The Board reiterates that the implementation of this ruling is, as always, in the hands of the District Boards to determine the timing and other aspects of that implementation.
I heard the UPC's long trusted legal team scrutinized over the WPF's Articles of Faith.
Under their advice and interpretaton of the UPC's manual ... the WPF is an org and that the UPC had every right to ask it's ministers to choose sides.
They gave a seven point argument why the formation and it's ongoing operations is in direct violation to the UPC bylaws in the manual.
They argued that the paragraph in the manual about licences is a mere technicality ... and that if anyone were to choose to take the UPC to court over this .... the believed the courts would throw the case out because the org's General Board has the right to interpret it's own manual, not an outside jurisdiction.
One small technicality, it is my understanding (according to the manual) that the GB has every right to bring a resolution, however, the resolution has no binding power until the constituency has voted to approve said resolution. It is important to note however, that the UPCI has a history of enacting these types of resolutions without due process, and if unchallenged of course it will stand.
One small technicality, it is my understanding (according to the manual) that the GB has every right to bring a resolution, however, the resolution has no binding power until the constituency has voted to approve said resolution. It is important to note however, that the UPCI has a history of enacting these types of resolutions without due process, and if unchallenged of course it will stand.
Whether it's done now or when it's appoved in October, BishopH ... what's the difference??? .... this thing would pass easily.
I agree the line is drawn, and many will make their decision. I think the next big hurdle will be whether the men who choose to go with the WPF will be put "under question." IMO that will also determine how many leave the UPCI. Because of the real or perceived stature of the WPF leadership, putting them "under question" will appear adversarial on the part of the UPCI and will cause some to leave that would have otherwise not even considered it.
Some districts, prior to the GB decision, had already started sending out letters to others effectively banning ex-UPCI ministers from ministering not just district events but local church events as well. I think that is a travesty. That kind of action is old strong arm mafia style leadership IMO. In essence what that says is, if you leave the UPCI because you choose to fellowship in another fellowship/organization you have to break all relationships built over the years, and cease from fellowshipping with those that are your close friends and possibly relatives. IMO that is just wrong. It was wrong when they did it with the AMF, it was wrong when they did it with the men who left in 92 and it is wrong today IMHO.
Came across this today while reading and thought of this whole split and the reasons why it was inevitable,
"...there is scarcely an error in doctrine or a failure in applying Christian ethics that cannot be traced finally to imperfect and ignoble thoughts about God." A.W. Tozer, in "Knowledge of the Holy".
It is my belief that everything going down right now is only the symptoms of more systemic issues.
__________________
"Most human beings are not able to stand the message of the shaking of foundations. They reject and attack the prophetic minds, not because they really disagree with them, but because they sense the truth of their words and cannot receive it." Paul Tillich
SDG 
Hybrid Mode
