Thomas Fudge email on his recollection to the 2004 UPCI Syposium on his Book.

[Neck]

I will post 3 threads.

First an email dated 12/12/2007 addressed to Nathan Eckstadt from Thomas Fudge.

The 2nd will be a letter addressed to brothern ouside the UPC on the symposium from 2004.

The third being the actual letter he sent to the UPC panel of men that were on the panel in 2004.

These are Thomas Fudges' Words.

I find him being a person that will not shy from his writings.

Here is the email he sent me today on his recollection of the 2004 symposium:

This email has not been edited in anyway.

Stay tuned for Part 2 and 3 the letters to the brethren:




Email to Nathan Eckstadt 12/12/2007
From Thomas Fudge:

Dear Nate,

The meeting occurred on the campus of Gateway College in Florissant, MO in March 2004.

The UPC holds an annual conference which they regard as scholarly
and people get together and run a conference.

At the 2004 affair they scheduled a panel discussion of my book which had appeared a year earlier.

The session lasted about 90 minutes and there were five panelists:
David Bernard, David Norris (who gave the main
response), Kenneth Bass, Robin Johnston, and J.R. Peyton.

Mark Jordan, superintendent of the Ohio district was the M.C.

I flew from Oregon to St. Louis to attend this session and did show up unannounced with a friend of mine who lived in the St. Louis area.

We timed our appearance to coincide with the start of that session and Mark Jordan was at the microphone calling the room to order when I walked in and sat in the back row. It was a fairly large room.

I had met Bass in Texas about 5 months earlier.

He is just now completing a PhD in New Testament at Baylor University.

He is Oneness but not UPC.

He recognized me and there was surprise on his face and in his body language.

While Norris was speaking Bass must have mentioned to someone else
that I was there and soon there were people straining to catch a glimpse of the heretic.

Necks were craning and whispers were going round the room.

Once Norris finished and was alerted to the presence of an unexpected guest he came down to where I was, shook hands, introduced himself, and asked if I'd like to reply. Initially I said "no".

Immediately, I realized this might be construed in a regrettable fashion (i.e. his argument had silenced and shamed the heretic) and so I agreed to do so if he wished.

He hesitated. Then he said he'd ask Jordan. Mind you while these exchanges were going on the session was still in progress.

Norris returned with the answer that the chair had a problem with me speaking.

The hilarity was exacerbated when questions were raised from the floor like "well, where does Fudge go to church?"

Much hem-hawing went on amongst the panelists none of whom were able to say anything.

Of course after the session I hung around and all of the panelists made a point of meeting me.

Jordan did not come near. I must have sent a copy of Norris' paper to several friends for I have here a form letter mentioning the conference.

Additionally, and this may be of some interest, I drew up a short paper on
accusations of calling the UPC "radical" in my book.

I'll attach both.

The other thing I recall is that afterwards someone from Missouri contacted me to ask if it was true that..I had been at the conference and denied the right to speak.

I wrote to him but that letter is among my files in Washington.

They held the session I think to provide an official response to the book.

After all, when was the last time someone wrote a 400 page book on the UPC?

Silence on their part might suggest I had completely proven my point or that they could think of no rebuttal.

They surely did not anticipate my appearance believing I was in New Zealand.

You might like to contact Kenneth Bass his email is XXX.

He and I have become friends.

Ask him about the symposium.

He's pretty upfront and he and I have talked about the conference on different occasions since.


Blessing,

Thomas

[crakjak]

I will post 3 threads.

First an email dated 12/12/2007 addressed to Nathan Eckstadt from Thomas Fudge.

The 2nd will be a letter addressed to brothern ouside the UPC on the symposium from 2004.

The third being the actual letter he sent to the UPC panel of men that were on the panel in 2004.

These are Thomas Fudges' Words.

I find him being a person that will not shy from his writings.

Here is the email he sent me today on his recollection of the 2004 symposium:

This email has not been edited in anyway.

Stay tuned for Part 2 and 3 the letters to the brethren:




Email to Nathan Eckstadt 12/12/2007
From Thomas Fudge:

Dear Nate,

The meeting occurred on the campus of Gateway College in Florissant, MO in March 2004.

The UPC holds an annual conference which they regard as scholarly
and people get together and run a conference.

At the 2004 affair they scheduled a panel discussion of my book which had appeared a year earlier.

The session lasted about 90 minutes and there were five panelists:
David Bernard, David Norris (who gave the main
response), Kenneth Bass, Robin Johnston, and J.R. Peyton.

Mark Jordan, superintendent of the Ohio district was the M.C.

I flew from Oregon to St. Louis to attend this session and did show up unannounced with a friend of mine who lived in the St. Louis area.

We timed our appearance to coincide with the start of that session and Mark Jordan was at the microphone calling the room to order when I walked in and sat in the back row. It was a fairly large room.

I had met Bass in Texas about 5 months earlier.

He is just now completing a PhD in New Testament at Baylor University.

He is Oneness but not UPC.

He recognized me and there was surprise on his face and in his body language.

While Norris was speaking Bass must have mentioned to someone else
that I was there and soon there were people straining to catch a glimpse of the heretic.

Necks were craning and whispers were going round the room.

Once Norris finished and was alerted to the presence of an unexpected guest he came down to where I was, shook hands, introduced himself, and asked if I'd like to reply. Initially I said "no".

Immediately, I realized this might be construed in a regrettable fashion (i.e. his argument had silenced and shamed the heretic) and so I agreed to do so if he wished.

He hesitated. Then he said he'd ask Jordan. Mind you while these exchanges were going on the session was still in progress.

Norris returned with the answer that the chair had a problem with me speaking.

The hilarity was exacerbated when questions were raised from the floor like "well, where does Fudge go to church?"

Much hem-hawing went on amongst the panelists none of whom were able to say anything.

Of course after the session I hung around and all of the panelists made a point of meeting me.

Jordan did not come near. I must have sent a copy of Norris' paper to several friends for I have here a form letter mentioning the conference.

Additionally, and this may be of some interest, I drew up a short paper on
accusations of calling the UPC "radical" in my book.

I'll attach both.

The other thing I recall is that afterwards someone from Missouri contacted me to ask if it was true that..I had been at the conference and denied the right to speak.

I wrote to him but that letter is among my files in Washington.

They held the session I think to provide an official response to the book.

After all, when was the last time someone wrote a 400 page book on the UPC?

Silence on their part might suggest I had completely proven my point or that they could think of no rebuttal.

They surely did not anticipate my appearance believing I was in New Zealand.

You might like to contact Kenneth Bass his email is XXX.

He and I have become friends.

Ask him about the symposium.

He's pretty upfront and he and I have talked about the conference on different occasions since.


Blessing,

Thomas






OK, Nate let's have the rest of them!:jolly

[SDG]

Waiting.

[PastorD]

Waiting.

the other two are threads . . .

[Hoovie]

It should be noted there was no syposium called for Tom Fudge's book. A paper was simply presented at the annual UGST Symposium. - Sorry, no special meeting were called for Fudge. The topic was one of many.

[Neck]

It should be noted there was no syposium called for Tom Fudge's book. A paper was simply presented at the annual UGST Symposium. - Sorry, no special meeting were called for Fudge. The topic was one of many.

That is understood if you read the other threads that are posted on what Fudge recollects.

Your commet is not enlightening.

[bishopnl]

The other thing I recall is that afterwards someone from Missouri contacted me to ask if it was true that..I had been at the conference and denied the right to speak.

Actually, that was me, in regards to a discussion about the symposium on the old Faith Child Forum. I still have the email...it says essentially the same thing he says here...although not quite as sarcastic (i.e. the heretic remarks). I'll be happy to post if anyone is interested. He also sent me an article he wrote for FCF regarding why he wrote the book. I have that as well...

I also have the tape of the symposium at my house somewhere. It's buried amongst the boxes of tapes I have...lol...

[Neck]

Actually, that was me, in regards to a discussion about the symposium on the old Faith Child Forum. I still have the email...it says essentially the same thing he says here...although not quite as sarcastic (i.e. the heretic remarks). I'll be happy to post if anyone is interested. He also sent me an article he wrote for FCF regarding why he wrote the book. I have that as well...

I also have the tape of the symposium at my house somewhere. It's buried amongst the boxes of tapes I have...lol...

If you have a tape of the sym. I would love a copy. I will forward to media file and make it available to everyone for no charge.

Nathan

[bishopnl]

Well, if I get time...I will try to see if I can find it. We just bought a house about three months ago, and I packed up every one of my tapes in boxes, in no particular order, and I have probably between 400-500 tapes. The boxes haven't been unpacked yet...but if I get a chance, I'll see if I can hunt it down.

[Neck]

Well, if I get time...I will try to see if I can find it. We just bought a house about three months ago, and I packed up every one of my tapes in boxes, in no particular order, and I have probably between 400-500 tapes. The boxes haven't been unpacked yet...but if I get a chance, I'll see if I can hunt it down.

That would be awesome. Thanks,

[Carpenter]

While I am not given to reading long posts, I am anxious to read this topic.

Here is an email T.F. sent me in response to some comments, and questions I had about the book not long after it hit the mainstream market.

Dear Mr. (Carpenter),

Thanks for writing and also for your comments. How did you hear about the book? I shall endeavor to answer your questions and the interesting points you raise. First, on the question of languages, I am unaware that many of the mendiscussing the new issue in those early days would have been schooled inthe Biblical languages. E.N. Bell would be an exception but of those onthe "Oneness" side like Howard Goss, Frank Ewart, Glenn Cook, O.F. Fauss and others I have never seen any evidence of formal training in the languages.

Moreover, their writings reveal no evidence that they took this matter under consideration. The reference to John 3:5 is especially important but here I could find no evidence of argument from theoriginal languages. There is still in my view, a small but largely silent PCI-like elementwithin the UPC.

Somewhere in the book you will come across a reference to a statement Nathaniel Urshan (immediate past GeneralSuperintendent)made to me in 1999 in which he thought there might be 200-300 ministers of that persuasion in the UPC but this out of 8,000. As you get into chapters 3 and 4 especially you will find some evidence of this.

Will the UPC re-examine their position? I doubt it very much. In my opinion the general feeling from the 1970s onwards has been that PCI theology needs to be buried and eliminated. Chapters 4 and 5 of thebook consist of a detailed elaboration of how that program was implmented and carried out.

I take your point about the academic tone of the book. The book was written initially and principally for an academic audience. I can certainly see the benefit in perhaps producing at some future point a shorter and less technical version aimed at a "popular" audience. There are no definite plans, however, at present to that end but there is always the chance that another publisher might want to produce such abook.

Overall, I think the book is accessible to the lay person. Yes,there are parts which tend to be a bit more technical but these could be skimmed or passed over without doing significant damage to the theme or arguments of the book. It is hard to give concrete guidance on this but for people really interested in some of this, I think they can read it to some benefit.

I can give you a personal anecdote from my students days. I became interested in some later medieval church history and oneof the subjects had to do with what is today the Czech Republic. Of course the place names and personal names were completely unpronouncible and for a while it was really off-putting. At length, I simply started to ignore words I could not pronounce and managed to learn a great deal.

The other thing is that hopefully the context of what I have written mayshed light on the meaning of technical words or passages.

Thanks for your sentiments about the UPC answering my book. I think they should. My book is not an attack on them and in fact I have just written a short essay on why I wrote the book which is being published at the first of next month on a website run by a UPC minister.

You are quite right to point out that normally the message is left unanswered while the messenger is clubbed. That is an unfortunate tactic. I have heard one comment second hand that a ranking official of the UPC in the mid-west has bought a number of copies of the book and is handing them out and intends to buy more. I cannot say what the motivation is,whether he is looking for support for a bonfire or thinks there is somemerit in the book itself which his colleagues need to read.

It is most unfortunate that UPC people generally do not read, study for themselves or exercise much critical thought about their faith andhistory. I do expect someone like David Bernard to write some type of review but I will not expect much more than a general dismissal based on a supposition that I have an axe to grind or something like that.

I would be pleased to again hear from you especially after you've had occasion to read the entire book. By the way, what part of the world do you live in and do you have UPC connections?

Thanks for your comments.

Best wishes,
Thomas Fudge

[Neck]

While I am not given to reading long posts, I am anxious to read this topic.

Here is an email T.F. sent me in response to some comments, and questions I had about the book not long after it hit the mainstream market.



Thanks for writing and also for your comments. How did you hear about the book? I shall endeavor to answer your questions and the interesting points you raise. First, on the question of languages, I am unaware that many of the mendiscussing the new issue in those early days would have been schooled inthe Biblical languages. E.N. Bell would be an exception but of those onthe "Oneness" side like Howard Goss, Frank Ewart, Glenn Cook, O.F. Fauss and others I have never seen any evidence of formal training in the languages.

Moreover, their writings reveal no evidence that they took this matter under consideration. The reference to John 3:5 is especially important but here I could find no evidence of argument from theoriginal languages. There is still in my view, a small but largely silent PCI-like elementwithin the UPC.

Somewhere in the book you will come across a reference to a statement Nathaniel Urshan (immediate past GeneralSuperintendent)made to me in 1999 in which he thought there might be 200-300 ministers of that persuasion in the UPC but this out of 8,000. As you get into chapters 3 and 4 especially you will find some evidence of this.

Will the UPC re-examine their position? I doubt it very much. In my opinion the general feeling from the 1970s onwards has been that PCI theology needs to be buried and eliminated. Chapters 4 and 5 of thebook consist of a detailed elaboration of how that program was implmented and carried out.

I take your point about the academic tone of the book. The book was written initially and principally for an academic audience. I can certainly see the benefit in perhaps producing at some future point a shorter and less technical version aimed at a "popular" audience. There are no definite plans, however, at present to that end but there is always the chance that another publisher might want to produce such abook.

Overall, I think the book is accessible to the lay person. Yes,there are parts which tend to be a bit more technical but these could be skimmed or passed over without doing significant damage to the theme or arguments of the book. It is hard to give concrete guidance on this but for people really interested in some of this, I think they can read it to some benefit.

I can give you a personal anecdote from my students days. I became interested in some later medieval church history and oneof the subjects had to do with what is today the Czech Republic. Of course the place names and personal names were completely unpronouncible and for a while it was really off-putting. At length, I simply started to ignore words I could not pronounce and managed to learn a great deal.

The other thing is that hopefully the context of what I have written mayshed light on the meaning of technical words or passages.

Thanks for your sentiments about the UPC answering my book. I think they should. My book is not an attack on them and in fact I have just written a short essay on why I wrote the book which is being published at the first of next month on a website run by a UPC minister.

You are quite right to point out that normally the message is left unanswered while the messenger is clubbed. That is an unfortunate tactic. I have heard one comment second hand that a ranking official of the UPC in the mid-west has bought a number of copies of the book and is handing them out and intends to buy more. I cannot say what the motivation is,whether he is looking for support for a bonfire or thinks there is somemerit in the book itself which his colleagues need to read.

It is most unfortunate that UPC people generally do not read, study for themselves or exercise much critical thought about their faith andhistory. I do expect someone like David Bernard to write some type of review but I will not expect much more than a general dismissal based on a supposition that I have an axe to grind or something like that.

I would be pleased to again hear from you especially after you've had occasion to read the entire book. By the way, what part of the world do you live in and do you have UPC connections?

Thanks for your comments.

Best wishes,
Thomas Fudge

Thanks for sharing. I have printed it and placed it with my book. I am trying ot gather as much as I can surrounding the book.