strawberry wrote:

---

LACNAC,

I am in total agreement. In fact, I am in agreement 200%. That's right. The little guys, who are the majority in number, who are actually obeying slavishly, and who are giving their 10% offering religously are NOT white men;  however, it is the white men who got credit for it, not the little people who actually made up the church. Their pictures are forever imprinted in the history of the NAC. You are right. Just look at the demographics. Where are pictures of non-white members, the majority who contributes to the existence of this church? 

I was making a point about power control, not demographic. The picture represents showed who held most of the power  and get most of the credit in this church. It doesn't matter how much women give of themselves in this church. Future generation will never see their pictues or know of their existance and contributions.

I am curious - What professional reseach journal provided these numbers? Who gathered these data for what organization to publish? I question all data coming from an NAC sources. There is a great deal of deception among NAC administration brothers. Suggestions and criticisms are not welcomed in the NAC, especially if you are a woman - no one cares what you have to say if you are a woman. A woman has to be represented by a  man for your voice to be heard.

Are these data evidence-based or collected via word of mouth from administration brothers? I am interested in looking the research method to collect, analyze, and interpret the dated collected. For the record, my membership was counted 4 times. I checked this out 15 years ago.
  

While I can't verify the accuracy of the data, my understanding is it's based on "members on the books". Even if the numbers aren't exact, clearly from a percentage basis, the membership demographic of the NAC is not white. Also, I thought further about you original comment about the picture posted. While I didn't disagree that the "powers that be" were of white european background, I think drawing that conclusion from the picture is erroneous. The picture was taken from around 1916 in New York. I would speculate that if you gathered the attendees of a synagogue in NY from the same time period and took their picture, the demographic/ethnic appearance would be quite similar. Again, not disputing that clearly the head of the NAC, as well as many of the "powers-that-be" are caucasian european males.  Also though, the "head" of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America is Bishop Mark S. Hanson (see picture below). He is also the president of the Lutheran World Federation (an interchurch organization of 140 churches. The head of the Roman Catholic church is Pope Benedict XVI (see picture below).

Mark Hanson

 

Pope

So, obviously the Lutheran and Catholic church are "white men" churches too.

deaconess wrote:

---

Current Jan. 2012 statistics show that 79% of the members are from Africa.    Only 21% of the District Apostles (the men who rule the church) are from that continent.  

While that clearly doesn't surprise me, I think it's definitely a case of the Golden Rule. The one with the gold rules. I do not mean this from an arrogance standpoint but I don't think the NAC, or any Christian church for that matter, would as a general rule be self-sustaining in most third world countries. They generally require, if nothing else, some "capital" assistance. Now whether or not along with capital/monetary assistance should also come "governance" is clearly a different issue.