SecretWarrior
01-22-2008, 03:32 PM
Date: January 21, 2008
To: Ministers of the South Texas District
From: David K. Bernard, District Superintendent
I have received some inquiries about the upcoming meeting in Tulsa of the Worldwide Pentecostal Fellowship based on the mail-out that all of us received. I would like to give you some information from my perspective. There seem to be three basic reasons for this meeting:
1. Some are concerned about the recent resolution that allows television advertising and ministry. I have already written about this, so I won’t belabor the point. There is a legitimate concern that TV could be used in a detrimental way. I believe that we should carefully monitor the situation and take any corrective actions needed. While most of our churches will not be affected significantly, I have recommended some guidelines for any who contemplate the use of this media for evangelism. (See the January-February 2008 Forward, p. 6.) In short, I don’t believe the resolution itself is the main cause for the Tulsa meeting, but it has drawn attention to the more significant factors stated below.
2. Some would like to see different leaders and different leadership paradigms. While it is understandable that some would be frustrated because their vision has not been fully embraced, the proper way for apostolic brethren to address this desire is through our constitutional process of elections and resolutions by a majority vote of the constituency.
3. Some are concerned about a drift away from biblical positions on outward holiness. Both before and after the resolution passed, some characterized it as a referendum on holiness. I don’t believe it was a repudiation of our belief in holiness, however. It had more to do with advances of technology (which have caused many people to equate advertising/broadcasting on TV and Internet), desire for more evangelistic tools, and respect for the autonomy of the local church. While the resolution has not changed our Articles of Faith or our position of holiness, nevertheless I share the concern that some churches are drifting away from our historic stand on certain holiness issues. Thus I respect those who may go to Tulsa as a way of stating this concern.
Having said that, I don’t believe the Tulsa meeting is the best way to address the problem, because of some complicating factors:
1. It seems clear that the Tulsa conference organizers have decided to form a new ministerial organization called the Worldwide Pentecostal Fellowship (WPF). (Don’t confuse this with the Pentecostal World Fellowship, which is a cooperative body of the leading trinitarian Pentecostal organizations.) As the WPF mail-out shows, they have developed an extensive organizational structure and have selected the key leaders. It seems that the chosen form of government is oligarchy. The WPF website reveals that it already has its own Articles of Faith (which prohibit “soliciting television for ministry” but don’t prohibit TV advertising or unsolicited TV ministry). The WPF will parallel the UPCI’s efforts in such areas as Foreign Missions, Home Missions, Youth Ministry, Ladies Ministry, Education, and even Bible Quizzing. To fulfill this plan, the WPF will need to identify ministerial license in some way in order to qualify members, qualify officers, conduct votes, and enforce adherence to its Articles of Faith. However, the Manual of the UPCI states that its ministers cannot be licensed with another “organization or association” (Art. VII, Sec. 2, Par.
6). Thus, it appears that those who officially join the WPF will be choosing to leave the UPCI. Some of the organizers have already done so. While there is great value in conferences that promote holiness, I don’t believe the solution is to form a new organization.
2. I am concerned about the ethical approach of this new group. It doesn’t seem right for a group to send a mass mail-out to all the ministers of the UPCI that, in effect, solicits them to join a new organization. It is one thing to respond to requests for information, but it is another thing to actively promote a division through mail and phone calls and to bestow offices in advance. This problem is compounded in that the mail-out was sent not only to pastors but also to ministers who work under a senior pastor without first contacting that pastor. The practical result could be confusion or even division within local churches, which has already begun
to develop.
3. As a further concern, some ministers on the original mail-out did not give consent for their names to be used in this fashion. Others gave permission but did not intend to communicate that they are leaving the UPCI and forming a new organization, although that is the common perception of the mail-out. Some names have been removed from the website because of this problem, but others have not.
4. There was a similar meeting in our district, in Houston in 2006, organized by some of the same people. This meeting involved similar problems of names used without consent, advertising contrary to UPCI policy, and an agenda different from the stated purpose. At that time, statements were made about not supporting the UPCI Foreign Missions program and even leaving the UPCI.
How many are planning to leave the UPCI over these matters? No one knows for sure; it is anyone’s guess. After discussion with some district leaders, I estimate that 100 to 200 pastors and churches will leave. Some have said they will join the WPF, while others have said they will become independent. This number is significant, but to put it in perspective, the UPCI currently has about 4,500 churches and daughter works in the U.S. and Canada. Thus, it appears that about 96% or more of pastors will stay in the UPCI. It seems that the WPF will begin with an international constituency smaller than our district. Although it aspires to be a worldwide group, I haven’t yet seen any development of leadership among African-Americans, Hispanics, Asian-Americans, or nationals outside the U.S. and Canada.
By far, the state most affected will be California, where some are leaving in part because of the recent decision to make Southern California its own district. From what I have heard, in most other districts the number of pastors who plan to leave ranges from zero to ten. In our district, one pastor in the Gulf Coast Section has notified me that he is leaving. A few other pastors in our district have told me they plan to attend the Tulsa meeting but don’t plan to leave the UPCI. It does not seem that there will be a significant impact on either the South Texas District or the Texas District.
As district superintendent, I strongly affirm the Apostolic doctrine and lifestyle as stated in the UPCI Articles of Faith and as described extensively in the books I have written. Moreover, our District Board unanimously affirms this position. At the beginning of our district we established platform guidelines as a means of communicating our commitment to the outward expression of holiness, and we continue to work diligently to uphold this stance in our district and sectional meetings. In 2007, the District Board discussed extensively the need to emphasize these beliefs and practices in light of the drift in some areas. As one step, we scheduled guest preachers for the 2007 Family Camp who would strongly reaffirm our Apostolic identity. They did a good job, but unfortunately both have since become part of the formation of this alternative organization, thereby undercutting their own efforts and influence in our midst.
With all its perceived flaws, the UPCI is the greatest vehicle for Apostolic revival and evangelism in the world today. It is active in 179 nations and has about 28,000 churches worldwide. It is not equivalent to the body of Christ, but it is certainly a large part of the body of Christ. As such, I don’t want to harm the efforts of the UPCI, because in doing so I would harm the body of Christ and the cause of Apostolic revival worldwide. In my extensive travels across North America and around the world, I find that the vast majority of UPCI ministers want to maintain the Apostolic doctrine and the lifestyle of holiness, both inwardly and outwardly. Therefore, I believe it is more effective to exert a strong, positive influence for truth in cooperation with thousands of churches and with a balanced approach.
In summary, I appeal to all ministers to unite around the biblical message of holiness and not to compromise our historic identity. Let each of us remember that true holiness involves outward appearance and choices of entertainment, and it also involves attitudes, communications, ethics, fellowship in the body, and respecting spiritual authority. If some wish to attend the Tulsa conference in order to affirm our position of holiness, then I appreciate your sincere desire. At the same time, I urge you not to leave the UPCI but to help us maintain a strong, godly identity and help us sustain our momentum for growth.
To: Ministers of the South Texas District
From: David K. Bernard, District Superintendent
I have received some inquiries about the upcoming meeting in Tulsa of the Worldwide Pentecostal Fellowship based on the mail-out that all of us received. I would like to give you some information from my perspective. There seem to be three basic reasons for this meeting:
1. Some are concerned about the recent resolution that allows television advertising and ministry. I have already written about this, so I won’t belabor the point. There is a legitimate concern that TV could be used in a detrimental way. I believe that we should carefully monitor the situation and take any corrective actions needed. While most of our churches will not be affected significantly, I have recommended some guidelines for any who contemplate the use of this media for evangelism. (See the January-February 2008 Forward, p. 6.) In short, I don’t believe the resolution itself is the main cause for the Tulsa meeting, but it has drawn attention to the more significant factors stated below.
2. Some would like to see different leaders and different leadership paradigms. While it is understandable that some would be frustrated because their vision has not been fully embraced, the proper way for apostolic brethren to address this desire is through our constitutional process of elections and resolutions by a majority vote of the constituency.
3. Some are concerned about a drift away from biblical positions on outward holiness. Both before and after the resolution passed, some characterized it as a referendum on holiness. I don’t believe it was a repudiation of our belief in holiness, however. It had more to do with advances of technology (which have caused many people to equate advertising/broadcasting on TV and Internet), desire for more evangelistic tools, and respect for the autonomy of the local church. While the resolution has not changed our Articles of Faith or our position of holiness, nevertheless I share the concern that some churches are drifting away from our historic stand on certain holiness issues. Thus I respect those who may go to Tulsa as a way of stating this concern.
Having said that, I don’t believe the Tulsa meeting is the best way to address the problem, because of some complicating factors:
1. It seems clear that the Tulsa conference organizers have decided to form a new ministerial organization called the Worldwide Pentecostal Fellowship (WPF). (Don’t confuse this with the Pentecostal World Fellowship, which is a cooperative body of the leading trinitarian Pentecostal organizations.) As the WPF mail-out shows, they have developed an extensive organizational structure and have selected the key leaders. It seems that the chosen form of government is oligarchy. The WPF website reveals that it already has its own Articles of Faith (which prohibit “soliciting television for ministry” but don’t prohibit TV advertising or unsolicited TV ministry). The WPF will parallel the UPCI’s efforts in such areas as Foreign Missions, Home Missions, Youth Ministry, Ladies Ministry, Education, and even Bible Quizzing. To fulfill this plan, the WPF will need to identify ministerial license in some way in order to qualify members, qualify officers, conduct votes, and enforce adherence to its Articles of Faith. However, the Manual of the UPCI states that its ministers cannot be licensed with another “organization or association” (Art. VII, Sec. 2, Par.
6). Thus, it appears that those who officially join the WPF will be choosing to leave the UPCI. Some of the organizers have already done so. While there is great value in conferences that promote holiness, I don’t believe the solution is to form a new organization.
2. I am concerned about the ethical approach of this new group. It doesn’t seem right for a group to send a mass mail-out to all the ministers of the UPCI that, in effect, solicits them to join a new organization. It is one thing to respond to requests for information, but it is another thing to actively promote a division through mail and phone calls and to bestow offices in advance. This problem is compounded in that the mail-out was sent not only to pastors but also to ministers who work under a senior pastor without first contacting that pastor. The practical result could be confusion or even division within local churches, which has already begun
to develop.
3. As a further concern, some ministers on the original mail-out did not give consent for their names to be used in this fashion. Others gave permission but did not intend to communicate that they are leaving the UPCI and forming a new organization, although that is the common perception of the mail-out. Some names have been removed from the website because of this problem, but others have not.
4. There was a similar meeting in our district, in Houston in 2006, organized by some of the same people. This meeting involved similar problems of names used without consent, advertising contrary to UPCI policy, and an agenda different from the stated purpose. At that time, statements were made about not supporting the UPCI Foreign Missions program and even leaving the UPCI.
How many are planning to leave the UPCI over these matters? No one knows for sure; it is anyone’s guess. After discussion with some district leaders, I estimate that 100 to 200 pastors and churches will leave. Some have said they will join the WPF, while others have said they will become independent. This number is significant, but to put it in perspective, the UPCI currently has about 4,500 churches and daughter works in the U.S. and Canada. Thus, it appears that about 96% or more of pastors will stay in the UPCI. It seems that the WPF will begin with an international constituency smaller than our district. Although it aspires to be a worldwide group, I haven’t yet seen any development of leadership among African-Americans, Hispanics, Asian-Americans, or nationals outside the U.S. and Canada.
By far, the state most affected will be California, where some are leaving in part because of the recent decision to make Southern California its own district. From what I have heard, in most other districts the number of pastors who plan to leave ranges from zero to ten. In our district, one pastor in the Gulf Coast Section has notified me that he is leaving. A few other pastors in our district have told me they plan to attend the Tulsa meeting but don’t plan to leave the UPCI. It does not seem that there will be a significant impact on either the South Texas District or the Texas District.
As district superintendent, I strongly affirm the Apostolic doctrine and lifestyle as stated in the UPCI Articles of Faith and as described extensively in the books I have written. Moreover, our District Board unanimously affirms this position. At the beginning of our district we established platform guidelines as a means of communicating our commitment to the outward expression of holiness, and we continue to work diligently to uphold this stance in our district and sectional meetings. In 2007, the District Board discussed extensively the need to emphasize these beliefs and practices in light of the drift in some areas. As one step, we scheduled guest preachers for the 2007 Family Camp who would strongly reaffirm our Apostolic identity. They did a good job, but unfortunately both have since become part of the formation of this alternative organization, thereby undercutting their own efforts and influence in our midst.
With all its perceived flaws, the UPCI is the greatest vehicle for Apostolic revival and evangelism in the world today. It is active in 179 nations and has about 28,000 churches worldwide. It is not equivalent to the body of Christ, but it is certainly a large part of the body of Christ. As such, I don’t want to harm the efforts of the UPCI, because in doing so I would harm the body of Christ and the cause of Apostolic revival worldwide. In my extensive travels across North America and around the world, I find that the vast majority of UPCI ministers want to maintain the Apostolic doctrine and the lifestyle of holiness, both inwardly and outwardly. Therefore, I believe it is more effective to exert a strong, positive influence for truth in cooperation with thousands of churches and with a balanced approach.
In summary, I appeal to all ministers to unite around the biblical message of holiness and not to compromise our historic identity. Let each of us remember that true holiness involves outward appearance and choices of entertainment, and it also involves attitudes, communications, ethics, fellowship in the body, and respecting spiritual authority. If some wish to attend the Tulsa conference in order to affirm our position of holiness, then I appreciate your sincere desire. At the same time, I urge you not to leave the UPCI but to help us maintain a strong, godly identity and help us sustain our momentum for growth.