How much information should the saints expect from their pastor?

What if a "saint" only started attending a UPC affiliated church because of their anti-television stance... does that "saint" have a right to know that the stance has changed?

[Blubayou]

I have always felt that I was a member of the United Pentecostal Church. However, recent events have shaken my belief in this and now I realize that the UPCI is a ministerial organization and I have no place in it as a member. I attend a UPCI church, we support UPCI outreaches, but I am not a member. Uhmm- I have always been proud to say I was UPCI, whenever I when to visit a city I always looked up the UPCI church, but from now on I think I will identify myself as Apostolic and leave it at that.

[Trouvere]

It don't matter to me....wasn't that a song?

[Coonskinner]

Brad, nothing you quoted identifies saints as "members" in the same sense as ministers are.

They don't pay dues, and they aren't subject to judicial procedure.

We are really arguing a very fine semantical point here, and one that I am about done talking about.

There is definitely an associaton, but that is not the same as membership.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

Brad, nothing you quoted identifies saints as "members" in the same sense as ministers are.

They don't pay dues, and they aren't subject to judicial procedure.

We are really arguing a very fine semantical point here, and one that I am about done talking about.

There is definitely an associaton, but that is not the same as membership.

That doesn't prove they aren't members. It proves they aren't in the same class of membership. I have memberships in certain things that I don't have to pay for, but if I were to become a paid member I would get more perks.

From what was quoted it seems the UPC as a rule recognizes everyone as members of this fellowship.

An analogy can be made in many ways. We are members of the United States and we have certain rights and can even vote, but we can't vote in congress....only a congressman can. We can't vote in the Senate, only a Senator can. So there are different levels of membership

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

Brad, nothing you quoted identifies saints as "members" in the same sense as ministers are.

They don't pay dues, and they aren't subject to judicial procedure.

We are really arguing a very fine semantical point here, and one that I am about done talking about.

There is definitely an associaton, but that is not the same as membership.

Sigh, I wrote a long post but I give up. How do you argue when you present someone with direct facts, and they refuse to acknowledge the facts presented from the manual which defines the very thing you are arguing about.

[Whole Hearted]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

Brad, nothing you quoted identifies saints as "members" in the same sense as ministers are.

They don't pay dues, and they aren't subject to judicial procedure.

We are really arguing a very fine semantical point here, and one that I am about done talking about.

There is definitely an associaton, but that is not the same as membership.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

Brad, nothing you quoted identifies saints as "members" in the same sense as ministers are.

They don't pay dues, and they aren't subject to judicial procedure.

We are really arguing a very fine semantical point here, and one that I am about done talking about.

There is definitely an associaton, but that is not the same as membership.

Note that CS says "in the same sense as ministers are"...yes but they ARE still considered members. What was quoted DOES identify them as members.

There are different levels of membership.

[Coonskinner]

Whatever...you guys enjoy yourselves.

[Coonskinner]

We have a token subscription to the Herald.

We give in offerings to SFC.

Missionaries come by.

I don't care one way or another whether our people can recite all the General Officals or not. It just doesn't matter to me at all.

When I spend time with them, I have better things to talk about than divisive issues that preachers fuss about among themselves, the outcome of which is not going to change their local church any.

I don't see how that could be considered edifying in any way.

If that makes me bad in the eyes of some of you folks, I guess you will just have to pray for me.

If people have been properly taught, they aren't going to be much interested in the in-fighting of politics in religious organizations.

I am very, very thankful that I don't have to pastor some of the attitudes I encounter on this forum.

Some of you might have sweeter spirits if you had something on the brain besides all the upscuttle running through the UPC.