Assistant Vice President of the C&MA. · PDF file23.12.2009 · creating...

5/16/08

Dear Rev Dan Wetzel:

The Vietnamese District received a letter from you, and they claimed this letter was written from the National Office. Perhaps, you can tell me who wrote this letter. There are three (3)assumptions.

a) Would you please confirm this letter was written by you on National Office’s behalf? Or b) Is this just your opinions or comments regarding Long Beach church? Or c) Is this Kathy Taubeneck written on you behalf?

Whatever (a), (b), or (c) is NOT suitable or appropriate. Please hear me out:

If (a) from National Office, why there was no letterhead, signature and not even addressees. The most troublesome, Rev Dan Wetzel is not an official National Office’s representative. The true, Rev Wetzel, is an Assistant Vice President of the C&MA.

If (b) from Rev Wetzel’s comment or opinions, it most likely is acceptable. Since these were Rev Wetzel’s opinions or comments, they are not factual and accurate. Don’t we all what to know where is the TRUE?

If (c) from Kathy Taubeneck, is even more unsuitable and inappropriate.

Where is the true? Who is the writer? Why the Vietnamese District claimed it came from the National Office? Honestly, I do not know. However, I would like to relate to you all facts including documents so that you can make up your own mind.

Attached hereto is my comment regarding “this letter”. Please note bear false witness is notappropriate among believers and especially spiritual leaders!.

Respectfully,

Daniel Nguyen Rosemead, CA

of 54

Concerning Charges Relating to the Long Beach Vietnamese Church Thursday, May 08, 2008 The letterhead is an original copy sent to US and Canada’s pastors. It’s a sole purpose to show the source of this letter. Daniel is not a pastor or a C&MA worker. Daniel’s Commentary:

1. The unhappy members of the Vietnamese congregation as stated above is an improper and distorted description of the case as described in the press release which describes the action taken by the Vietnamese District against the Vietnamese C&MA Church at Long Beach, CA. For reference, here is the current press release: http://reversion-clause.com/ We were fine and happy until:

• 9/12/07- Vietnamese District Superintendent, Rev Tai Nguyen, wrote a 4

page letter defaming our senior pastor, Dr. Nha Tran. (see attachment #A)

• 10/7/07- The C&MA refused to respond to our senior pastor’s request for a disciplinary action against Vietnamese DS, Rev Tai Nguyen’s letter. Even though, there were two direct parties that were verified and confirmed those allegations of the DS’s letter were incorrectly reported (see attachments #B and #C)

• November and December 2007, Vietnamese DS frequently visited our

church as an uninvited guest. Vietnamese DS, manipulated a few members

During the last week, pastors and members of the C&MA in various parts of both Canada and the United States have been receiving emails regarding actions taken by the Vietnamese District relating to the Vietnamese Alliance Church, Long Beach, CA. The charges contained in these emails arise out of recent disputes between some unhappy members of the Vietnamese congregation in Long Beach and the Vietnamese District Executive Committee. I am writing to correct possible misimpressions, and to provide a review of events pertinent to the charges contained in these emails.

of 54

creating difficulties for our senior pastor and a local church’s governance board. (There were numerous documented email/letter/minutes of these events in Vietnamese language)

• 3/28/08- Letter to Rev John Soper was acknowledged but there was NO

correspondence. (Attachment #D)

• 4/1/08- Letter to Rev John Soper was acknowledged but there was NO correspondence (Attachment #E)

• 4/12/08- Petition Letter to Rev John Soper was NEITHER acknowledged

NOR corresponded (Attachment #F)

• 4/13/08- Letter to Rev John Soper was promised to reply but there was NONE (Attachment #G)

• 4/20/08- There was NO written report directly from Rev Soper which he

repeatedly promised that he will respond during the private meeting (had audio recorded while church’s members met him on 4/19/08)

If you were a C&MA Long Beach Church member, would you be happy or unhappy to see the Godly pastor mistreated by the DS and the unresponsiveness from the National office?

2. Rev Dan Wetzel, Assistant Vice President of the C&MA, has NOT

contacted directly with the Vietnamese congregation in Long Beach. If Rev Wetzel has not listened to both side of participants or first hand witnesses, his provided information is (a) NOT biblically sound (b) not reliable and truthful. Furthermore, it is he who has borne false witness against us.

of 54

Daniel’s Commentary: Why did the C&MA Vietnamese District DEXCOM determine not to renew the ministry license of our senior pastor? (see attachment #H)

• What document are the “working protocol” documents that DEXCOM specified or have they ever discussed this issue them with Dr. Nha prior to this important decision?

• Were there any written reports of these violations prior to this important decision? And was there any reasonable time period given in order to rectify any problems that were allegedly discovered in order to preserve the unity of the Vietnamese church?

• Was there a thorough investigation of these violations as specified in C&MA manual?

• If the Vietnamese DEXCOM’s decisions were correct, why did C&MA Vice President Rev. John Soper voluntarily recommend the renewal of Dr. Nha Tran’s ministry license from another district?

Why did the Vietnamese DEXCOM meet with the entire congregation on 3/16/08?

• There was NO instruction to our senior pastor or our local governance board to execute or carry out the DEXCOM’s motions #23 and #24

Last February the District Executive Committee of the Vietnamese District determined not to renew the ministry license of the pastor of the Long Beach congregation. The Vietnamese District Superintendent subsequently met with the entire congregation (March 16, 2008) to explain the actions of the DEXCOM and to resolve internal difficulties. One week after that congregational meeting, the Vietnamese District Superintendent also met with the church’s governing board. The Director of Intercultural Ministries was present at that meeting of the board. This board meeting ended when the Vietnamese District Superintendent, in an exercise of the responsibilities of his office, conducted a vote of the church governing board to dissolve itself. Prior to the board’s vote, one dissenting member of the board, and one individual who was accustomed to attending board meetings but was not actually an elected member of the board, choose to leave the meeting. The vote to dissolve the church board was therefore taken in the absence of one member, but with a majority of the board present as specified in the Vietnamese District constitution. The board’s vote to dissolve was unanimous.

of 54

• Vietnamese DS ONLY worked with governance board Secretary, Mr. Le Minh Son whom repeatedly refused working together with other elected members.

• Vietnamese DS, Rev Tai Nguyen, showed NO respect to the local governance board and our local Constitution and Bylaws. (At this time we still were an accredited church)

(The entire dialogs and commotions of this meeting both audio and video were recorded in the Vietnamese language) Was the board voted to dissolve unanimously? This is a FALSE statement. Below is a comment from Mrs. Ai Nguyen, member at large, who was present in the “dissolved meeting” 3/22/08. Daniel’s Commentary: There was a subsequent meeting, but it was: (see attachment #I)

of 54

• NOT called by any procedures at all: NOT even local Constitution and by-laws or C&MA Manual.

• There was NO Meeting agenda prior to this meeting. • There was a motion from the DS, Rev Tai Nguyen, to revoke Vietnamese

Long Beach church charter (audio recorded available upon request). • There was NO vote.

Daniel’s commentary:

• The Rev Soper meeting on 4/20/08 was a cover up for Vietnamese DS, Rev Tai Nguyen. Since Rev Soper learned that our attorney, Mr. Kam, would be investigate the Vietnamese church’s illegal seizure and transfer of the church’s checking account. (see attachment #J) At this time, we do not know how the Vietnamese DS, Rev Tai Nguyen, placed his name in the Long Beach’s checking account.

• “The decisions of the Vietnamese DEXCOM and the Vietnamese District

Superintendent…” This is a FALSE statement. (There are minutes of this meeting.) There was ONE (1) member of the Vietnamese DEXCOM who was Rev. Tai Nguyen; unless you assume DEXCOM is Rev Tai Nguyen then it was a true statement.

At the request of the Superintendent of the Vietnamese District, the Vice President of Church Ministries conducted a second congregational meeting on April 20, 2008 in order to explain the vote that was taken by the church board and restore congregational authority. The decisions of the Vietnamese DEXCOM and the Vietnamese District Superintendent were also explained a second time, and questions were answered. Dissenting members of the church were permitted to make a motion to reinstate the former members of the church’s board. The Vice President put that motion to a vote, but the motion lost by nearly a two thirds majority.

After a full explanation of the consequences of a vote to place the congregation under the redevelopment policies of the Vietnamese District was given, a member of the congregation presented a motion to take this voluntarily action in order to resolve difficulties within the church and restore congregational health. Before a vote could be taken on the motion to request redevelopment, the dissident members of the congregation stalked out of the meeting. The motion to request the Vietnamese District Executive Committee to place the Long Beach congregation under its redevelopment policies was subsequently put to a vote. It passed overwhelmingly with only two negative votes, as reflected in the minutes of this meeting.

of 54

Daniel’s commentary: “…the motion to request the Vietnamese District Executive Committee to place the Long Beach congregation under its redevelopment policies…” This is a FALSE statement. (There were a minutes of this meeting.) There was ONE (1) member of the Vietnamese DEXCOM who was Rev Tai Nguyen; unless you assume DEXCOM is Rev Tai Nguyen then it was a true statement. Daniel’s commentary:

• The DS, Rev Tai Nguyen, has confiscated the Long Beach church funds. It’s not, a Vietnamese District, confiscated the church’s funds. Rev Tai Nguyen removed both authorized personnel who were on current WaMu’s signature card. This arrangement was executed inappropriately. There WAS NO letter from WaMu banks to inform their names were removed. At this time, HOW this transaction happened is still a mysterious matter to everyone.

• The significant amount was Twenty Four Thousand and Three Hundred

Dollars ($24,300). This amount was approved by the governing board (attachment #K). The amount was solely purpose for our senior pastor’s severance package. This was a compensation for our senior pastor’s Nine (9) months of his salary ($2,700 x 9 = $24,300.00).

• Please ask Vietnamese District or Nation Office, what have they done

financially for our senior when they decided dismiss our senior pastor from the Long Beach church? Please note, the DS, Rev Tai Nguyen, tempted our

Contrary to the assertions that have been broadcast, the Vietnamese District has not confiscated any funds belonging to the Long Beach Church. However, during an investigation of matters prior to the last congregational meeting, it was discovered that members of the dissident party had withdrawn a significant amount of money from church bank accounts without the authorization of either the standing church board or the Vietnamese District. Stop payment was placed upon these bank accounts in order to prevent additional unauthorized withdrawals. Further inquiries into the financial affairs of the church suggest that there are additional irregularities in the congregation’s financial records. However, a new treasurer for the congregation has been appointed and the church continues to control its own funds and bank accounts.

of 54

senior pastor with a compensation of 6 months; and he promised that he will negotiate with Simpson University for a second compensation of 6 more months if our senior pastor, Dr. Nha Tran, accepted his resignation. (This was audio-recorded on the 3/16/08 meeting). Our senior pastor, rightfully refused this obvious bribe.

• Now the DEXCOM has complete control over the Long Beach church’s

assets (tangible items: money and properties which in Matthew 6:19-24 indicated clearly where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal.) Sir, the DS and C&MA pastors, please carefully review and assess what did you do to our local Long Beach church made up of boat people. (a) Godly senior pastor lost his shepherd calling position because of Vietnamese DS, Rev Tai Nguyen’s personal hidden agenda; (b) Forty (40) or more members lost trust in God because of your abuse of spiritual authority and unwise decisions leading to unbiblical actions. Matthew 6:21 “for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also”. WHERE IS YOUR HEART? Lost souls or other people’s assets?

CONCLUSION: The C&MA admits to seizing the Vietnamese church’s bank account. In it’s fatally flawing reasoning, it submits that the bank robber is going to take the money from the depositors in order to protect and save the depositors from stealing their own money. Does anyone notice that there is something glaringly missing from the account attributed to Mr. Daniel Wetzel as to the true course of events regarding the Vietnamese church? Assuming that Mr. Wetzel’s account is even an accurate depiction of events [which we have already proved to be fraudulent], an obvious two questions remain.

(1) If, according the C&MA’s version of events that the Vietnamese church polity is now all in order, their report should show the date and amount of the $90,000 bank account returned to the Vietnamese C&MA church in Long Beach. So where is this information in the report to give it even an ounce of credibility?

(2) 100% of the blame is laid at the feet of the Vietnamese congregation, no responsibility is taken by C&MA leaders. They villainize the victims and

of 54

render the true villains as victims, then defame the messengers who caught them red-handed! It should be obvious to everyone that the C&MA’s self-serving version of events is a sham and disgrace to our Lord Jesus Christ. Christians should be of good report to the world. The C&MA has destroyed this by devouring and plundering its own people.

of 54

Attachment # A

of 54

TRANSLATION OF REV TAI NGUYEN’s LETTER IN VIETNAMESE ON SEPTEMBER 12, 2007

On behalf of the Vietnamese District and the Alliance Evangelical Divinity School, I would like to sendmy warmest greetings to you in the divine love of Jesus Christ.

In most instances, there is a cause for everything that happens, especially in this case of God’s work at theAlliance Evangelical Divinity School. There was certainly a good cause for the District Committee toremove Rev. Nha Tran according to the DS Minute on 7/2007/169 and to replace a number of pastorswho served at the School.

The reason that we barely raised the issue in the Minute, wherein only one sentence indirectly pointing tothe ministry of Rev. Nha Tran, was because we did not want to cause confusion within the churches, andthat we would explain further to those who would like to find out the real cause behind this decision. Wemainly wished that Rev. Nha Tran would understand our resolution and would continue to work amiablywith us. After that incident, despite the fact Rev. Nha Tran wrote letters dated 19/3/07 and 1/4/07 to hiscolleagues wherein he explained the situation—that seemed to benefit him alone, and possibly causedmisunderstanding—relative to the decision of the DEXCOM as the whole and myself alone, we stillbelieved that God knows everything and continued to remain patient.

However, these letters were mailed out more and more during the past 6 months; therefore, we’veconcluded that Rev. Nha Tran’s action was deceitful and caused division among the pastors, thus, wemust raise our voice in order to clearly explain the main cause that brought us to this decision.

Organization

a. The change in ministry and relocationIt is normal to make changes in the ministry and the relocation within our organization as it is in thereal world. The term of Rev. Nha Tran serving as the senior pastor at Long Beach church, whichends in January 2008, has not been mentioned. His term as the Academic Dean of the AllianceEvangelical Divinity School has ended according to the DEXCOM Miniute of 3/2004/154.

According to the mode operandi within the District, in order for a pastor to be reappointed in achurch, the church must write to the District requesting to reappoint the individual and that therequest must be approved by the DEXCOM. If the individual serves as Associate Pastor, the SeniorPastor must approve this reappointment. The same in a company, if a CEO does not wish to retain anemployee, the relocation will happen. This is in the case of Rev. Nha Tran at the AllianceEvangelical Divinity School.

b. External RelationshipRev. Nha Tran has gone beyond his authority of a pastor within the District, taking advantage of hisposition as the Academic Dean in order to contact directly with Simpson University, and throughthem he made connection with National Office of C&MA without going through the proper channel.This deceitful act has been going on for quite some time without my knowledge.

In the letter dated 19/3/07 and 1/4/07, Rev. Nha Tran portraits himself as an invitee to importantevents at Simpson University, The National Office of C&MA and Tin Lanh Church. However,according to the letter dated December 22, 06 (as per attached) from the President of SimpsonUniversity, Dr. Larry McKenney, Rev. Nha Tran is the focal point of this.

It states, “……..Dr. Nha has been instrumental in helping us reach this point, and his presence atthese meetings will help ensure their success. I respectfully request that you allow Dr. Nha time away

of 54

Daniel

Highlight

2

from his duties from Monday, January 8 to Friday, January 12 to take part in these meetings.” Thecontent of the letter from the President Gary Benedict’s secretary dated December 19, 2006 alsoshared the same context. Because Rev. Nha Tran has worked directly with these individuals withoutmy consent, therefore, they had to ask for my permission to allow him to take part in these meetings.Had I known or had granted my permission, they would not have written those letters. When Iunderstood the whole situation, I opened the door for him to pursue his desire as stated in the letter ofJanuary 19, 2006 that I had asked Rev. Nha Tran to forward to you.

c. This is the focal point of the matterRev. Nha Tran took advantage of his position at the Alliance Evangelical Divinity School and “wentin darkness.” As people called it “pirating,” Rev. Nha Tran stole the labor of those within the Districtwho have toiled to establish a good working relationship with the churches in Vietnam as well as theC&MA and claimed “credits” for himself. All the efforts in Bible teaching and theological educationat the School as well as the District’s financial and mental support have been muddied by hisexploitation. Rev. Nha has also created poor morale among the leaders in the US and those inVietnam who has just begun their ministry.

d. Evidence was shown at the Grand Celebration of the District Conference 30 years Anniversary inAzusa, Rev. Nha Tran and Mr. Nhiem Tran arranged for several members of Tin Lanh Church in VNto tour Simpson University in Redding, California, just before the opening day of the conference,which I did not become aware until the very last minute. This showed that while everyone wasworking hard to prepare for the Grand Celebration to thank the Lord for the 30 years the churcheswere being established, these two individuals had their own hidden agenda!

The C&MA leaders, who just took office—being naive of the background of immigrants and theVietnamese culture—immediately followed them without hesitation. As you might know, Dr. GaryBennedict won election in 5/05; Rev. Truong took office in 3/05, President McKenney took his post in2006, therefore, who would want to turn down the request to support 1 million of Vietnamese who are inneed for training!

However, these leaders had no clues that the VN District has silently built a bridge for over 32 years toconnect the C&MA and the churches in Vietnam that the majority of church members in Vietnammistakenly thought that the C&MA had abandoned them after 1975. The result of the District Conferenceand the Grand Celebration of 30 years is the crucial evidence to prove fruition of the efforts made by theVN District to the churches in VN, the C&MA, the Executive the Executive Committee of the Tin LanhChurch and the 46 former missionaries who once served in VN.

It would take a long time and lots of ink to describe in details what the VN District has done to help ourcountry; however, I would like to provide a few main points to reiterate the efforts the VN District hasmade.

A few activities that the District has done to the churches in VN

a. Right after the fall of 1975, many Vietnamese church members overseas had not only ferventlyprayed for the churches at home, they also showed their care in action by sending gifts to theirrelatives and pastors in VN. They still carried the culture and attitude of “a small amount while beinghungry is better than a large amount when full.” or “good leaf covers ragged leaf.” From then on, theVN District has sent their financial support up to hundred thousands of dollars to the countrywhenever allowed.

of 54

3

b. Opportunity to visit VN for the first time (1992). When the situation in the country was somewhatless tense, the late Rev. Tin Nguyen and I, along with 3 other leaders—Dr. Peter Nanfelt, the lateRev. Cliff Westergreen and Missionary Robert Reed visited VN for the first time. The delegationwent from the North to the Central and to the South bringing happiness and hope to both sides. Thereport and photos are still in tact, showing that the District had already demonstrated their interesteven before Rev. Nha entered into his ministry.

c. After that, many delegations from the US returned to VN, attending many church activities in thecountry. From that on, many church members have returned home.

d. Of course how can you help everyone or meet all the needs; however, our number one priority isgeared towards former pastors, widows, and pastors who are ill. We also raised funds to support thehurricane relief ($27,000 for 2 hurricanes in the Central Region and the South this past year). Theneeds to renovate churches or parsonage also capture our attention. While Rev. Tai and Rev. Ducwere visiting VN to celebrate the 90 years gospel came to VN and the dedication of the new church inDanang in 2001, The Central Office of Tin Lanh Church (South) needed to renovate the currentoffice. We borrowed $10,000 from a church member in VN and gave directly to the late PresidentPham xuan Thieu. When we learned that the Executive Committee of Tin Lanh Church neededtransportation, the District and the C&MA shared half and half of the expenses to purchase a brandnew car that the Executive Committee is currently using. Of course, I am unable to describe in thisletter the love and care we have for the churches at home. Why the church members in the US can dosuch thing? The answer is simple: Because the Vietnamese District recognizes that this is theresponsibility God has given us in that we still care for church members in VN whether they havetheir own leaders or not. History has proven that.

e. I believe everyone knows what the Alliance Evangelical Divinity School has done for VN, especiallyRev Nha and Pastor Nhiem have already participated. As soon as the Administrative Staff approvedthe establishment of training church leaders in the VN churches since the Bible College in VN stayedinactive for over 20 years, the Alliance Evangelical Divinity School began its work by choosing 15 to20 students to study God’s word, creating courses to benefit those who have the ability to learn andhave interest in serving churches at home. Even though the tuition was quite steep, 34 graduated atthe two commencements at a branch campus in Bangkok. There are two unfinished classes atpresent. The Alliance Evangelical Divinity School provided full scholarships to VN students whocame to Bangkok to study several weeks, at times a month. We’re thinking the next step would bethe pastors who have the ability and desire to attend those courses. Scholarship given by the AllianceEvangelical Divinity School includes round-trip airfares, transportation, tuition, hotel expenses andpocket money for daily expenses. I wanted to state in details so that you may see how much we carefor the churches in VN. Besides, there were thousands of students learning God’s word through theTheological Education by Extension and are now serving fruitfully in VN. It does not mattersomeone wanted to deny this achievement, the Lord already knows our hearts. However, Rev. Nhacompared himself to the notorious leaders who rescued the Israelites is something that none of uswould even dream of.

In summary, Rev. Nha had gone beyond his authority as an administrator of the Alliance EvangelicalDivinity School. He took upon himself to establish external relationship that must be approved firstby the District Committee. He made personal gain of the efforts and work labored for many years bychurch members within the District and the Alliance Evangelical Divinity School to buildrelationships with churches in VN. He has created misunderstanding and built tension between theDistrict and external constituents. This is evidenced when Rev. Truong refused to wear the gown andturned down the invitation to sit at honored seats during the Graduation Ceremony at the 30th AnnualConference. He repeated what Rev. Truong had said that, “no robe nor the honored seat on the stage

of 54

4

is worthy for me; therefore, I would not step up onto the stage.” To this date, I still do not knowwhere that statement came from? If Rev. Truong did say that, I have no idea…. is that a statement tocreate misconception and to establish a barrier between the VN District and the Executive Committeeof Tin Lanh Church?

Above are numerous reasons that rendered the decision to terminate Rev. Nha at the AllianceEvangelical Divinity School. If Rev. Nha would like to dispute the issues listed in this letter, I willarrange a time for him to meet with the DEXCOM.

Thank you all and please keep each other in prayers since there are many challenges as we approachthe end of time. (2Timothy 3:1-5).

Sincerely,

Rev. Tai, GHT

Cc:- District Board of Trustees- Pastors within the District- Students at Divinity School- Branches of the Divinity School- A number of church secretaries- Church Representatives all over the world- English version: sent to related individuals

September 17, 2007Translated byGloria DaoAssistant to ProvostMillersville Univeristy, PA

of 54

Attachment # B

of 54

October 26, 2007 Mr. Nhan Minh Chuong Vietnamese Evangelical Church of Long Beach 11922 Mac Duff St. Garden Grove, CA 92841 Dear Sirs, I am writing in response to your letter dated October 10, requesting information about Pastor Nha Tran and his involvement with Simpson University and A.W. Tozer Theological Seminary. 1: Did Dr. Nha act out of his own personal agenda in reaching out to and partnering Simpson University and the Tin Lanh Church in Vietnam. Did he initiate these contacts to achieve his own personal gain or benefit. Not to my knowledge. From the beginning Dr. Nha has acted at the request of others in this matter. The contact between the Tin Lanh Church and Simpson was initiated by the Tin Lanh leadership who came to Simpson in July 2005 of their own volition. I know this because these leaders have told me so on several occasions since then. I have observed only the highest motives and concerns from Dr. Nha; his primary objective is to serve the Evangelical Church of Vietnam and Simpson University. 2: Has Dr. Nha acted on behalf of or represented The Alliance Evangelical Divinity School or the Vietnamese District? Not in any of the occasions when we have worked together. 3: Have you or anyone contacted and/or informed the Vietnamese District Superintendent of the involvement in all of the various meetings throughout the past year? Do you know whether or not Dr. Nha requested permission or informed his District Superintendent prior to his participation in these meetings. I understood Dr. Nha had permission to assist us. This was based on Rev. Tai’s offer in February 2006 to make Dr. Nha available to help us develop a relationship with the Evangelical Church of Vietnam. Dr. Nha did not discuss this matter with me until he asked me to have Dr. McKinney to send a letter to Rev. Tai requesting he be given permission and release from his duties to attend a meeting in January in Colorado Springs. I assumed during that time that Dr. Nha was working with the full knowledge of Rev. Tai. Dr. Nha never told me that his activity for ECVN and Simpson was a secret, and he never asked me not to tell Rev. Tai about his work.

of 54

4: Do you have comments regarding his heart or character? Do I think Dr. Nha tried to take credit for the work of others or to seek his own glory in the process? Dr. Nha Tran is one of the most honorable and ethical Christian leaders I have had the privilege to work with. His spiritual maturity and passion is a strong encouragement to me and those who know him. He is quick to give credit where credit is due; I have heard him speak positively on many occasions about the work of the Vietnamese District, the Alliance Evangelical Divinity School, and Rev. Tai An Nguyen. I have never heard Dr. Nha speak in a self-serving or self-aggrandizing manner about his role at AEDS, in Vietnam, or with WAVAC. He sees these as opportunities to serve the Vietnamese Church and the Kingdom of God, and not as personal recognitions or honors. To the contrary, he is perhaps too reluctant to acknowledge his own valuable contributions. 5: What are the effects of Dr. Nha’s involvement in the partnership between Simpson University and the Tin Lanh Church? Nha’s role has been instrumental in helping us to develop and maintain the partnership. We could not do it without him. He is known and respected in Vietnam, and his credentials give academic credibility to the program in the eyes of our accrediting agency (WASC). His work of translation and his knowledge of academic administration is particularly useful in helping me shape the curriculum and finding suitable instructors. Dr. Larry McKinney, the President of Simpson University and Dr. Stanley Clark, the Provost, agree with this assessment. In sum, I can think of no reason why Dr. Nha’s contract as your pastor should not be renewed. Tozer Seminary will move ahead with our plans to develop the partnership with the Tin Lanh Church with Dr. Nha playing a key role in teaching and administering the program. We are truly grateful to the Vietnamese Evangelical Church of Long Beach for your support of this vital ministry. Pursuing God, Dr. Robb Redman Dean A. W. Tozer Theological Seminary Cc: Rev. Nguyen Anh Tai Dr. Tran Trong Nha

of 54

Attachment # C

of 54

A TRANSLATION OF THE LETTER OF REV THAI PHUOC TRUONG, PRESIDENT THE EVANGELICAL CHURCH OF VIETNAM (SOUTH)

* * * * * * * * * *

THE EVANGELICAL CHURCH OF VIETNAM (SOUTH) The General Church Assembly

155 Tran Hung Dao, 1st District, Ho Chi Minh City

Ho Chi Minh City, 06 November 2007 Mr. Nhan Minh Chuong, Treasurer The Executive Board of Long Beach Church RE: In response to letter from the Executive Board of the Long Beach Church On behalf of the Executive Committee of the Evangelical Church of Vietnam (South), we would like to send our greetings to the Church and its Executive Board in the grace and peace of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have received your letter dated October 10, 2007, asking for our assessment regarding the senior pastor of your church, Rev. Nha Trong Tran, whose work is linked to a number of activities within the Evangelical Church of Vietnam (ECVN) (South), the C&MA in USA, Simpson University and Vietnamese District of C&MA in the US. We regret that the incident between Rev. Tai Anh Nguyen and Rev. Nha Trong Tran had happened as it did not bring glory to God’s name but rather created uncertainty and misunderstanding amongst vast number of church members and leaders. This unpleasant occurrence perhaps could have been avoided, in particular the four-page letter prepared by Rev. Tai Anh Nguyen should not have been circulated all over the world. It would have been adequate had the issue been resolved at the local level within its own organization. Furthermore, various issues mentioned in the letter were grossly erroneous, which could have been validated beforehand, causing devastation to church leaders and God’s work within the ECVN and the C&MA in USA (for example the absurdity of the statement, “no robes or honored seats on the podium are worthy for me; therefore, I would not set foot on stage” in accusing that Rev. Truong Phuoc Thai once said, and the allegation made by Rev. Tai Anh Nguyen, “If Rev. Truong Phuoc Thai made that statement, I have no comment.”) It would have been much better if either Rev. Tai Anh Nguyen or the Executive Committee of the Vietnamese District had confirmed the validity of that statement with us prior to writing the letter—as exemplary set by the Executive Board of the Long Beach Church.

of 54

2

Our wish was to remain silent because we trust that God’s intervention is significant. Moreover, public reaction to this letter is more than enough; however, we now must face the questions raised by the Executive Board of the Long Beach Church to verify the truth of the above:

1. The ECVN made connection with Simpson University in Redding and the C&MA in Colorado Springs based on the needs of the ECVN rather than Rev. Nha Trong Tran’s deception to achieve his personal gain.

2. In Rev. Nha’s working relationship with the ECVN, the C&MA in USA and Simpson

University, he has never acted on someone’s behalf, the Alliance Evangelical Divinity School or the Vietnamese District. Because the ECVN (South) has the ability to directly contact the C&MA and Simpson University, it is not necessary to go through the Vietnamese District of C&MA or a middleman to invite the C&MA and Simpson University to visit Vietnam and vice versa.

3. Before our official visit to the C&MA in USA in January 2007 in response to the

invitation of Dr. Gary Benedict, we came to visit the District Superintendent Rev Tai Anh Nguyen; Rev. Nha Trong Tran and Pastor Nhiem Thai Tran were also present and; thus, our official visit was known by Rev. Tai because it was made public and nothing was a secret.

4. In the occasions when we have worked with Rev. Nha, we believe that Rev. Nha has

no intention of “fighting for credits” or “making profits” for himself since our common goal is to promote God’s work, particularly the ECVN in Vietnam. The fact that someone is thinking in terms of “stealing credits” or “claiming credits” has created a heartbreaking situation that we are now facing.

5. Thanks God, after 30 years of facing adversity, the work of God in Vietnam is now

stabilized and developed. After so many years of interruption, the ECVN and the C&MA in USA have reconnected the affiliation to sustain God’s work in Vietnam. This is something that all of us must give thanks to God rather than displaying an attitude of jealousy or questioning why this was done by this individual and not the other. “For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.” (Acts 5:38-39). I would like to thank God and all of you who have supported God’s work in Vietnam during the past.

May God bless the Senior Pastor, the Executive Board, and all members of the church at Long Beach. Sincerely in Christ, Rev. Truong Phuoc Thai, President The Evangelical Church of Vietnam (South)

of 54

Attachment # D

of 54

of 54

Daniel

Copy

of 54

Daniel

Text Box

Khong dong y va khong co ky ten

Attachment # E

of 54

Print http://us.f817.mail.yahoo.com/dc/launch?.rand=b8j3pb2mnjnfn

1 of 1 4/3/2008 8:37 AM

From: Daniel Nguyen ([email protected])To: John SoperDate: Tuesday, April 1, 2008 10:22:40 AMCc: [email protected]; Cummings, Tim; Dan Wetzel; Chuong Nhan; ThienAi Baui; Tai Anh Nguyen; Ha Ho; Nghia Van Nguyen; Minh Thien Tran; Phien Thanh NguyenSubject: My Great Concern of Vietnamese Long Beach's Situation

Dear Rev John Soper:

Please read an attachment regarding my great concern of Vietnamese Long Beach's situation. Should youhave any questions or comments please do not hesitate to contact or reply.

Thank you in advance for your prompt response.

Daniel Nguyen562-301-7231

ps This attachment will be circulated among Vietnamese District's churches within 24 hours. If I do not hearany official response from your office within 72 hours, this attachment will be released to Mr. James Sundquistfor a public domain. PLEASE and PLEASE do not put in into this situation. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of theintended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, you should delete this message from your system without copying or forwarding it. Any use, disclosure, printing, copying, ordistribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, by anyone other than the intended recipient, is strictly prohibited.

of 54

Daniel

Rectangle

3/31/08


Reference: Your email dated 19 March 2008 (attached)

Subject: The District Superintendent did not say… but it’s in writing

Your emailed wrote: “The District Superintendent did not say that he stripped the church of its by-laws. That I cannot understand unless those by-laws were somehow in conflict with the District or C&MA Uniform Constitution for churches. In any case, I am sure that if it was his intention to supercede local by-laws, Dr. Tai will offer a complete explanation in the very near future. A local church does have the right to institute by-laws (by congregational vote) that are not in conflict with the District and national regulations”

The DS may forget frequently what he said, but we have it in writing. Attached is a letter from Rev Tai for your reference. Below is a partial from that letter:

(Rough translation) “All meetings of our governing board MUST be called and presided by DEXCOM. Otherwise, meetings are invalid”. (See attachment for full version).

There are few issues with this reasoning: (a) Was NOT mentioned in neither District’s bylaws nor C&MA Manual. (b) It would be expensive meeting just for one (1) church since there are few DEXCOM’s members are out of state of California. Especially, there are few churches in Vietnamese District. How could DEXCOM function efficiently with this thinking? (c) Since DEXCOM meets quarterly, how our church’s business conducts in between?

Secondly, what would you do when our DS failed to follow your instructions time after time as you wrote in your email:

Our DS, Rev Tai Nguyen, certainly neither empowered nor assisted our governing board. Rev Tai DID abolish the governing board and appointed the interim advisor. What would you do, Rev John Soper, when your subordinate deliberately fails to follow instructions to the letters? There is something wrong in this picture, don’t you think?

of 54

Thirdly, our congregation is waiting for Rev Tai Nguyen’s a complete explanation for supersede our local governing board. Are you sure and certain regarding this issue as you mentioned in your email? Be advice, we need your immediate response or instructions how should we operate and manage weekly activities from now until your meeting on 4/20/08.

There is a division within our church.There are two (2) different church’s leaderships.

There is an old saying “where there is no clear vision (direction) people will perish”. Would you PLEASE provide us clear instructions NOW or let the people perish?

Sincerely,

Member-at-large, Daniel Nguyen

of 54

Print http://us.f817.mail.yahoo.com/dc/launch?.rand=8t686nrsljf2d

1 of 4 3/19/2008 11:02 AM

From: Chuong Nhan ([email protected])To: Daniel Nguyen; Thien-Ai Nguyen; [email protected]: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 9:15:57 AMSubject: FW: 2nd letter to VP of Church Ministry

From: Soper, John [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 9:11 AMTo: Chuong NhanCc: Kong, Joe; Tai Nguyen; Wetzel, DanSubject: RE: 2nd letter to VP of Church Ministry Dear Brother Chuong, I have spoken with Rev. Joe Kong who is the director of intercultural ministries and he has been in touch with yourSuperintendent who has assured us that he is only trying to help your congregation through a transition period. Youre-mails to me suggest a very different understanding of what is happening at Long Beach . Rev. Kong will be inCalifornia this week and will attempt to further clarify what is happening there. He is already scheduled to preach atanother church on Sunday but I am sure that he will be available at another time to at least interact with you. His e mailaddress is [email protected]. As a superintendent for more than a decade, it does not surprise me that Dr. Tai Nguyen visited your church anattempted to explain to the congregation the actions of the Dexcom in the matter of your pastor. As a superintendent,that is exactly what I would have done. Whether or not that explanation was self serving or helpful, I cannot judge, but Iwould also have made some kind of statement. The District Superintendent did not say that he stripped the church of its by-laws. That I cannot understandunless those by-laws were somehow in conflict with the District or C&MA Uniform Constitution for churches. In anycase, I am sure that if it was his intention to supercede local by-laws, Dr. Tai will offer a complete explanation in thevery near future. A local church does have the right to institute by-laws (by congregational vote) that are not in conflictwith the District and national regulations. It is certainly true that in the absence of a local pastor, the District Superintendent does fill the role as thechairman of the governance authority. That is fully in accordance with C&MA governing documents and polity. Heworks closely with local leadership to help in the transition period and to supervise the governance authority as they dotheir work. In every case however, the DS will work not to supercede the local leadership but to empower and assistthem. It would be very normal to appoint the Board Secretary to function as the contact person unless the governanceauthority had a duly elected vice chairman. If the current secretary is not the preferred person to represent you then ifthe full board were to vote in a different vice chair, I am sure that the DS would attempt to work with that individual. I have asked Rev. Kong to communicate with the Superintendent (who is not planning to be at your church thisweekend) to see how he can help in this situation. I am assuming that your communication with me is with the fullawareness of the governing board and in accordance with their collective wishes. You may be sure of my prayers for the church during this difficult period. Your servant in Christ, John F Soper

From: Chuong Nhan [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 5:09 PMTo: Soper, JohnCc: Wetzel, Dan; [email protected]: RE: 2nd letter to VP of Church Ministry March 18, 2008

of 54

Daniel

Highlight

Daniel

Rectangle

Daniel

Highlight

Daniel

Highlight

Daniel

Highlight

Daniel

Accepted

Daniel

Copy

Daniel

Rectangle

Daniel

Accepted

of 54

Daniel

Rectangle

Daniel

Accepted

Daniel

Copy

Attachment # F

of 54

Attachment # G

of 54

Print http://us.f817.mail.yahoo.com/dc/launch?.rand=82fv1a2ch1q29

1 of 2 5/13/2008 11:41 PM

From: Daniel Nguyen ([email protected])To: Soper, JohnDate: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 12:44:41 AMCc:Benedict, Gary; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Wetzel, Dan; Cummings, Tim; Peter Kam; Stuart Lark; Tai Nguyen; Kong, Joe; Wetzel, DanSubject: Re: VECLB's Governance Authority is no longer in Existence...WHY? and HOW?


If you don't mind, I would rather have your response in written this weekend. Would you please have yourresponse letter to me either on Saturday or Sunday? As always, your understanding and cooperation aregreatly appreciated.

Daniel Nguyen

----- Original Message ----From: "Soper, John" <[email protected]>To: Daniel Nguyen <[email protected]>Cc: "Benedict, Gary" <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected];[email protected]; [email protected]; "Wetzel, Dan" <[email protected]>; "Cummings, Tim" <[email protected]>; Peter Kam <[email protected]>; Stuart Lark <[email protected]>; Tai Nguyen <[email protected]>; "Kong, Joe" <[email protected]>; "Wetzel, Dan" <[email protected]>Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 7:18:06 AMSubject: RE: VECLB's Governance Authority is no longer in Existence...WHY? and HOW?

Dear Mr. Nguyen, I will be at your church next weekend and will deal with these issues at that time.Thank you for your patience.JF Soper

From: Daniel Nguyen [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 6:20 PMTo: Soper, JohnCc:Benedict, Gary; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];Wetzel, Dan ; Cummings, Tim ; Peter Kam; Stuart LarkSubject: VECLB's Governance Authority is no longer in Existence...WHY? and HOW? Dear Rev John Soper:

I perplex and confuse regarding your email dated 4/12/08. Attached is my letter regarding the above issue. Thank you for your explanation and prompt response.

Daniel Nguyen CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of theintended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intendedrecipient or the person responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, you should delete thismessage from your system without copying or forwarding it. Any use, disclosure, printing, copying, or

of 54

Daniel

Rectangle

Daniel

Highlight

Daniel

Highlight

Daniel

Highlight

Daniel

Highlight

4/13/2008 Dear Rev John Soper: Ref: Your email dated 4/12/08 (Attached) Subject: Local Governance Authority No Longer in Existence Here is an insert:

Our local congressional voted for our governance authority in January 2008. I would like to know what references that you have concluded that our governance authority is no longer in existence.

• If you reference to the meeting 3/22/08, I challenged the invalidity of this meeting (see attachment). To date, I HAVE NOT received your direct answer.

• If you reference to C&MA Manual or the Policy and Procedure for Districts and

Churches, I would like to know in what section and page number. Our Rev Tai Nguyen’s mistake was to abolish the governance authority as I described in attached letter since it DOES NOT meet the C&MA Manual which required 2/3 elected member votes. Unfortunately, now you acknowledge our local authority governance is no longer in existence. Would you please explain to us WHY and HOW? Thank you for your time. Respectfully Yours, Daniel Nguyen

of 54

Daniel

Daniel_Sig

Daniel

Text Box

(Validity)

Daniel

Highlight

Subject: RE: Request for a group meeting Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 06:07:05 -0600 From: [email protected] To: [email protected] CC: [email protected]

Dear Friends,

I have been at a district conference for the entire week and did not have access to my e mail until yesterday. I apologize for the tardiness of my response to an earlier e-mail. First, my experience in situations like this has been that in large group meetings it is very difficult for me to hear from all of the people who wish to speak- some are reluctant to speak and others tend to dominate discussion. My preference therefore is always to meet with individuals. I will be happy to stay as late into the evening on Saturday as necessary to accommodate all of the adults who wish to speak with me. I am also willing to meet with married couples together if that would help to ease the time problem. There will be someone available to translate so language should not be an insurmountable problem.

Second (in response to an earlier e mail) since all of the previous board members will have the opportunity to meet with me individually, and since the board is no longer in existence, I see no reason to meet separately with that group. (I also will not meet with the existing steering committee) My great desire here is to make certain that every single member has the right to speak to me one-on- one. I strongly believe that each member has the right to be heard.

I look forward to being with you next weekend and am praying that God will give us a clear path to a solution for the Long Beach Church.

Sincerely,

JF Soper

of 54

Daniel

Highlight

Daniel

Copy

Daniel

Highlight

of 54

Daniel

Copy

Dear Rev John Soper: Subject: Meeting 3/22/2008 is INVALID

1) Was not called by the chairman (our Senior Pastor terminated) 2) Was not called by written request of one-half on the governance authority membership 3) Removal of elected member requires two-third majority vote of the governance authority 4) Was not in the best interest of our church

Would you please review and reply to our church at earliest of your convenience. Thank you for your support and prayer. Sincerely, VP & Treasurer, Nhan Minh Chuong

Member-at-large, Daniel Nguyen

of 54

Daniel

Text Box

3/28/08

Daniel

Highlight

Attachment # H

of 54

A translation of the motions #23&24 of the Minutes 01/2008/173 Vietnamese DEXCOM (February 16-20, 2008)

“Saturday morning, February 16, 2008, the DEXCOM held a meeting with Rev Tran Trong Nha, from 9Am to 5PM, with the presence of Rev Joe Kong, Director of Intercultural Ministries of C&MA, to present and discuss what has happened in the Vietnamese District so far. After Rev Tran Trong Nha and Rev Nguyen Anh Tai had opportunities to present all details of the issue, DEXCOM spent time to discuss all aspects of the issue and invited Rev Tran Trong Nha to come back again to find the most appropriate solution for the issue in order to give all glory to God and bring peace to the whole Vietnamese District.”

Motion #23: “Considered that Rev Tran Trong Nha violated working principles/protocol, constituted authority, and district jurisdiction, now decide not to renew his license from the date of this minutes on.”

Motion #24: “Decide to introduce Rev Tran Trong Nha to another district to pursue his ministry at Simpson University. The Vietnamese District will try to support his new ministry.”

of 54

Daniel

Highlight

Daniel

Highlight

Daniel

Highlight

Attachment # I

of 54

(Translation)MINUTES OF THE GOVERNING BOARD MEETING

The Governing Board of the Long Beach Church was called to order at 8pm on March 22, 2008, at the District Office under the directive of the Vietnamese District Superintendent (DS) Rev. Nguyen Anh Tai. Present: Rev. Nguyen Anh Tai, DS; Mr. Le Minh Son, Secretary; and Mr. Nguyen Van Hao, Member-at-large. Mrs. Nguyen Bui Thien Ai, Member-at-large and Rev. Joseph Kong, Director of Intercultural Ministries of the C&MA District; and Rev. Ho The Nhan, Assistant to DS. Mr. Nhan Minh Chuong, Treasurer, was in attendance at the beginning of the meeting; however, he left the meeting after challenging the authority of the DS and rejecting the District By Laws. After scripture reading prayers, the following motions were rendered:

1. Due to a number of the Long Beach Governing Board members refusing to submit under the authority of the DS and the District By Laws, and since the LB Church’s Governing Board has not performed its duties properly, the remaining members of the Governing Board have agreed with the DS to revoke the existing Long Beach church’s governing board members.

2. Rev. DS has designated a Counseling Board to temporarily work directly with him. This Counseling Board includes Mr. Le Minh Son, Mr. Nguyen Trong Hao, and Mr. Nguyen Vo Hien Tai.

3. Based on motion #1 above, Mr. Nhan Minh Chuong must surrender all financial information of the church to the DS effective this date.

4. The DS has appointed Mr. Nguyen Trong Hao to serve as Interim Treasurer of the Long Beach Church until new arrangements can be decided upon.

5. The Long Beach By Laws are illegal because the document has not been voted for approval at a church conference nor officially reviewed or accepted by the District Executive Committee.

Respectfully Submitted, Rev. Nguyen Anh Tai, DS Rev. Joseph Kong, Director of ICM Rev. Ho The Nhan, Assistant to DS Mr. Le Minh Son, Secretary Mr. Nguyen Hao, Member-at-large Mrs. Nguyen Bui Thien Ai, Member-at-large no signature due to disagreement

of 54

Attachment # J

of 54

Attachment # K

of 54

VIETNAMESE EVANGELICAL CHURCH 3749 East Wilton Street Long Beach, CA 90804

Tel & Fax: (562) 985-3055 Email: [email protected]

BIÊN BẢN PHIÊN HỌP BẤT THƯỜNG BAN CHẤP SỰ

Thứ Năm ngày 13 tháng 3 năm 2008 �

Ban Chấp Sự của Hội Thánh Tin Lành Long Beach đã họp phiên họp bất thường vào lúc 8:00 PM ngày 13 tháng 3 năm 2008, dưới sự triệu tập của đa số thành viên BCS dựa theo Hiến chương HTLB. Hiện diện gồm có: Chấp sự Nhan Minh Chương, Chấp sự Nguyễn Bùi Thiên Ái, Chấp sự Nguyễn Quốc Hưng Vắng mặt: Chấp sự Lê Minh Sơn, và Chấp sự Nguyễn Hào. Sau khi đã thảo luận về việc Ban Chấp Hành Giáo Hạt không cấp chứng minh thư cho Mục sư Trần Trọng Nha và vì thế đã ngưng chức vụ Mục sư Quản nhiệm HTLB của ông. BCS tuân phục theo biểu quyết của BCH GH. Ban Chấp Sự đã thảo luận và đi đến biểu quyết sau:

• Đồng ý giúp phụ cấp cho Mục sư Trần Trọng Nha trong vòng 9 tháng ($24,300.00), cho đến hết năm 2008. Vì BCS đã đồng ý và hơn 2/3 HT đã thông qua lưu mời Mục sư Trần T Nha làm Quản nhiệm HT trong nhiệm kỳ 2 năm, nhưng vì đây là quyết định hoàn toàn vế phía GH, nên BCS thấy cần phải bày tỏ lòng cảm ơn cũng như đền bù của HT cho đầy tớ Chúa một cách hợp tình, hợp lý và hợp pháp.

Buổi họp kết thúc vào lúc 9:00 PM cùng ngày.

Chấp sự Nhan Minh Chương Chấp sự Nguyễn Bùi Thiên Ái

Thủ Quỹ BCH Nghị Viên BCH

Chấp sự Nguyễn Quốc Hưng

of 54

Daniel

Text Box

A Signed copy is filed, available upon request.

Assistant Vice President of the C&MA. · PDF file23.12.2009 · creating...

Documents

Transcript of Assistant Vice President of the C&MA. · PDF file23.12.2009 · creating...