When a UPC pastor leans towards the WPF...

[LadyRev]

Does he/she have the right to drag the congregation along?

My opinion is no, he/she does not have that right. Even if he/she "feels the leading of God", I still don't believe they have the right to do this. Nor do I believe its a decision for the "church board". It should be a congregation decision...including those that supposedly are not eligible to vote but attend regularly.

I opened the can so the worms could get out. What think ye?

Disclaimer:
If this has been discussed before, please don't tell me so. I rarely get to be online and therefore I can not keep up with the threads.

[freeatlast]

I do not feel it is the pastors sole decision to make. If he and the board, if their is a board, feel strongly, then it should be presented the congregants ofthat assembly...you know the people whos money probalbly built and supports this church.

[freeatlast]

I do not feel it is the pastors sole decision to make. If he and the board, if their is a board, feel strongly, then it should be presented the congregants ofthat assembly...you know the people whos money probalbly built and supports this church.

I said "if" their is a board. In many situations like this, with a pastor that is looking towards a "more prefered aposotolic future". you'lll find that that pastor will not allow a board to be in place.

I'll never have to deal with a situation like that, as I would not walk across the street to attend a church without a board in place.

[rgcraig]

I honestly can't see where it is right, but I'm sure it's being done.

Especially if that pastor was elected by the church as a UPC pastor and they do not desire to leave the UPC.

[freeatlast]

Seems I read in a thread here one time that one pastor got told by his congregation that he could join but they were nOT joininig or leaving the upc.

If I remember it was one of the main organizers of the Tulsa group.

[DividedThigh]

i agree it should be up to the church, as a whole, not just the pastor, interesting, lol,dt:kickcan

[Ferd]

if the man started the church himself, then it is vastly different than a man who took an established work.

it is a lot more complicated than yes or no.... in my humble opinon.

personally the WWPF holds about as much interest for me a tree hugging rally.

[Sister Alvear]

There are many ways that question can be examined but I do think the saints should have a choice...

A preacher joining or not joining is a personal choice.
Since I am not a pastor I cannot answer this fully for it is hard to say what we would do...because we do not know situations involved...
However ethics is right for anyone...whether UPC, WPF, AMF, ALJC or whoever..

[Sister Alvear]

I have heard stories from different ones... we must make sure our spirits are right whatever decision we would make.

[Rhoni]

Does he/she have the right to drag the congregation along?

My opinion is no, he/she does not have that right. Even if he/she "feels the leading of God", I still don't believe they have the right to do this. Nor do I believe its a decision for the "church board". It should be a congregation decision...including those that supposedly are not eligible to vote but attend regularly.

I opened the can so the worms could get out. What think ye?

Disclaimer:
If this has been discussed before, please don't tell me so. I rarely get to be online and therefore I can not keep up with the threads.


I just read this one post and I think that the church should vote to follow the Pastor or not. The organizations are supposed to be a fellowship for Preachers not church saints...technically.

Take a vote...the majority stays with the Pastor and the building goes with it. If the vote is the other way - the building should stay with the people and get a new Pastor.


Just fair as Rhoni sees it:gaga

[Balanced]

I just read this one post and I think that the church should vote to follow the Pastor or not. The organizations are supposed to be a fellowship for Preachers not church saints...technically.

Take a vote...the majority stays with the Pastor and the building goes with it. If the vote is the other way - the building should stay with the people and get a new Pastor.


Just fair as Rhoni sees it:gaga

I would agree with this is most situations, but as Ferd stated, it depends on whether it is the founding pastor or someone who took over an established work.

There is also the option of staying in the UPC and fellowshipping the WPF.

It was my understanding from speaking to someone on the WPF General Board that you could even serve on the general board and not be a member of the WPF. (This came from information he got at the Branson meeting.) The by-laws posted online state that you must be a member of the WPF, but they may have made some amendments.

d) All members of both Executive and General Councils must be members of WPF and at least (30) thirty years of age, who have been faithful to the life and doctrine of Jesus Christ as expressed in Scripture and as enunciated for fellowship purposes in the Articles of Faith.

[Sam]

Unless a church is affiliated with a specific organization and the bylaws state that the pastor must also be affiliated with that organization, what difference would it make if the pastor changes organizations or goes independent?

[pelathais]

Does he/she have the right to drag the congregation along?

My opinion is no, he/she does not have that right. Even if he/she "feels the leading of God", I still don't believe they have the right to do this. Nor do I believe its a decision for the "church board". It should be a congregation decision...including those that supposedly are not eligible to vote but attend regularly.

I opened the can so the worms could get out. What think ye?

Disclaimer:
If this has been discussed before, please don't tell me so. I rarely get to be online and therefore I can not keep up with the threads.
Hey LadyRev, been missing you.

I think if the pastor is the founding pastor then he has the "right" to follow whatever course his/her mind will reasonably lead them in. I think a founding pastor has far more say than his/her successors.

If there's going to be dissention in the church about a move to the WPF (or some other similar scenario) then an ethical non-founding pastor should step down and let the church follow its conscience and he/she follow their's.

[mizpeh]

Does he/she have the right to drag the congregation along?

My opinion is no, he/she does not have that right. Even if he/she "feels the leading of God", I still don't believe they have the right to do this. Nor do I believe its a decision for the "church board". It should be a congregation decision...including those that supposedly are not eligible to vote but attend regularly.

I opened the can so the worms could get out. What think ye?

Disclaimer:
If this has been discussed before, please don't tell me so. I rarely get to be online and therefore I can not keep up with the threads.

Would the pastor's joining of the WPF change anything about the way he already preaches, teaches, ministers...etc?

[tv1a]

Please explain why the founder has more say. The man in charge should make the decision. When the president of the United States leaves office, he has no more say on what goes on at the White House. The pastor in charge makes the decision. If he wants to make a stupid decision, that's between he and God.

Hey LadyRev, been missing you.

I think if the pastor is the founding pastor then he has the "right" to follow whatever course his/her mind will reasonably lead them in. I think a founding pastor has far more say than his/her successors.

If there's going to be dissention in the church about a move to the WPF (or some other similar scenario) then an ethical non-founding pastor should step down and let the church follow its conscience and he/she follow their's.

[Amos]

God ordained pastors; men create organizations.

That pretty well sums it up.

I do believe a pastor ought to carefully weigh the wishes and best interests of the people.

The bottom line is that if he is really the pastor, the folks are probably going to follow his lead.

Where it can get dicey is if there are district funds tied up in the physical plant.

[pelathais]

Please explain why the founder has more say. The man in charge should make the decision. When the president of the United States leaves office, he has no more say on what goes on at the White House. The pastor in charge makes the decision. If he wants to make a stupid decision, that's between he and God.
I confess that it's a bit simplistic - however, the founding pastor should have more latitude if for no other reason than so he can be free to make a mistake or two. Founding a church is tough and the pastor will second guess everything from the location to the color of the door mat to organizational affiliation.

Just like he/she ought to be free to move around a bit to find the best fit in the community, so also should they be free to choose or change orgs. The church plant was his/her vision, let them follow that vision. Of course if they move around too much then they will suffer the consequences, but still, it's their vision.

[WyoPastor]

The pastor has a right to do what he wants, but I don't think that automatically includes the the church.

I know of a situation, somewhere else, where the pastor took an established work that the building was mostly paid for with UPC funds. Since he took it the membership has dropped to 2, besides his family. He is talking about leaving and going to the WPF. I don't think it's right for him to take the property out of the UPC.

[Sept5SavedTeen]

I'd have to say the power resides with the bishop/pastor, elders and deacons to make this decision. They can decide to open up a vote, they can decide to vote on it amounst themselves, they can give the power to make this decision 100% to the pastor, but the bottom line is, is that these were the roles the NT church has by which to make decisions and to function. A vote given to the whole congregation as the first step is wrong, I believe, GOD is NOT into democracy. I'd say the congregation gets a vote, if the board votes that they get a vote. If the board does NOT vote that they get a vote on this, well, then they can get a vote next time, eh?

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

[Rhoni]

I would agree with this is most situations, but as Ferd stated, it depends on whether it is the founding pastor or someone who took over an established work.

There is also the option of staying in the UPC and fellowshipping the WPF.

It was my understanding from speaking to someone on the WPF General Board that you could even serve on the general board and not be a member of the WPF. (This came from information he got at the Branson meeting.) The by-laws posted online state that you must be a member of the WPF, but they may have made some amendments.

Dear Balanced,

Not sure that I agree with the first statement about there being a difference if one was founding Pastor of the church or not. I don't really see the relevence.

Fellowshipping other Apostolic churches is a wonderful thing that we all should do..and I am proud of the WPF that they do not exclude other ministers from other organizations from being on their board. This is progress:).

Blessings, Rhoni

[JTULLOCK]

This might have been brought up and I missed it...but incase I am wrong if the church in question or theory is a UPCI affiliated church then the pastor would have to leave the church and the UPCI would appoint another person to take it, unless the church pulls out too. My guess is that this might have happened, but also my guess is that the congregation would have sat under this pastors UC teaching and preaching. If they have most likely that would want to leave the UPC, IMO. They might feel the same as the pastor. I think that often times the congregation takes on the ideals of the pastor whether it be be conviction of cohersion. Just my thoughts!

[Kings Kid]

Please explain why the founder has more say. The man in charge should make the decision. When the president of the United States leaves office, he has no more say on what goes on at the White House. The pastor in charge makes the decision. If he wants to make a stupid decision, that's between he and God.If the founding pastor still runs the church from behind the scenes then he would have a lot to say about it.

[Rhoni]

If the founding pastor still runs the church from behind the scenes then he would have a lot to say about it.

Talk about a hobby horse...I take an issue with a Former Pastor who needs to retire and let someone else take over and actually have the money and authority to do so.:kickcan

[Rhoni]

Sorry...that's another thread...

[Kings Kid]

Talk about a hobby horse...I take an issue with a Former Pastor who needs to retire and let someone else take over and actually have the money and authority to do so.:kickcanBut if the pastor underneath him is loyal and wouldn't go against his him.

[tv1a]

That founding pastor is unethical. One who reliquenshes control of the flock has no business pulling the strings behind the scenes. No man can serve two masters. It divides loyalties and invites division.

If the founding pastor still runs the church from behind the scenes then he would have a lot to say about it.

[Sept5SavedTeen]

That founding pastor is unethical. One who reliquenshes control of the flock has no business pulling the strings behind the scenes. No man can serve two masters. It divides loyalties and invites division.

I think the "two masters" were GOD and mammon, lol...

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

[Kings Kid]

That founding pastor is unethical. One who reliquenshes control of the flock has no business pulling the strings behind the scenes. No man can serve two masters. It divides loyalties and invites division.
I agree but unfortunately a lot of these old time preachers are that way.

[Sister Alvear]

I think if the pastor turned the church over to someone he ought to have enough sense to move on and not try to pastor behind the scenes....

If he stays he needs to have lots of wisdom and KNOW how to become a saint.

[Sam]

I think the "two masters" were GOD and mammon, lol...

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

I thought that was the teaching of Jesus against having more than one wife because no man can serve two masters

[Michael Phelps]

Does he/she have the right to drag the congregation along?

My opinion is no, he/she does not have that right. Even if he/she "feels the leading of God", I still don't believe they have the right to do this. Nor do I believe its a decision for the "church board". It should be a congregation decision...including those that supposedly are not eligible to vote but attend regularly.

I opened the can so the worms could get out. What think ye?

Disclaimer:
If this has been discussed before, please don't tell me so. I rarely get to be online and therefore I can not keep up with the threads.

In my mind, the same principles should apply in this situation as if the pastor was going to pull out of the UPC and go "charismatic".

[Sept5SavedTeen]

In my mind, the same principles should apply in this situation as if the pastor was going to pull out of the UPC and go "charismatic".

That's interesting... I would say if the pastor is going charismatic, he ought to lose the assembly, everything, ect... I think that would be the opinion of most Apostolics. Can you elaborate, though, as to why you see going WPF and charismatic as being actions that should reap the same consequences? What if he wants to go UPC to ALJC (I'm just throwing them out there because they are both longstanding Apostolic denominations, whereas WPF is the new kid on the block)?

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

[AmazingGrace]

That's interesting... I would say if the pastor is going charismatic, he ought to lose the assembly, everything, ect... I think that would be the opinion of most Apostolics. Can you elaborate, though, as to why you see going WPF and charismatic as being actions that should reap the same consequences? What if he wants to go UPC to ALJC (I'm just throwing them out there because they are both longstanding Apostolic denominations, whereas WPF is the new kid on the block)?

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

Well for one thing what good would it do to leave the assembly if the whole church has also gone charasmatic? Also... If they choose to go the direction of their pastor then that is what should be done. Whether it be leaving to go charasmatic upc aljc wpf or methodist... If the pastor goes I think the church should have the option of what they want to do.... It should not however be forced to follow if the majority does not choose to.

[Consapostolic1]

Does he/she have the right to drag the congregation along?

My opinion is no, he/she does not have that right. Even if he/she "feels the leading of God", I still don't believe they have the right to do this. Nor do I believe its a decision for the "church board". It should be a congregation decision...including those that supposedly are not eligible to vote but attend regularly.

I opened the can so the worms could get out. What think ye?

Disclaimer:
If this has been discussed before, please don't tell me so. I rarely get to be online and therefore I can not keep up with the threads.

This is funny since when have sheep led the shepard? I always thought it was the other way around

[Sept5SavedTeen]

This is funny since when have sheep led the shepard? I always thought it was the other way around

Who is the shepard?

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

[Kings Kid]

This is funny since when have sheep led the shepard? I always thought it was the other way around

unfortunately some sheep think they can tell what the pastor to do.

[Sept5SavedTeen]

unfortunately some sheep think they can tell what the pastor to do.

Is the pastor not a sheep also?

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

[hometown guy]

the pastor has to pay for his license so its up to him what card he wants to carry. our pastor went independent and the only ones that know is the leadership of the church. now his dads church was affiliated so they had to have a vote with a upc presbyter present at the time of the vote.

[Sister Alvear]

I think a pastor should be open and honest with his church.

[ChristopherHall]

Does he/she have the right to drag the congregation along?

My opinion is no, he/she does not have that right. Even if he/she "feels the leading of God", I still don't believe they have the right to do this. Nor do I believe its a decision for the "church board". It should be a congregation decision...including those that supposedly are not eligible to vote but attend regularly.

I opened the can so the worms could get out. What think ye?

Disclaimer:
If this has been discussed before, please don't tell me so. I rarely get to be online and therefore I can not keep up with the threads.

I know a Pastor who is currently involved in the leadership of a department of WPF who is straddling the fence. For months he's let on like he knew nothing about it. He even claimed over the pulpit that he didn't know anything about his name being on the WPF. Then later in men's prayer he brought up the network of more conservative fellowship early in men's prayer. As far as I know he's still with the UPCI but members from the church have called me (I left about eight months ago) asking what I know because others have found his name on the website... but he's kept them in the dark about his involvement. Taking a very strong conservative stand, he took the church's youth out of most if not all UPCI district youth functions and has appeared to slowly move the church away from fellowshipping in the district. Those still attending that have contacted me said that they believe he's been slowly positioning the church for his break from UPCI. A small handful of people have already left. Those that have talked to me appear to be considering leaving. There are also other issues of a more serious nature that may come to the surface according to what I'm being told. Frankly, I'd like for these individuals to not contact me, but what do you do when a friend you had for years calls you or you see them in the mall and they begin pouring their heart and soul out to you about how confused or worried they are?

Because of all of this I personally believe that if a pastor has leanings toward the WPF he should by all means be upfront. He should certainly tell the board and even present it before the church and measures should be taken for the church to affirm the transfer or to seek a new pastor.

[Kings Kid]

I think a pastor should be open and honest with his church.

I agree very much that the pastor should be open and honest in this type of situation because it could leave a mark on his minstry if he isn't honest. And also if it isn't shared with the saints I consider it be a type of control.

[Michael Phelps]

That's interesting... I would say if the pastor is going charismatic, he ought to lose the assembly, everything, ect... I think that would be the opinion of most Apostolics. Can you elaborate, though, as to why you see going WPF and charismatic as being actions that should reap the same consequences? What if he wants to go UPC to ALJC (I'm just throwing them out there because they are both longstanding Apostolic denominations, whereas WPF is the new kid on the block)?

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

When a pastor assumes the oversight of a congregation, and then decides to make drastic changes, either to the right or left, or even to another organization, the same rules should apply in every situation, if we are to be consistent.

I understand that you are a zealous young ultracon, and at this point in your young life, you don't see the correlation, but one day you will, hopefully.

[Amos]

Joining the WPF doesn't represent a sharp swing in any direction ideologically, folks.

It is just a change in organizations.

Big difference.

[Michael Phelps]

Joining the WPF doesn't represent a sharp swing in any direction ideologically, folks.

It is just a change in organizations.

Big difference.

Apparently some congregations don't think so........

[Amos]

Apparently some congregations don't think so........


That may be true.

If they do think so, a pastor would likely be unwise to persist in trying to turn that way.

[Michael Phelps]

That may be true.

If they do think so, a pastor would likely be unwise to persist in trying to turn that way.

Agreed.

My wise pastor told me a few years ago, "When you take over an established congregation, and decide to move the piano from one side of the platform to the other, just move it one inch at a time."

Good advice.

[Neck]

Does he/she have the right to drag the congregation along?

My opinion is no, he/she does not have that right. Even if he/she "feels the leading of God", I still don't believe they have the right to do this. Nor do I believe its a decision for the "church board". It should be a congregation decision...including those that supposedly are not eligible to vote but attend regularly.

I opened the can so the worms could get out. What think ye?

Disclaimer:
If this has been discussed before, please don't tell me so. I rarely get to be online and therefore I can not keep up with the threads.

When they lean towards the WPF you need to lean towards the door.

[KarenJo]

A Pastor IS NOT A KING OR DICTATOR!!!!!! So in my opinion he does not have the right to dictate a decision like leaving an organization. He has the responsibility to pray, discuss, and allow ALL Church Members to have a voice in making this type of a decision. If they leave the organization that helped the church to grow then they need to pay back what was given to establish that UPC Church. If a Pastor wants to leave then they should go. God Bless Them! But leave the congregation, the land and the money behind. Why should we care who “founded” the church, IT ISN”T THEIR PERSONAL PRIVATE PROPERTY! The purpose of ministry is to serve the people and not the other way around. We have too many churches now days that think of the church as the Family Business. For hundreds of years the church belonged to the community and the Pastor served those in that community. Most didn’t even have a right to vote for things so the decisions were made by the membership. I love the ministry and have such respect for them but good pastors know that it’s not their church, its Gods church and belongs to the congregation and that they have been called to serve the members of that congregation. I was with one of my best buddies Kevin and the Mangun’s along with the POA staff one Sunday Morning in their devotions and Bro. Anthony said to his staff, “We are here only because of those people sitting in the pews, without them, there would be no need for us. Let’s ask God meet the needs of those who are here this morning and pray that we are sensitive to the leading of the spirit.” This impressed me so much! I think that for something like this, God can talk to many people in the congregation about the same things. I know I’ve seen this many times. If God is in it, then he will confirm it! Just my thoughts on this matter!!!!

[hometown guy]

A Pastor IS NOT A KING OR DICTATOR!!!!!! So in my opinion he does not have the right to dictate a decision like leaving an organization. He has the responsibility to pray, discuss, and allow ALL Church Members to have a voice in making this type of a decision. If they leave the organization that helped the church to grow then they need to pay back what was given to establish that UPC Church. If a Pastor wants to leave then they should go. God Bless Them! But leave the congregation, the land and the money behind. Why should we care who “founded” the church, IT ISN”T THEIR PERSONAL PRIVATE PROPERTY! The purpose of ministry is to serve the people and not the other way around. We have too many churches now days that think of the church as the Family Business. For hundreds of years the church belonged to the community and the Pastor served those in that community. Most didn’t even have a right to vote for things so the decisions were made by the membership. I love the ministry and have such respect for them but good pastors know that it’s not their church, its Gods church and belongs to the congregation and that they have been called to serve the members of that congregation. I was with one of my best buddies Kevin and the Mangun’s along with the POA staff one Sunday Morning in their devotions and Bro. Anthony said to his staff, “We are here only because of those people sitting in the pews, without them, there would be no need for us. Let’s ask God meet the needs of those who are here this morning and pray that we are sensitive to the leading of the spirit.” This impressed me so much! I think that for something like this, God can talk to many people in the congregation about the same things. I know I’ve seen this many times. If God is in it, then he will confirm it! Just my thoughts on this matter!!!!
i never once seen any org at outreach and MOST churches are not upc but there pastors are. the only reason are church had the words upc in it was because the card that my pastor carried. so why should the saints say what he carries. if saints are more submisive to an org then to a pastor then let the saint go.

[Blubayou]

OK this conversation has touched on something I have wondered for a couple of years. Who does the building and property that houses the congregation belong to? What happens to it when a pastor and congregation cannot reach a consensus? Is it sold? If so who get the money?

[LadyRev]

Unless a church is affiliated with a specific organization and the bylaws state that the pastor must also be affiliated with that organization, what difference would it make if the pastor changes organizations or goes independent?

I was referring to an affiliated church.

[LadyRev]

Would the pastor's joining of the WPF change anything about the way he already preaches, teaches, ministers...etc?

Yes, it would.

[AmazingGrace]

OK this conversation has touched on something I have wondered for a couple of years. Who does the building and property that houses the congregation belong to? What happens to it when a pastor and congregation cannot reach a consensus? Is it sold? If so who get the money?

I am just speaking from personal experience in what the case was with our church. The pastor was licensed with the UPC. He was a card carrying member. The church was NOT affiliated. The pastor left the church... the church was then handed over to my husband. My husband is NOT licensed. Our DS came in and offered to rush and get my husband licensed (note he had went to bible school but did not finish as we were asked to come work at a church that was in desperate need at the time and he had already been in process of getting his license as far as the papers had been filled out and all his requirements were already met he was just waiting for the next meeting of the board to go before them) My husband however does not feel he is called to pastor and that church was in such financial distress we knew we could not save it without major help. The church was NOT affiliated so therefore they could not take the building without the board agreeing as it was at this point and always had been the property of the board.. lease in the name of the corporation the corporation being the board.. the board being 4 board members (elders) in the church and the secretary being me. The DS did offer to buy the building and the fixtures therein but we the church chose not to go on in the debt we were already in due to some things that had happened prior to said board and staff...

We sold the building and fixtures in the building. The funds were used to pay off remaining building debt and any other debts that were incurred. The attorney did tell us however that if there had been any moneys left it would be split among the said board members and paid staff which at that time I was the only paid staff yet I had removed myself from payroll except for gas money once a week as the funds were not there.We then would have placed this money in the hands of our DS as he had done so many things to assist us in this time. That is up to the person but one would think a church would use these funds for something to further the kingdom. So pretty much. If there is money left after the sale of the building. It goes to the board if its not an affiliated church... and the church is incorporated sending its lean to the board members. Some churches choose to put their note in the name of the pastor therfore it would go to him.

[WyoPastor]

It depends on what the bylaws say, but most of the time because of federal laws, 501-3-c, the money left over has to go to another non-profit.

[AmazingGrace]

It depends on what the bylaws say, but most of the time because of federal laws, 501-3-c, the money left over has to go to another non-profit.

This is correct unless there is this one certain clause in there that I cant remember what is anymore. and I hope that made sense to someone because my words in my head didnt come out typed like I want em to tonight LOL

[Blubayou]

Thanks for the imput. I appreciate the answers.

[Sister Alvear]

so many complex problems dealing with people and churches...we all need guidance from the Lord.