| pelathais |
10-11-2007 03:01 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by josh
(Post 268949)
Perhaps I shouldn't speak for Coonskinner, but he was pastoring his church long before he was in the UPC. In other words, his church wasn't upc and therefore has no reason to wonder or worry what the upc is doing.
Just because he joined doesn't mean he abdicated his leadership to someone two or three states away...or that his church should be bound to or worried about some decision made by men ten states away.
|
While I personally have a different perspective from yours and C.S.'s, generally speaking, I think you make an important point here.
A lot of the discussion has been around the phrase "When you accepted the pastorate in a UPC church..." (or words to that effect). Josh points out that there are a lot of UPC pastors that never "accepted the pastorate of a UPC church;" Coonskinner apparently being one.
The UPC Manual and its Affiliation/Disaffiliation processes take into account churches that are still pastored by their "founding pastor" and gives the founder extra leeway in administration of the church's affairs. I think the same consideration can be (and certainly will be) given to men ("founders" or "successors") who had brought their churches into affiliation with the UPC.
In these cases I don't really see how these men can even be remotely said to be "robbing or taking from the UPC." They merely entered into an arrangement, an arrangement that included a "back out" clause.
Coonskinner can come and go and come back and go again as far as I'm concerned. :) I wish he'd do something about the racoons that have been coming up through the storm sewers around here though. They make an awful mess and one even chewed on my garage door. Firearms are out of the question (sigh!).
|