cups measure to mean two small cups and others take it as meaning two big mugs!
A: We'd have to mandate how many coffee grounds should be used in the brewing of each pot if we go any further than we have in the Charter. It seems how much caffeine a person can handle is different for each individual, so we'll leave it up to each individual to determine what size cup to use. Caffeine is a strong stimulant, though, and too much can be damaging. Let your moderation be known unto all men (Phil.4:5).
Q: Concerning the new alcohol limits, I'm wondering if the rule could be modified slightly to say that Homes could choose to have double the limits given once a month on a special occasion, instead of that amount twice a month — provided it happens in the Home.
Watching videos together is cool, but sometimes it's nice to do other things together, and I've found it can be very difficult for many of us to get out of ourselves without enough to drink to get us tipsy. And somehow special events like Christmas and New Years just aren't the same if you can't have a good drink — it's like taking half the fun out of it. If the Home agrees to this quota, it doesn't seem an overemphasis to me.
A: This was a topic of extensive discussion and prayer at the Summit, and the decision was to not have more than 12 oz (37.5 cl) of wine or its equivalent of port, sherry or beer at any given occasion. But in the light of this question we asked the Lord if He wanted to confirm that His will is not over 12 oz on any one special occasion. Following is His answer.
(Jesus speaking:) All things are lawful, but all things are not expedient. I have led you, My shepherds, to a balance that will meet the needs of all, and yet provide a safety net for those who have weaknesses in this area.
If what you want is to get tipsy, or a little high, well, most people can reach that point with the special occasion limit of three 4 oz glasses of wine or the equivalent of another specified alcoholic beverage under 20% alcohol. Some cannot handle even near that much. And though some would like to even have that much, because of the field where they live they must forego it entirely or limit it because of the cost. Those who are tempted to complain because they feel they have too little should consider that they are blessed to have the opportunity to have any — for there are many of My missionaries who make this and many other sacrifices. Yet would you say they are not happy? Or would you say that they could not be free without this aid of wine or drink? True, wine loosens you and your tongue a little and makes you freer, and this can be pleasurable and even desirable. It can help those who are shy or withdrawn or not in the best of moods to come out of their shells and be able to laugh, be funny, be affectionate — even a little crazy in a good way.
There is no harm in this, as long as it is kept in check. But if the quota were to be higher, then while some could keep themselves in check, many could not, and it would defeat the purpose. Instead of lightening up a little, some people would get out of control, either being foolish or overly emotional or even doing things that are unsafe.
Therefore I would that the safety net be kept where it is, for while wine is a good thing and makes merry the heart of man, all things must be done in moderation. Moderation is a broad term, and for one may have a slightly different meaning than for another; but in order to ensure that moderation is widespread, rather than chaos and drunkenness becoming widespread, I have set the limits where they are. So follow them, My children.
Enjoy your liberties and the joys of the body, and appreciate the blessings that you do have, but do not let yourselves become overly dependent on such things of the flesh either. For the greatest joy, the greatest highs, the greatest freedom and liberation, the ability to really be loving and affectionate and outgoing — to be giving and free and happy and rejoice with all your heart — comes from Me and My Spirit. So get high on My Spirit first of all through your communion with Me and your lovemaking with Me. And, along with it, you are free to partake within reason of the spirits that come in bottles. But let it not become overly important to you, and let not yourself overindulge or open doors for those who are weak to be stumbled or cause themselves or others harm. (End of message from Jesus.)
Q: A question came up regarding the use of certain hard liquors, such as vodka or rum if they're mixed with juice and thus diluted. Some people's understanding is that it is acceptable according to the new alcohol consumption guidelines, providing it is sufficiently diluted to be less than 20% alcohol content.
The Charter Responsibilities GN says, All other alcoholic beverages with an alcoholic content of over 20%, such as whiskey, gin, vodka, liquor, etc., are not permitted in a Family Home for the purpose of members' weekly rations, nor are they permitted to be drunk on special occasions or celebrations (ML #3198:162, GN 803). It seems to imply that we'd rather not have this particular type of alcoholic beverages in our Home.
Somebody made a concoction on Christmas night with vodka and other soft drinks, but the alcohol content must have been high, because quite a few of the young people got drunk. Because vodka is almost tasteless and so easy to absorb, you don't really realize that you're drinking so much alcohol. It's very difficult to know exactly how much hard liquor you could put in a drink so that it is considered acceptable and less than 20% alcohol content.
I feel that considering that we don't have it very clear how diluted these liquors could be to be acceptable, and considering the rules in the Charter and the Charter Responsibilities GN, it doesn't seem we should use these liquors as part of our weekly consumption or special occasions. But it seems that this has become a loophole that people use, saying that because they dilute it, then the drink is less than 20%, and hence it is acceptable according to the new alcohol consumption guideline.
Could you help clarify this point as to whether these types of alcohol are allowed in our Home if they are diluted?
A: The explanation under point C of the Food and Drink Rules says: All other alcoholic beverages, with an alcohol content of more than 20%, including whisky, gin, vodka, liqueurs, etc., are not permitted in a Family Home for the purpose of members' weekly ration, nor are they permitted to be drunk on special occasions or celebrations (Charter, p. 250).
After counsel and hearing from the Lord, the decision was made by WS Leadership and your CRO shepherds at Summit `98 that hard liquor is not to be allowed in our Homes or used by Family members for weekly quotas or special occasions (even if the teamworkers and Home members vote to do so, or if the drinks are mixed outside the front gate — which we have heard rumored reports of some members doing).
In some countries you can purchase bottles of mixed drinks that have low alcohol content, similar to beer or wine (less than 20%). Seeing that the drink itself is less than 20%, it would be permissible to drink this in the Home (only in the quantities as allowed in the Charter for beer or wine or sherry, according to the percentage of alcohol in the drink as indicated on the bottle).
The big difference between that and bringing a bottle of liquor and mixing it yourself is that if you have hard liquor in the Home, even if it's for the purpose of mixing down, you run the risk of people drinking it straight or mixed much higher than 20%.
We asked the Lord concerning ready-made mixed drinks that are less than 20% in the bottle and following is His answer:
(Jesus speaking:) I am a loving and merciful Husband, and I wish to make things as easy as possible for My children, so that they can enjoy life as much as possible. But at the same time I have to give them certain restrictions so that they do not cause harm to themselves or to their bodies, or to others. That is why I have led you to make this rule of banning hard liquors from the Homes altogether, so that no one will be tempted to drink more than they should, or to bring it to a party and get drunk.
But I do not wish to put heavy burdens on My children; I only wish to protect them from the harmful effects of too much alcohol. So you must consider the purpose, and whether it will be similarly accomplished if you allow the Homes to purchase mixed drinks that are less than 20% in content. If you consider that it is the same as port or sherry, and not any more harmful than those, then the purpose is achieved, in that they are not bringing anything into the Home that is so strong that it will cause drunkenness. Of course, they could get drunk on a mixed drink that is less than 20%, just as they could get drunk on port or wine, but if they drink according to the amount allotted for port or sherry, then this will not cause harm. And just as you must trust that the Homes will not drink more than the Charter quota of beer, wine or port, so you must also trust that they would do the same for other store bought premixed drinks of a similar percentage of alcohol. And if they drink too much and break the rules, you can be sure that I will know and will bring the matter to light or deal in their lives accordingly.
So yes, you may allow and make mention of purchasing mixed drinks that have a similar alcohol content to port or sherry that of 20% or less. It should only be drunk in the same quantity as that allowed for port or sherry, and the same rules apply. This will take some of the burden off of My children of feeling that they are being restricted from drinking tasty drinks that are made with stronger liquors. If they can find prepackaged cocktail-type drinks in a bottle that are 20% or less, then it is permissible. For then they are not bringing in to the Home anything stronger than a bottle of port.
But to purchase hard liquor and mix it themselves, whether in the Home or outside the Home, should not be allowed. For there is too much leeway in how they would mix it, and once the bottle of hard liquor is purchased, there can again be the temptation, once it is in the Home, for it to get drunk. Of course, someone could drink heavily while they are out of the Home and you would not know it, but at least you can exercise control over the drinking in the Home, and hard liquor and the mixing of drinks in the Home should not be allowed. (End of message from Jesus.)
Q: We know that a recent Charter amendment and the Charter Responsibilities GN make it clear that no hard liquor is permitted in Family Homes. As a point of clarification, does this mean that you cannot buy things like brandy, rum or other hard liquors to add to other drinks or fruitcakes to spice them up in mild quantities? Recently, at a local Home's Christmas party some brandy was used to put in a fruitcake. Then it was brought out for folks who desired to put in their punch. Hardly anyone did drink it, and all were very wise about it, but one thing led to another and a junior teen girl got hold of it and ended up getting sloppy drunk on it. And what about mixed cocktails like Tia Maria or piña colada which contain 26% alcohol? Could the alcohol level be raised to accommodate people that would like to enjoy these mixed drinks?
A: Hard liquor (where the content is 20% alcohol and above) in our Homes for weekly rations or special occasions is not permitted for any reason. The reasons are evident from the example you gave, as well as answers to the previous questions. If we allow stronger mixed drinks, then where do you draw the line, at 26%, 29%, or all the way up to 37.5% or 40%? We asked the Lord again about our current policy, and following is His reply:
(Jesus speaking:) As I have repeatedly warned, strong drink is raging, and powerful bad spirits can and will use it as a medium to attack My children. For people that are weaker in spirit, these spirits can overcome them through this medium, and cause them to do terrible and dangerous things at worst, and to make fools of themselves at the least. As David has pointed out, alcohol loosens the tongue, and people often say things they regret or make security mistakes that can have long-lasting repercussions.
It's just not wise to allow strong drink into your sanctuaries, your Heavenly Homes, as it can wreak havoc. Limited amounts of beer or wine or port and sherry and other low alcohol content liquors are fine if used in moderation, and thus I have allowed this liberty for My children. The amount of alcohol allowed in the Charter is a sufficient amount for any Family member to feel relaxed and happy and have a fun time together.
People who haven't had much experience with alcohol think that because the allowable amount makes them feel good, that more will make them feel better. But it's not the case. — More usually results in anger, depression, oppression, sadness or foolishness, and on top of it sickness — a grand hangover the next day. Many have learned through bitter experience that strong drink and overdrinking is not fun, but awful, and doesn't bear good fruit in the end, and can result in hurting others.
I want you to keep the alcohol percentage and rations at their present levels because I know that it is best, and that more will only cause grief, heartache and problems. A little alcohol can be good for some people to help them relax and feel less inhibited, and therefore able to enjoy parties and special get-togethers more. But too much can result in foolishness, unkind words and actions, sadness, depression and even oppression from bad spirits that can and do hitchhike in the alcohol. So My children need to be sure to pray for the Lord's protection before drinking alcohol. Even the System knows that spirits can be in strong alcohol, and that is why they say beer, wine and spirits!
Hard liquor is dangerous for My disciples, and especially dangerous for My teens and young adults. Having it in Family Homes is not necessary because it will only weaken My frontline soldiers for the battle, and also weaken your testimony to the world that its vices and addictions are bad and can be resisted. A wine punch is just as effective and tasty as hard liquor. Hard liquor is not even tasty in truth, but strong, and can carry very bad spirits which My children should not associate with or be singed by. I have instructed your Family leaders to insist that these strong spirits not be allowed into your Homes, and therefore I implore you to heed these admonitions lest you let the Enemy into your lives and the lives of your children.
I do not hold My children back from more and stronger alcohol because I do not want them to have fun. I hold them back because I want them — and all with them — to have fun, and for no one to be hurt or harmed. I love My Family and need them alert and in shape for fighting against the gates of Hell, and claiming My sheep for the Kingdom.
Thank you, My children, for making these sacrifices and living moderately. I promise that I will reward you in this life for it, and in the world to come we will sit down together and drink as much as you like of the wine that I will make for you. And it will not hurt you or contain any bad spirits because there will be no bad spirits in our Kingdom, which is because of your faithfulness to win people's souls so that I can free them from the Devil's clutches and any other bad spirits. (End of message from Jesus.)
Please, dear Family, abide by these alcohol limits to prevent further incidents of overdrinking such as described above. As you can see it spreads like wildfire, and can cause a great amount of harm, and could be dangerous for our younger members, and a terrible reflection on our sample to the world of caring for our children. We believe that all our Family's voting members can have much more fun at their special occasions without having these inordinate amounts of alcohol via hard liquor or extra smuggled beer or wine. Twelve ounces of wine (half bottle, 37.5 cl); 28 ounces of beer (84 cl, not over 6% alcohol) or 8 ounces (25 cl) of port, sherry or other alcoholic beverages under 20% alcohol, should be more than enough to get anyone in a jovial mood. Let your moderation be known to all men (Philippians 4:5).
Q: I've been in Homes where, since the JETTs are sometimes included in different teen activities, they also get included in the wine for special occasions. Can a JETT who is almost a junior teen have a glass? Could we specify what age group of teens are to be included on those special occasions?
Q: When mentioning that in your own Home, on special occasions or celebrations, the Home could decide to let the teens drink a glass of wine or a punch which has some alcohol in it (Charter, p. 250), I'd like to know which group or groups of teens it is referring to. Is it senior teens and junior teens? If not specified, then one would naturally assume that it means all teens. Is that correct? Also, a glass of wine, in the case of teens, means how much? It could be 6 oz, 8 oz or even 12 oz. If it is not specified, then we could have another loophole here. Teens could easily get quite tipsy on 12 oz of wine.
Q: It says in the Charter that teens could have wine or punch on a special occasion in their own Home. It doesn't mention beer, which of course is taken by most people to mean that teens are not allowed to have beer. Is beer allowed for teens or not?
A: The Charter says that those under the age of 18 are not permitted to drink alcoholic beverages; however, in your own Home, on special occasions or celebrations, the Home could decide to let the teens drink a glass of wine or a punch that has some alcohol in it. This means junior teens and above, not JETTs. It also does not mean that teens have a right on every special occasion to have a glass of wine, but it is the Home that decides if and when the teens can be permitted to partake.
When referring to a glass of wine, we were referring to a standard wine glass (4 ounces, 12.5 cl). As far as beer, if a Home wants to allow their teens to have a glass of beer on a particular special occasion, there is no rule against teens drinking one 8 oz (25 cl) glass of beer if the Home agrees, since it is approximately the equivalent of a 4 oz glass of wine.
Q: I'm wondering what we should do in a situation where you have to leave your Home for some important reason: having a baby, visa trip, booked tickets, etc., and you have written to your teamwork for a permission to stay more than one month out of your Home, but didn't get a reply in time (or didn't get any reply at all). Will you be punished for leaving the Home without permission? Or does no answer mean yes? Or are you responsible to refer the matter to your teamwork some months before you leave?
Q: A YA from our CM Home went to an FM Home to get his driving license because the only 2 CM Homes there didn't have room to put him up. The continental office sent a reminder of the 30-day limit for living outside a CM Home, and offered to reclassify him to FM status in order for him to continue to stay longer there to finish the procedure. He, of course, didn't want to be reclassified, so he immediately came back to us. Couldn't there be some allowance for situations like this?
A: In the Charter Amendment No. 18 (LNF 257), and now the revised Charter, it says: If you are temporarily away from your Home on an extended road trip, or visiting relatives, etc., and will be returning to your existing Home (and thus remain on their TRF), this is simply a matter to be counseled about and decided upon between you and your Home (Right of Mobility, 7.a)(2)(i), Charter, p. 51). In other words, you don't need to notify the CROs, nor are you limited to 30 days.
If someone is actually leaving his Home and moving to a new Home, but will be in transit on the way before he arrives at his new Home, his current Home can keep him on their TRF for two more months after his departure. They don't need any permission from the CROs on this. All he has to send the CROs is his 30-day notice, and that's it (and he doesn't have to wait 30 days after sending his notice, because the Home can vote to let him leave right away).
So after being gone for two months, he is dropped from his former Home's TRF. That means that from then on he should have either already arrived in his new Home and be reported on their TRF, or he must begin to report as his own Home. Or, he could ask the CROs for an additional one-month extension. But the easiest is just to begin reporting as your own Home. Even if you're just a couple, that gives you a few more months before you either reach your new Home, or other people join you and you have the four-man minimum.
So the answer is no, you don't need permission to stay outside your Home for more than one month to take care of business or for a visa trip or road trip, etc., as long as you stay in touch with your Home and continue to tithe via your Home and are retained on your Home's TRF. Maybe you're confusing it with the clauses in the Charter that say that an entire CM Home can't stay [reside] with non-Charter members for more than 30 days, nor can a non-Charter member stay in a CM Home for more than 30 days.
The Charter does not specifically say that you can't live outside your Home for more than 30 days. To the contrary, you could be gone on a trip for several months visiting relatives, raising support, etc., as long as you will be returning to your Home and you stay in touch with your Home so they can keep including you on the TRF. (See Definition of a Charter Home, C.2, Charter, p. 85.)
So in the second scenario of staying more than 30 days with the FM Home to get a driver's license, the Charter member does not have to become an FM to do so. It's only the entire CM Home that cannot reside with an FM Home for more than 30 days.
Q: In the Charter's Preface under Age Designation (p. xx), it says the full application of the Charter is for all those who have reached the age of 16. Due to financial debts, our Home was re-classified to FM status. We have many children under the age of 16. Are they re-classified as well to FM status? Do they have to bear the full application and consequence for the adults' failure to uphold their responsibilities?
A: In this case, being moved to FM status applies to the entire Home and not just certain individuals. Therefore, the reclassification would include children under 16 as well. In the case of a Home being reclassified for unpaid debts which the senior teens had no decision in, if their parents are in agreement, the senior teens could ask the VSs if they could move to a CM Home before the Home's reclassification takes effect.
Generally, when adults are reclassified to FM status, that would include their dependant children under 16. However, if their junior teens or JETTs wish to remain in a CM Home, and their parents agree and have worked out with a CM family or adult to become a legal guardian for them, then the teens could remain CM if the area office agrees.
If the adults had chosen to go FM, and their children under 16 wish to remain CM, and the parents agree to it and arrange for legal guardianship with a Charter member or family, then the children could remain CM. — In that case no permission from the area office would be necessary.
Q: We heard of two house Homes and three house Homes. This is where they are one team and one Home but sleep in different houses or buildings, but work as one Home and report as one Home. Is this permissible? — And what about the case of a Fellow member living five minutes walking distance from our house? We do things together quite often. And we even have hearing from the Lord prayer sessions for many important matters. She told us that she would like to become CM. But both she and our Home know that our house is not big enough for her family to physically move in. — So may we have a two house Home with her?
We read in the Charter about FMs transferring into an existing CM Home. But the section of the Charter does not say anything about an FM Home joining with a nearby existing CM Home to form a two house CM Home. So the question is, Is it possible? If it is possible, we will start to go through the procedure for her to be able to join us as the Charter instructs. But if it is not possible to form a two house CM Home with her, then we do not need to even start the procedure. We will be looking forward to hear from you!
Q: (From a continental office:) We have a number of undersized Homes, and have received several questions about the Charter requirement that members of a CM Home must reside together. It seems to us in the Definition of a CM Home (p. 84), that there are no exceptions given, although Road Teams are mentioned elsewhere in the Charter, and are, of course, permissible.
Nevertheless, several undersized Homes have asked if it is permissible for couples to report as one Home, if they are working together as one Home but are living in separate housing, for example, two families living in the same apartment building, but not in the same apartment.
Another Home asked if they could open up a separate apartment for a third couple that will be joining their Home, but for whom they don't have room in their house. In a third case, there are two undersized Homes (each Home consisting of one couple and their children), who live about half an hour's drive apart, and they were requesting permission to report together as one Home.
The Charter requirement is that CM Home members must reside together.
So our question is whether the residing together clause must be followed in all cases, or would there be exceptions, such as a Home opening an overflow apartment, or perhaps two couples living in separate apartments in the same building?
A: Let's take the case of opening an overflow apartment in the same building so people won't be cramped: The criterion of residing together would be whether they have their meetings and devotions together, whether they eat and fellowship together, go witnessing together, manage their finances as one Home, etc., which in essence, makes them one Home, and that they truly have split into an additional apartment for the right reasons.
However, the Homes that are half-an-hour apart would not constitute one Home since they are unable to meet these requirements.
As far as another house 5 minutes walking distance away that are fulfilling the above requirements, we asked the Lord:
(Jesus speaking:) If the CROs and VSs feel the house or apartment is close enough and they are sure the members are meeting the requirements of having their meetings and devotions together, eating and fellowshipping together, witnessing together, managing their finances as one Home, etc., in essence making them one Home, then it could be up to the CROs to decide if these members can operate as one Home. (End of message from Jesus.)
Q: We had a question regarding the section discussing the showing of public affection in Living the Lord's Law of Love—Part 9 (ML #3209:200-214). There is no mention in this Letter that the Charter forbids the showing of sexual affection in public. Are we right to assume that even though the GN seems to imply that public displays of sexual affection are acceptable, there is no alteration in our official stance as outlined in the Charter regarding no public display in the Home itself?
A: That's right. The rules on public sexual affection in the Home still hold as per the Sex and Affection Rules, C, in the Charter, which says, No sexual activity or open demonstration of sexual affection should take place in public areas of the Home (p. 275).
Q: The Charter guarantees the privacy of a member's communication with the continental offices and WS via the published addresses. Does this infer that communications sent via the ABM are to be considered unreliable and can be intercepted? Or does it imply that messages sent via the ABM will be read and/or judged by the ABMs?
A: The ABMs are not to read anything that passes through them that is not addressed to them. — This includes letters or communications addressed to CROs or WS. They also should not read letters addressed to the VSs unless their continental office has appointed them as an area officer on the area office teamwork with the VSs. In some cases it might be to the Home's advantage that the ABM reads certain messages that pertain to business or something where it's the ABM's responsibility to see that it gets taken care of. So in those cases the Home might want to send a cc of the message to the ABM, or include a note letting the ABM know that it would be all right to read that particular message. Or they could work out an agreement with the ABM that they would automatically read all messages that are addressed a certain way.
We trust that the Family ABMs are reliable and are doing their best to handle your messages (incoming and outgoing) intact, and to forward them at the earliest possible time. No one, including the ABM, has the authority to tamper with your messages, or to decide to intercept them. If, however, you are having problems with not receiving your messages, please explain the problem to your area office and/or continental office, which we believe will do all they can to fix the problem.
However, you should be using CPY96 (available on the HomeARC Setup Program CD, or CPYWin if you don't have Windows 95/98) for secure communications between Family members. Then you don't have to worry about anyone reading your e-mail except the intended Home or particular person you're writing. So if you get the public key of the Home you're communicating with, or the VSs' key or your CRO office's key, then no one can open e-mail you send except the intended recipient(s). That's the best way to go about ensuring the privacy of your communications, and the best security as well. (See the answer to the next question.)
Q: In our area's Bulletin it was mentioned that it is a Charter infraction to send unencrypted messages from Home to Home. Does this mean any and all communications? Some of our teens have been writing personal letters back and forth that are innocent in content, and what they say couldn't be considered Home communications. Do these have to be encrypted also?
A: E-mail between Homes should be encrypted with CPY96 (or CPYWIN if you don't have Windows 95/98). This is not always initially possible if you don't have the recipient's public key, so you may have to initially send unencrypted e-mail messages until you are able to exchange public keys.
However please obtain the public keys of those you communicate with via e-mail in order to keep your communications secure and away from prying eyes on the Internet or anywhere else. Continually disregarding this fundamental Family rule, just as any other, could result in your CM status being in jeopardy. To assure security, when sending e-mail to another Home for the first time, please attach and send your CPY/PGP public key along with the initial message, asking the recipient Home if they could send theirs with their first response. The CPY/PGP public key file does not in itself need to be encrypted and so can simply be sent along with a message as a file attachment.
Q: It seems there has been a lot more exchanging of addresses and telephone numbers amongst young and old alike since we started having more fellowship meetings. We're concerned, as no matter how much we keep our Home's addresses and telephone numbers in our computers encrypted, if Family members are keeping each other's unencrypted addresses and phone numbers in their personal possession, this compromises our privacy. Could you send out a reminder for everyone to be careful about this? (Home Life Rules, B, C and D, Charter, pp. 263-264).
A: Here `tis!
Q: I remember the days when it was taboo to make a call unless you had a pre-written message and it was checked by your shepherds. Nowadays, especially because of the Internet and e-mail communications, it's unclear to me where the line is drawn. What is current Family policy on phone communications?
A: In Home Life Rules, G, the Charter says:
G. To ensure the privacy of our members and their Homes, members should preferably use modem communications instead of live phone calls between Homes. Additionally, phone modem communications between Homes should be secure (p. 265).
Live phone calls are sometimes necessary between Homes in order to take care of timely business, especially if you don't have a good e-mail link between the Homes. However, if you're having a problem in your Home regarding how much time people spend on the phone, what they talk about, and how to pay the phone bills, you could talk about it in your Home council and set down Home regulations if you wish.
Although e-mail over the Internet is basically free, other than the small fee for your account, you still have to pay for a local phone call while you're on line. However, it's different than the days of telephone traitors where long-distance calls were extremely expensive, which is why there is no strict prohibition on live phone calls in the Charter.
Q: We were wondering if when CMers move to FM status, if they are supposed to take their Tool Fund with them, or are Tool Funds just given to Charter members?
A: Tool Funds were originally given to all Charter members as a gift from WS, but if CMers change to FM status or leave the Family, they are free to take their personal Tool Fund with them. But if they return to CM status at a later date, they would be responsible to bring their $50 Tool Fund with them, rather than be issued a new one. (This would not apply to FMers who became FM before the Tool Fund was issued, and therefore never received one. In that case, they would receive a Tool Fund when they become CM.)
Q: Is the Tool Fund given per adult, or to each Home member regardless of age? We have figured ours per Home member, regardless of age. In the Home Self-Evaluation Checklist, it asks if you have $50 per adult. In the Tool section of the TRF it asks if you have $50 per person.
A: The Tool Fund is $50 per person regardless of age, as stated in the Financial Rules, C (Charter, p. 320). (Exceptions are babies who are not yet 6 months of age, and new disciples who have been in the CM Family less than 6 months.)
The mention of per adult in the Home Self-Evaluation Checklist was an error, and has been corrected in the recent reprinting of the Charter (checklist question 83, p. 392). Thanks for pointing it out.
Q: According to the Charter, Homes have the responsibility to give their members a $50 Tool Fund in tools or cash when they move out of their Home, or to send it to them shortly thereafter. One of our members, who transferred from another Home over three months ago, still hasn't received his Tool Fund. He has called several times asking for it but they still haven't sent it. He's about to move to another field and our Home can't afford to replace his Tool Fund, so he'll be going without it. We feel bad about this, but we don't believe it's our responsibility, but that his former Home should be the one to be held accountable for it. Isn't there a way to make sure the Homes fulfill this obligation?
We've also experienced members coming from other Homes with tools that their Home didn't want (an assortment of old posters or tapes that don't sell, etc.). Could the people moving have a choice of the tools they want to take, or better yet get the $50 cash? Otherwise their new Home has no choice and has to take the loss.
A: We'll take this opportunity to reiterate to all Homes that it is your responsibility to keep on hand each member's Tool Fund and give it to those who move from your Home. It is their tool reserve given by WS, and does not belong to the Home. Failure in providing ongoing members with their Tool Fund is a contravention of the Charter, and your Home will be in jeopardy of being placed on Probationary Notice. Also it is the responsibility of the departing member, his new Home and his former Home to work out the transfer of his Tool Fund to his new Home, not the continental office's responsibility. Of course, if you are unable to work it out, you could ask for counsel and help from your continental office.
The purpose of giving the individual Tool Funds was not only so that every individual had at least $50 worth of tools or cash, but so that the Home they were in would have a basic seedcorn stock. In other words, in each Home the Tool Funds of each individual are to be pooled together to build the Home's seedcorn stock, but before a member leaves for another Home, the Home should give them $50 worth of tools or cash from its seedcorn stock, as agreed upon.
As far as giving old or outdated posters as a Tool Fund to departing members, we would remind you to do unto others as you would have them do unto you (Mat.7:12). If someone joining the Home turned in his Tool Fund in cash to the Home for safekeeping, it would only seem right he be given cash when he leaves, if he so desires. Also, if he were leaving for a field where he cannot use the tools from your field, it would certainly be the loving thing to give him funds rather than tools, if at all possible.
If a Home doesn't have funds available for members to take their Tool Fund in cash, then maybe you can try giving them their Tool Fund in tools far enough in advance of their moving for them to distribute them and get cash for them before leaving for their new field. In that case, the Home would need to agree with the departing member that when distributing those tools he would be able to keep the full income received (after tithe) for his Tool fund, as opposed to his regular outreach and fundraising for moving on, of which he would give a certain percentage (up to 50%) to the Home to cover his expenses (as per the Right of Mobility, A.4.c) (2), Charter, p. 46).
Q: (From a continental office:) Some Homes confuse the Charter clause allowing the Home to use up to $1,000 of its HER for emergency expenses, with a Home Loan. In other words, the Home takes out an unofficial Home Loan from their HER, promising to pay it back within 10 months. Some Homes use part of their HER to pay for a vehicle breakdown or an unexpected customs bill, etc. Are these expenses legitimate?
A: No, we're sorry, they are not. The HER is for emergencies only. While Home Loans are a part of the FAF, they are to be applied for through the continental office and not taken from the part of the HER that a Home is holding. If you were to use part of your HER for a Home Loan, then should a valid emergency arise necessitating the use of the HER funds, you would no longer have them on hand for that purpose. That's why the HER should be kept intact at all times, except in case of dire emergency when no other recourse is possible.
According to the Financial Rules, B (Charter, p. 318), the Home must decide by a two-thirds majority whether a certain situation constitutes sufficient emergency to warrant using up to $1,000 of HER funds (cumulative total, not $1,000 each time). However, the continental office reserves the right to overrule the Home's decision, in which case the amount used by the HER would become a Home debt and subject to repayment by the Home within the two-month time period outlined in the Responsibilities of the Charter Home: Regarding Financial Matters, B (ibid., p. 103).
As far as auto repairs, etc., please understand that the FAF, from which the HER is drawn, is a limited fund set up to help the Family with genuine emergencies — primarily medical or persecution, as well as pioneer gifts, tool funds, Home loans and baby bonuses. If we were to start underwriting car repairs, etc., the expense would be prohibitive and we'd deplete our present FAF fund in short order, leaving us with nothing when true emergencies occur. Thanks for your understanding. The FAF has proven to be a major help with pioneering, Home loans, baby bonuses and tool gifts, and is a blessing to many Homes in their time of dire need. We pray it will continue to be so for you and yours. God bless you!
Q: We will be having twins, and are wondering if we will receive two baby bonuses for the birth of our twins, or just one?
A: Congratulations! Yes, absolutely you should get two! It's one baby bonus per child, not per delivery. God bless you!
Q: The Charter says that if a senior teen wishes to marry another senior or a YA, he or she will have to go through a six-month engagement (Charter, p. 246). But what if the girl gets pregnant, and the two people involved decide to get married? If one of them is a senior, does that mean they will have to go through six months of engagement and then marry when the girl is six months pregnant? Or, in that case would the engagement be lessened?
Or what if, in the same scenario, the girl gets pregnant, and again one of the people involved is a senior teen and has to have the permission of a CM parent, but neither of the parents of the senior thinks it's a good idea for them to marry? According to the Letters, it says that if pregnancy occurs as a result of a union, the Lord in most cases has already chosen the parents. So does that mean they could go ahead and get married without the senior teen parents' approval? Or could the CROs override the parents' decision?
A: If the girl is pregnant and the senior teens have decided to marry, and the parents are in agreement, then the period of engagement may be waived. This would then allow teens desiring to do so to get legally married before the birth of the child in order to make the custody of their child more secure.
The Charter requires parental permission for senior teens to get engaged and marry regardless of pregnancy (p. 345), but we trust that in such cases most parents would happily give their consent if the Lord has confirmed the union in prophecy to the couple and their parents or leadership.
Q: In the Charter it stipulates that both parties should be in agreement to the separation, but I have seen situations where it seems that the one who wanted the separation seems to get his or her way and is allowed to separate, sometimes taking all the children. Can a member's Right of Redress be used in these instances?
A: It shouldn't be possible under the Charter for a couple to separate without both parties consenting to it, since both must sign the Agreement of Permanent Separation and Guardianship of Children form in Appendix B of the Charter (p. 384), and send it to their continental office before the separation could happen. So unless both parties have signed that paper, they remain bound to each other. And after both parties sign the paper, neither of them can claim a Right of Redress to reverse the decision on the marriage or the distribution of the children.
Q: (From a continental office:) We have encountered two marital situations where one of the parties is threatening legal action to attain the desired ends that they have been unable to reach under the Charter. How should we mediate situations like these? Should there be punishment for people who resort to legal action to try to obtain the results they want — especially when it goes against the Charter, and subjects the Lord's work to untold problems and possible adverse repercussions?
In the Charter, under the Responsibilities of Individual Charter Members, F, it clearly states that we all must Endeavor to live by the principles of the Law of Love: To love and care for, and interact lovingly and harmoniously with all members of the Home in which they reside, and with Family members at large (p. 6).
And point S in the same section says members should Endeavor to conduct themselves as good Christians, showing outgoing love and concern for others (p. 15). Point T continues that they should Refrain from activities or behavior that would be a reproach to the cause of Christ and/or reflect negatively on the Family (p. 16).
It seems to us that in threatening legal action against another Family member, these people are not fulfilling these two basic responsibilities. Is there some other way this kind of thing should be handled?
A: If Family members are insistent on taking legal action to solve their marital problems, for example, divorce or child custody, the Family has no legal authority to prevent them from doing so. However, besides going against the Bible injunction, Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? (1Cor.6:1), if in doing so the person taking legal action is deemed by his or her Home or continental office to be contravening the Charter points you quoted above, then they can initiate the Procedures for Moving a Charter Member to Fellow Member Status, as outlined in the Charter (p. 211).
It seems that legal action against another Family member would almost invariably break Charter rules. Take the case of a marital separation: If a partner is suing for divorce or threatening a child-custody suit, then obviously the other party is not consenting. The Charter says, If they cannot come to an agreement on their own, and after counsel with the area or continental officers, they may have to move to Fellow Member status in order to work it out. (Permanent Marital Separation Rules, B [explanation], Charter, p. 350.)
Knowing that taking legal action against your brethren goes against both the Bible and the Love Charter, and that it might result in your being transferred to Fellow member status, should be enough incentive to work things out peaceably and not be so intransigent in one's position.
So our counsel is that those still wishing to take legal action against another Family member — after having heard from the Lord in prophecy and having tried to work it out and having gotten prayer and counsel from their over-shepherds — should choose to move to FM status until these legal matters are settled.
We asked the Lord concerning this matter and He gave the following answer:
(Jesus speaking:) Love, prayer and humility solve all problems. Through My voice, My written Word and Godly counsel, I will help you work out your differences without the need for any of you frontline soldiers to have to drag each other through the legal systems of this world. Paul's admonition not to do so is just as true today as it ever was. It is a terrible reproach to My cause, and very damaging for all concerned including your precious children.
It would be best for those that feel they have no alternative but to follow the path of taking their husband or wife to court concerning separation and child custody, to move to Fellow member status until they have worked out their differences. They can later apply for Charter member status once their marital and child custody situations are resolved. (End of message from Jesus.)
Q: (From a continental office:) We recently had a CM couple temporarily staying with an FM Home, and asking about the possibility of making the FM Home a CM Home with the plan that the FM couple would be able to start their six-month probationary period. In light of trying to make some of our procedures easier for our faithful FMers to return to full-time service, could we make exceptions for cases such as this?
A: As stated in Charter Questions and Answers — Part One, FSM 287, question 34, CMers cannot join an FM Home and still retain their CM status. In the case described above, though, it would not be contravening the Charter if CMers were to move into a house with FMers and immediately turn the FM Home into a Charter Home. If CMers take over the responsibility of shepherding and running the former FM Home, making it a Charter Home, then they would not be joining an FM Home (which would make them no longer Charter members), but would merely be starting a new CM Home that used to be the location of an FM Home, incorporating the Fellow members into their new CM Home as returnees. What makes the difference between it being an FM Home with CMers in it, or a Charter Home with FMers in it, is if it is reporting as a CM Home or an FM Home. If CM, they must be keeping the Charter standard.
The Fellow members who previously had an FM Home could then join the CM Family in this now-CM Home, under the new CM teamwork, following the Procedures for Fellow Members Changing to Charter Member Status and Moving into an Existing Home (Charter, p. 192).
Q: (From a continental office:) We recently had an FM Home, which finished its six-month probationary period and is now in its transitional period to full CM status, ask if they could invite an FM family to join their Home and begin the reclassification process also. It seems that since this Home is now considered a CM Home, minus a few rights, that there is nothing in the Charter which would disallow other FMers from beginning their CM reclassification in such a Home, since for all intents and purposes they are CM. However, if the Home in its final visit from a VS or continental office-appointed designated representative (DR) — which has to occur sometime during the six-month transitional period — were to be disqualified for not living up to the standard of the Charter, then we would understand this to mean that the FMers who joined subsequently would also be disqualified. Is this assumption correct?
A: On the first question, yes, the Charter does allow for a rejoining FM Home that has completed its probationary period (and is therefore a CM Home) to have additional FMers rejoin in their Home during the transitional period. These new FMers joining the transitional CM Home would follow the Procedures for Fellow Members Changing to Charter Member Status and Moving into an Existing Charter Home (p. 192).
In the case of a Home in its transitional stage being disqualified: If the VSs or DRs who disqualify the Home determine that new FMers rejoining in that Home are not to blame for whatever is causing the Home to be disqualified from receiving full CM status, they could allow them to find another CM Home and transfer to that Home (where they would complete their probationary period for becoming Charter members). If a returning FM couple or members are unable to find another Home to continue their probationary period, they could still continue their probationary period to become CMers on their own as their own Home, at least until the time of either their VS/DR visit or when they would need to bring their Home numbers up to the minimum by taking in two more voting members or joining another Home.
FMers who join a Home that is on transitional status, and which has not yet received a confirming visit from their VS or DR, should be informed that there is the possibility that the Home they are joining could be disqualified from CM status, so that they can bear that in mind when deciding whether to join the Home or wait until the Home has receive its confirming visit.
Q: What happens when a person decides to become CM, but their children don't want to be in the Family — especially in the case of JETT-age children? If we get Fellow members becoming CM, but their children don't really have a choice in the matter, then we will be having some problems that will affect the Charter members' young people. Also, if Fellow members want to have their Home become a CM Home, but the kids don't like it and aren't planning to live up to the Charter, is that okay?
A: In the case of FMers joining an existing CM Home, it will be up to the Home council whether they are willing to take in the potential members, knowing that their children are not interested in living according to the Charter rules. If they do, all Fellow members joining, including their children, will be required to abide by Charter requirements or else they will have to leave the CM Home and remain on FM status — unless an underage child is granted an exception by the CRO under Definition of a Charter Home, C.3 (p. 86).
The same applies to FM Homes changing to CM Home status: All members, including children, must abide by the Charter requirements or else remain on FM status.
Q: We were wondering if we could get a clarification on whether or not FMers can use the Family name when provisioning, as they sometimes provision for us.
A: Although the Statement on Fellow Members (Appendix I, Charter, p. 430) doesn't spell this out in black and white, it is clear that without CRO permission, Fellow members cannot act as official representatives of the Family. However, the clause clearly states that this is referring to media and government-related matters, not provisioning.
There is nothing in the Statement on Fellow Members to prevent FMers — who are basically a good representation of the Family — from provisioning in the Family name. However, if an FMer's bad sample and representation of the Family while provisioning were to cause problems for the rest of the local Family, their continental officers have the right and would be justified to intervene, citing the Statement on Fellow Members, specifically responsibility point A.5, which states that Fellow members should refrain from activities or behavior that would be a reproach to the cause of Christ and/or reflect negatively on the Family (ibid., p. 432). And if the FMer who is being a bad sample balks at that and refuses to discontinue using the name of the Family — thereby being a negative reflection on the Family — the CROs have sufficient authority to revoke the FMer's Family membership, if necessary.
Q: Now that the FMers have many recent Letters on the HomeARC that they weren't allowed to read before, the question was posed to us from an FMer who wanted to borrow a certain Letter, as he found it difficult at times to be able to sit at his FM Home's computer and read from the HomeARC.
A: The heavier Letters that are on the HomeARC have been HomeARC purged (this is in addition to the Pubs Purge), so while it's fine for FMers to have the FM HomeARC Text Library CD MO Letters, they still can't have the printed version of the Letters, unless they're on the list of Letters they can have as per the Charter (Classifications of Family Membership and Literature, B.1, Charter, p. 358).
Q: Do we count new disciples on the TRF as soon as they move in or after they have completed their six first months?
A: At the Summit it was decided to count new disciples as Home members as soon as they move into the Home. This provides a more accurate account of who exactly is residing in the Homes.
Q: (From a continental office:) We've had a situation come up recently with a brother who left the Family, but is now intending to rejoin another CM Home, while still having outstanding liabilities to his former Home. At the time he left the Family, he could no longer be held accountable to pay the liabilities he owed. However, just a couple months after having left the Family, he is rejoining as a new disciple in a different CM Home — completely free of any debts owed to his previous Home. We know the Charter clearly specifies that a new disciple joining should be free of debts, so do these debts or liabilities owed to the CM Home he was in when leaving the Family apply?
A: This brother who left the Family still having a debt with his former Home, is still under the Charter rule stating that a new disciple joining must be free of debts. If a member leaves the Family owing a debt, he should pay it back before rejoining. This includes debts or liabilities to another Home (unless his former Home had by a two-thirds majority vote outright forgiven him the debt at the time he left, in which case he is not obligated to repay the debt whether he rejoins or not.)
Or, the rejoining member could try to make an arrangement with his former Home — provided the new Home is in agreement — to pay off the debt in installments while in his new Home, rather than having to forgo rejoining the Family until it is paid.
Q: A new disciple completed his first six months in the Charter Home, but on the last day the Home conducted a final vote of confirmation as per the Charter, and the new disciple was not confirmed as a Home member. Is this final vote of confirmation a Charter requirement?
A: At the last Summit it was resolved that the final decision on whether a new disciple should become a Home member or not should be determined by the majority of a Home's voting members, and therefore in the Procedures for Accepting New Disciples into a Charter Home, F (Charter, p. 184), it states that a new disciple would need to receive a majority vote of confirmation from the Home council before becoming a voting member of the Home. However, to ensure new disciples won't be taken advantage of for their material possessions if the Home does not vote them in as Charter members after six months, point D has been added to the Charter as follows:
D. Upon moving into a Charter Home, a new disciple must list his or her assets (cash and personal possessions) using the Asset Declaration for New Charter Members (p. 367; [the form referred to is actually entitled Personal Possession Declaration for New Charter Members]). The assets listed on this declaration will remain his or her property to take with them should he or she decide to leave before completing six months in the Family, unless they choose to leave some of these assets with the Family (p. 183).
Q: According to the Charter we can read selected CM material with catacombers at the teamwork's discretion, but in Charter Questions and Answers — Part Two (FSM 287), in the answer to question 64, it was explained that this meant selected materials from CM/FM pubs. But in LNF 254 about Feast mailings for partial excoms, etc., it mentions again that live-outs and catacombers are eligible to read CM lit at the Home at the teamwork's discretion. The question is whether this overrides the explanation in FSM 287, that live-outs and catacombers can only read selected CM/FM pubs. Would you be able to please clarify this for us?
A: In the revised Charter in the Classifications of Family Membership and Literature, C. Live-Out/Catacomb Members (p. 359), we have clarified that they may read CM/FM publications at the teamwork's discretion, as well as older CM lit which FMers can read, but not new CM GNs and other CM-only pubs. Most of the pubs that come out nowadays are CM/FM, so it doesn't seem necessary that a live-out member would need to read new CM-only lit. However, if you feel your live-out member needs to read new CM lit, then please write your CRO office for special permission.
Here's what the Charter says:
C. LIVE-OUT/CATACOMB MEMBERS:
Eligible for the following publications:
GP and DFO publications. Certain CM/FM publications, as well as older CM publications which FMs are eligible for (see list on page 358), at the entire Home teamwork's prayerful discretion. (Permission to read other CM publications can be granted by WS leadership in special cases, and these may be taken off the Charter Home's premises at the Home teamwork's discretion.)
Q: I visit my parents in a nearby city where there is a CM Home. In the same city there are a couple of live-outs that we have known personally for over seven years. We've been seeing them regularly and feeding them all these years, and they stay in touch with us and help to support us. But it has been a bit more sensitive now that a Home is opening there, as they also want to minister and receive their support. They meet these live-outs regularly, and they receive a regular pledge from them as well.
This particular live-out couple is not so close to the Family Home there and finds it hard to open up to them. It's not that the brethren in this Home are not sweet. To the contrary, they are very sweet, but it's just that somehow they don't click so well.
So far ministering to this couple has not been an insurmountable problem, but it has been sensitive at times, as the Home there has special needs, too, and wishes they could benefit from their services more.
Having lived in that city for many years before, there are just so many sheep and contacts that we know and love dearly and would like to still stay in touch with. We have passed on all of the contacts to the Home there, but are now finding it sensitive when we want to meet any of them. So personally, I feel it would be good to have some allowance for such situations. Could this be arranged?
A: This is a slightly different scenario than was talked about in Charter Amendment No. 40, Dividing of Family Contacts Between Homes, in LNF 257, since you all were never part of the same Home; nevertheless, it seems that the same principles put forward in that amendment would apply. We trust that it will provide a means for you and the Home in the city to come to a loving and workable solution in ministering to and receiving support from your friends. Please see Amendment No. 40 in LNF 257, as well as Right of Mobility, A.2 and A.3 in the reprinted Charter (pp. 39-42).
Q: (From a continental office:) Some Homes and Family members have given the Charter to some of their friends, even to some who have only recently met the Family. The Charter is classified as DFO, however are there any guidelines concerning giving the Charter to non-Family members?
A: We asked the Lord who could read and receive the Charter, and following is the counsel we received:
(Dad speaking:) Praise the Lord for the Charter! It's such a victory, such a clear sound of the trumpet for all to know the Lord's will and way for His people to act and live and work. It has proven to be a blessing to leaders, shepherds and sheep alike. Putting it out as a DFO pub was a wise thing to do, because it is good for your friends and your contacts and those studying you to know exactly what you believe, and what you won't stand for or allow to enter in amongst the sheep. The Charter shows conviction, strength, spirit and a willingness to live the way Jesus lived, and according to His commandments.
Don't be afraid to give it to your friends, because it's DFO. If someone from the GP is friendly and you consider him or her a friend, then you can give them the Charter. And if people are studying your group, you can give them the Charter. Sometimes you can even give it to the antagonistic and those that are doubtful, if the Lord so leads in a confirming prophecy, as the Charter can open their eyes and help them to become enlightened and even to become friends.
There is nothing in the Charter that we're not willing to stand behind and say that we believe. We live it, we do it and this is what we want for our people and for our children. So don't be afraid to share this constitution the Lord has given us. It is what we believe! It's what I built for many years and it's what you are continuing to build. It is a strong building with a good firm foundation, built on love, faith, caring, understanding and even sacrifice and willingness to give whatever it takes to be one of the Lord's missionaries and disciples.
I don't blame these people for wanting to give it out because they're proud of it. They know that it's the right way to live. They're saying, Here, this is the standard. This is what the Family is and what it stands for. I may fall short on some things, but I'm trying to live up to it. If you want to know how we live, why we live it and the way we live it, well, just read it right here in this Charter. God bless their faith! (End of message from Dad.)
In light of this prophecy, we are reclassifying Mama's Introduction: The Love Charter! — God's Call to a Love Revolution! ML #2963, from DO (CM) to DFO along with the rest of the Love Charter.
However, bear in mind that we did not print extra copies of the Charter to give to non-Charter members. Due to limited finances, we just printed enough for Charter members to have their own copy, as well as FM Homes who are returning to CM to obtain a copy. So extra copies for your friends are not available for ordering from your CRO Office, otherwise there won't be enough copies for new Charter members who would need one. So you could lend your copy to outside friends, or if they have a computer they could download it off of the GP Family Web site.
Q: Is it permissible to copy FTTs for other Family members? In general, what are the restrictions for copying Family tapes? People would like some clarifications as far as who certain tapes are for, who they can be played for, copied for, etc. This question came up as on each of the tapes it says that unauthorized copying is prohibited. Also, sometimes copies have been made for close friends, etc., and a question arose about what exact category the tapes come under, whether it is the same as literature or not.
A: It is permissible to make copies of Family tapes for other Family members. As we stated in the I'm Wondering section of Grapevine 22, we also see no problem with giving copies of the FTTs to outside friends, as what is on them should be suitable for most anyone. Please remember that Loving Jesus tapes are not FTTs, and certain songs on them may not be suitable for outside friends, so please be sure to pray and ask the Lord if it's OK to give Loving Jesus tapes or individual songs on them to certain sheep or friends.
Unauthorized copying would be defined in this case as mass duping these tapes without WS or CRO permission, as required in under Responsibilities of Continental Officers, H.1 (Charter, p. 157).
Q: (From a CRO:) Do we want to encourage former members or close friends of the Family to become FM? We receive a good number of requests from such folks who want to begin reporting as their own FM Home. We don't know much or anything about them, but on the basis of a letter from them and sometimes some sketchy information from a CM Home, we have to decide about making them FM; allowing them to receive all the CM/FM pubs, as well as being able distribute tools and represent the Family.
We want to be careful, as many do want to support themselves by distributing the tools, and their sample can affect the larger Family. Sometimes it's worked out well and the new FMs are a blessing, but in other cases we only found out later that there was a negative side. When we can, we encourage a CM Home to adopt them first as live-outs so that they can get to know them better, build their foundation in the Word and check out their level of dedication before we move them up into a higher membership category. We also pray and ask the Lord about each case, which of course is essential when you don't know so much.
A: A lot has to do with the vision or burden that the particular former member or friend of the Family has. Do they have a burden to serve the Lord and implement the general goals of the Family — preaching the Gospel to every creature and winning the world for Jesus? Even if they don't quit their jobs, do they still want to try to do what they can to help the Family to reach that goal? If so, then becoming a Fellow member is a concentric circle of discipleship that allows them to do that.
But if their vision were more just to be friends and supporters of the Family, then it would be better for a Home to encourage them to become live-outs. In situations where they are regularly fellowshipping with and tithing to the Home, and able to go out witnessing with the Home, live-out status is a good level for them. They can even read the CM/FM GNs at the Home, and get much of the latest Word. The Lord wants as many people as possible to benefit from and drink of the waters of the Word that He is pouring out.
Homes who have live-outs should feed their disciples the New Wine, which the Charter gives them eligibility to read, as soon as they are able to receive it — and many are able to take it much sooner than you think! Once they have had a foundation in the basics, then they are ready to take on more. Of course, some things are only for the ones who are part of the innermost circle of discipleship, who are able and ready to take the stronger meat.
If there are live-outs who want to go a step further and get the New Wine themselves so that they can read it at home, who want to take the next step towards becoming disciples, they can become Fellow members. Then, if they pass that grade and if they have the dedication and the desire, they can become Charter members.
Fellow member status is good for those who are not near a Home or able to regularly fellowship with a Home in order to get fed from the Word. If their only connection with the Word is through the Home, then if they can't go to the Home often, either because of the distance involved or for other reasons, then they're not going to get fed very often, and they're going to weaken spiritually. They should be encouraged to become Fellow members. The Word that they'll be receiving will strengthen them, even if they don't understand it all at first. There were a lot of things that you didn't understand either at first, and it took time.
As far as them being able to get out the tools, the Lord wants the message and the tools to get out, and He'll use anyone He can. Of course, there will be some problems and bad samples here or there, but in general, we feel the Lord will keep us. He will bless the pouring out of His Word.
Another thought regarding the distribution of the tools is that with the push into mass marketing, a lot of people or companies who don't represent the Family are going to be distributing our tools. In fact, if a Home can multiply their efforts by getting their live-outs and friends to help them distribute the tools, the more the merrier!
Copyright (c) 1997 by The Family