As I understand non-profit accounting SOP and IRS tax regulations, the pledges (if the branch office is notified of them - I'll have to re-read the letter) would consitute "income" and would have to be treated as such at the time the pledge is made. If the congregation fails to live up to the pledge, those amounts must be written off in a manner similar to bad debt. If the pledges are NOT reported officially to the branch office, as I understand it no income would be recorded except for actual contributions being transmitted/sent in.
As for the loans, previously they would have had to be carried on the books as loans receivable assets. If the loans were forgiven, then the receivable balances would have been written off as allowances, contributions (most likely), or bad debts (which they really aren't - this is the result of a policy change). Once these assets are gone off the books, this would relieve the organization of some kinds of jurisdictional property tax reporting requirements (which they probably do not owe taxes on but are required to report nonetheless).
So, just thinking out loud, it kind of looks like the organization just cut down the size of their tax/income/regulatory radar signature to something much less detectable. I wonder if that's the overarching strategy at play here. For sure there must be an angle. What it is will become clear very soon, I think.
CC