Prosthelizing from new org

[HangingOut]

What is the opinion of the new org mass mailing to the UPCI ministers.
Do they have a statement as to their justification for this. My pastor has not inquired about anything from them and yet he recieves their magazine.

[Sam]

This is considered "unethical" and "sheep stealing" by some.
But, isn't most Oneness Pentecostal evangelism based on getting church members out of their churches and into a Pentecostal church?

[mizpeh]

But, isn't most Oneness Pentecostal evangelism based on getting church members out of their churches and into a Pentecostal church?

Why don't you take a poll of all the OP pastors here and see if that is their method of evangelism! :whistle

[tstew]

What is the opinion of the new org mass mailing to the UPCI ministers.
Do they have a statement as to their justification for this. My pastor has not inquired about anything from them and yet he recieves their magazine.

Highly unethical. I can't believe it is still going on if this is true.

[rgcraig]

Here's a thread where we discussed this before:

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=11840&highlight=mailing+list

[Sept5SavedTeen]

What makes it unethical to try to persuade a consenting adult to your view of things?

-Bro. Alex

[tv1a]

The upci is raiding the aljc...
The wpf is raiding the upci...

Brings me to a point I made on another thread how an organization that is consistently claiming considerable increases in membership fail to crack a million constituents without counting people from foreign countries.

We don't expect preachers to raid saints. Organizations should be held to the same standard.

This is considered "unethical" and "sheep stealing" by some.
But, isn't most Oneness Pentecostal evangelism based on getting church members out of their churches and into a Pentecostal church?

[Bowas]

What makes it unethical to try to persuade a consenting adult to your view of things?

-Bro. Alex


The same thing as it would be unethical for a minister to leave a mother church and continue to "make contact" with members from the church he just left showing them what was going on in the new church he was starting.
I know it has been bantered about before, but it is still wrong no matter how one wants to rationalize it.

[tstew]

What makes it unethical to try to persuade a consenting adult to your view of things?

-Bro. Alex

??? This is not solicited material. The only thing these adults consented to was being licensed with the UPCI.

[Bowas]

??? This is not solicited material. The only thing these adults consented to was being licensed with the UPCI.

You got that right.
Oh, they wrap themselves in mock ethics by saying, "well if you do not want to recieve the solicitaion, you can request to be removed". Nonsense. True ethics would have it the other way. If you want on the solictaion list, then you should request ot be on it.
It is obvious why it is going on, and shameful this is going on.

[tv1a]

This is the same group who says it is okay to have computers which bring pornography into the home with little effort, yet outlaw television which has systems set in place where one could be lucky if a Disney cartoon could pass through the filter. Legalists are experts at rationalizing. Pharisees have self righteouss justification down pat. They lied right from the start. We all knew they were going to do it so it should be no suprise.


The same thing as it would be unethical for a minister to leave a mother church and continue to "make contact" with members from the church he just left showing them what was going on in the new church he was starting.
I know it has been bantered about before, but it is still wrong no matter how one wants to rationalize it.

[Sept5SavedTeen]

But orgs grow by recruiting people, so why shouldn't the WPF send something out to all the apostolic ministers it can contact to let it know about its fellowship?
If someone wants to join them it's not sheep/pastor stealing, that person chose to join that org.

I don't understand this "ethics" thing, but I am also indep, so I don't often come across this sort of stuff (or will in the future, since I plan to stay indep), I guess...

-Bro. Alex

[George]

??? This is not solicited material. The only thing these adults consented to was being licensed with the UPCI.

EXACTLY! It is still going on, it is still unethical, and they are never going to be ethical.

[Melody]

A magazine that is excellent in content, is unethical?
But signing an affirmation statement that one doesn't adhere to isn't unethical, unbelievable.
There are several things mailed to me that I don't "sub" to and I have never been offended, and not once in the "unethical" magazine do they ever "talk bad" about any organization.

Just so you know the "organization" sells, without our consent, our addresses to anyone that asks.............

[bkstokes]

In the end -- these issues really don't matter. They are human organizations, and the Kingdom of God is a whole lot bigger than both of them combined.

[aak1972]

This is the same group who says it is okay to have computers which bring pornography into the home with little effort, yet outlaw television which has systems set in place where one could be lucky if a Disney cartoon could pass through the filter. Legalists are experts at rationalizing. Pharisees have self righteouss justification down pat. They lied right from the start. We all knew they were going to do it so it should be no suprise.

This TV vs internet issue is competely absurd. I have heard the craziest arguments. We all know what you could do with a web cam. The anti TV people say we cant control what we watch and dont have the ability to change the channel if something comes on questionable. But we can control our internet, something that is a lot easier to hide than a TV program. These people are completely out of the loop. How many marriages has TV broken up compared to eharmony and the such??

[Timmy]

In the end -- these issues really don't matter. They are human organizations, and the Kingdom of God is a whole lot bigger than both of them combined.

Don't matter? Mmmmmkay.

[tstew]

A magazine that is excellent in content, is unethical?
But signing an affirmation statement that one doesn't adhere to isn't unethical, unbelievable.
There are several things mailed to me that I don't "sub" to and I have never been offended, and not once in the "unethical" magazine do they ever "talk bad" about any organization.

Just so you know the "organization" sells, without our consent, our addresses to anyone that asks.............

To whom Melody? Can you name names of random organizations who have received our mailing lists and are sending things out to all of the ministers?

And yes, what is being done is highly unethical. But I would really appreciate a list to back up your claims.

[A.W. Bowman]

Unethical?

To receive unsolicited mailings (news papers, political advertisements, store sales, catalogs, outreach mailings/door hangers at houses for folks to attend other churches, inviting friends, family and even strangers to visit your church for special events, etc.) one considers to be trash, then simply trash it. No one is "required" to read such magazines - and yet, who knows, there just might be an article in there you could find interesting, perhaps even valuable. I can't say - I don't get any. LOLOL

[Scott Hutchinson]

I have seen and read their magazine and there is some good reading in it.

[Bowas]

Unethical?

To receive unsolicited mailings (news papers, political advertisements, store sales, catalogs, outreach mailings/door hangers at houses for folks to attend other churches, inviting friends, family and even strangers to visit your church for special events, etc.) one considers to be trash, then simply trash it. No one is "required" to read such magazines - and yet, who knows, there just might be an article in there you could find interesting, perhaps even valuable. I can't say - I don't get any. LOLOL

Just because there is some good articles in it does not make it ethical.
I guess a good question would be to ask why they would spend money on a magazine and send it unrequested to ministers from an organization they just left just so the ministers from the organizatoin they left may find a good article to read. I think not.
People invest money in the hopes of gaining something from it. Be it more money or more members.

[2020Vision]

Unethical?

To receive unsolicited mailings (news papers, political advertisements, store sales, catalogs, outreach mailings/door hangers at houses for folks to attend other churches, inviting friends, family and even strangers to visit your church for special events, etc.) one considers to be trash, then simply trash it. No one is "required" to read such magazines - and yet, who knows, there just might be an article in there you could find interesting, perhaps even valuable. I can't say - I don't get any. LOLOL

Exactly. Hatred creates blinders. Charisma Today somehow found my address on a distribution list and sent me a FREE copy. How unethical!

[HangingOut]

Answer this for me, why would they solicit every minister from the supposed liberal org they just seperated themselves from a mere months before. Are they trying to weed out the left over liberal from Cons to come on down and join. Sorry, it is a numbers and money game in my opinion. My pastor wouldn't meet their standards. He watches "Little House on the Praire."


But orgs grow by recruiting people, so why shouldn't the WPF send something out to all the apostolic ministers it can contact to let it know about its fellowship?
If someone wants to join them it's not sheep/pastor stealing, that person chose to join that org.

I don't understand this "ethics" thing, but I am also indep, so I don't often come across this sort of stuff (or will in the future, since I plan to stay indep), I guess...

-Bro. Alex

[HangingOut]

I understand that but timing here is of consideration. I can understand notices and invitations that led up to the voting and continuing to advertize on their web site. To me anyway, mass mailing the constinguency after the vote is another tactic altogether.


A magazine that is excellent in content, is unethical?
But signing an affirmation statement that one doesn't adhere to isn't unethical, unbelievable.
There are several things mailed to me that I don't "sub" to and I have never been offended, and not once in the "unethical" magazine do they ever "talk bad" about any organization.

Just so you know the "organization" sells, without our consent, our addresses to anyone that asks.............

[2020Vision]

Answer this for me, why would they solicit every minister from the supposed liberal org they just seperated themselves from a mere months before. Are they trying to weed out the left over liberal from Cons to come on down and join. Sorry, it is a numbers and money game in my opinion. My pastor wouldn't meet their standards. He watches "Little House on the Praire."

get over it and let it go... they have something they want to share. If you decide to join because of the magazine, that's your choice. If not, it's okay. For crying out loud it's an Apostolic magazine. We need more of them!

[tstew]

What helps put this in perspective is the fact that every one of them would have a huge problem with this happening in their local assembly. It is not the same as receiving a Circuit City circular in the mail. That is a ludicrous comparison.

[HangingOut]

Excellant point!


What helps put this in perspective is the fact that every one of them would have a huge problem with this happening in their local assembly. It is not the same as receiving a Circuit City circular in the mail. That is a ludicrous comparison.

[George]

Just because there is some good articles in it does not make it ethical.
I guess a good question would be to ask why they would spend money on a magazine and send it unrequested to ministers from an organization they just left just so the ministers from the organizatoin they left may find a good article to read. I think not.
People invest money in the hopes of gaining something from it. Be it more money or more members.

EXACTLY. This is why it is unethical.

[George]

Exactly. Hatred creates blinders. Charisma Today somehow found my address on a distribution list and sent me a FREE copy. How unethical!

Bet they didn't keep sending it to you for over a year. BTW, they were trying to solicit you with their "FREE" mag.

WPF won't give up on their solicitation.

[George]

What helps put this in perspective is the fact that every one of them would have a huge problem with this happening in their local assembly. It is not the same as receiving a Circuit City circular in the mail. That is a ludicrous comparison.

Your speaking truth.

[2020Vision]

Bet they didn't keep sending it to you for over a year. BTW, they were trying to solicit you with their "FREE" mag.

WPF won't give up on their solicitation.

Let them waste their money then! Their business...
I tend to think many of them just care about getting their voices heard. My take. Splits are splits. UPC was formed because of a split. That part we've got to let go.

CT did not continue for a year! Wish they had! Love reading attacks on us Oneness folks!

[A.W. Bowman]

Time for a quick lesion in ethics and identifying what constitutes acceptable moral conduct?

I await instruction.

[tstew]

Time for a quick lesion in ethics and identifying what constitutes acceptable moral conduct?

I await instruction.

You can usually start with "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", and not engage in anything that you know you would not want done in your assembly. That usually goes a long way.

[A.W. Bowman]

You can usually start with "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", and not engage in anything that you know you would not want done in your assembly. That usually goes a long way.

Yep, that is an excellent place to start. Thanks.

Now, as we can see from this thread, there is some question as to how this approach is to be implemented. We seem to have a difference of opinion as to what this principle means and how it should be understood. Also, how the definitions of ethics and moral conduct work together in establishing the foundations of the value judgments rendered so far on this thread.

Again, thanks for a wonderful start - Now, on to the next step in the lesson.

Anyone - -

[tstew]

Yep, that is an excellent place to start. Thanks.

Now, as we can see from this thread, there is some question as to how this approach is to be implemented. We seem to have a difference of opinion as to what this principle means and how it should be understood. Also, how the definitions of ethics and moral conduct work together in establishing the foundations of the value judgments rendered so far on this thread.

Again, thanks for a wonderful start - Now, on to the next step in the lesson.

Anyone - -

I would then move to placing Kingdom building over Church building, and not engaging in any activity that may help you build a church in the short term but be detrimental to the Kingdom in any way. Ministerial ethics is a very important issue to me.

[mizpeh]

Let them waste their money then! Their business...
I tend to think many of them just care about getting their voices heard. My take. Splits are splits. UPC was formed because of a split. That part we've got to let go.

CT did not continue for a year! Wish they had! Love reading attacks on us Oneness folks!

I thought the UPC was formed because of a MERGER?

[2020Vision]

I thought the UPC was formed because of a MERGER?

However it's well-crafted. Doesn't make good PR to say "UPC was formed after the split in 1945"...

AOG - 1914
SPLIT into The General Assembly of the Apostolic Assemblies - 1917
MERGED with The Pentecostal Assemblies of the World - 1918
SPLIT BIGTIME - 3 movements: The Apostolic Churches of Jesus Christ, The Pentecostal Ministerial Alliance, and Emmanuel's Church in Jesus Christ - 1925
MERGED TOGETHER - The Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ - 1927
MERGE - The Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ - 1931
MERGE - United Pentecostal Church International - 1945

I guess we're both right. Just depends how far back we want to go! Lots of merging and splitting in Pentecost history!

[Sam]

In the end -- these issues really don't matter. They are human organizations, and the Kingdom of God is a whole lot bigger than both of them combined.

Of course God is not ignorant of our organizations (or preachers' unions), He knows they exist, but I think He ignores them and doesn't even recognize them. That's my personal opinion.

[Sam]

However it's well-crafted. Doesn't make good PR to say "UPC was formed after the split in 1945"...

AOG - 1914
SPLIT into The General Assembly of the Apostolic Assemblies - 1917
MERGED with The Pentecostal Assemblies of the World - 1918
SPLIT BIGTIME - 3 movements: The Apostolic Churches of Jesus Christ, The Pentecostal Ministerial Alliance, and Emmanuel's Church in Jesus Christ - 1925
MERGED TOGETHER - The Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ - 1927
MERGE - The Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ - 1931
MERGE - United Pentecostal Church International - 1945

I guess we're both right. Just depends how far back we want to go! Lots of merging and splitting in Pentecost history!

And, if I remember correctly,
--after the formation of the PAJC in 1931, many African American ministers left that group, revived the PAW charter, and continue today as the PAW.
--after the PAJC/PCI merger (or some would say hostile takeover of the PCI by the PAJC) some of the PAJC ministers maintained the PAJC charter and that organization still exists today. Their headquarters are about an hour away from where I live in Ohio.

[Sam]

You can usually start with "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", and not engage in anything that you know you would not want done in your assembly. That usually goes a long way.

Now what does that kind of an attitude have to do with (religious) politics?

[Sam]

L
...
CT did not continue for a year! Wish they had! Love reading attacks on us Oneness folks!


What is or was CT?

[MO Preacher]

I send a letter to WPF and asked to be removed from the mailing list. The did not comply with the first request. I send an email to them through their web page and two weeks later they answered. They said they would address the issue and apologized. However, the letter was unsigned.

For some reason the letters I received from this org WPF does not like to sign their letters. I say take a stand and sign your name.

MO

[Sam]

Time for a quick lesion in ethics and identifying what constitutes acceptable moral conduct?

I await instruction.

lesion in ethics?

Whassat? Back stabbing?

[SOUNWORTHY]

But orgs grow by recruiting people, so why shouldn't the WPF send something out to all the apostolic ministers it can contact to let it know about its fellowship?
If someone wants to join them it's not sheep/pastor stealing, that person chose to join that org.

I don't understand this "ethics" thing, but I am also indep, so I don't often come across this sort of stuff (or will in the future, since I plan to stay indep), I guess...

-Bro. Alex

If WPF wasn't happy with UPCI standards why do they try to steal those unholy members that they were unhappy with.
That's like someone leaving my business, starting their own then recruting my employees to come with their business.

[A.W. Bowman]

lesion in ethics?

Whassat? Back stabbing?

LOLOL

Sam - love ya bro! It is such a blessing to share a thread with you again!

[SOUNWORTHY]

I've always felt WPF is a power play, the more members the more power. Let them solicit those who are independent. What they are doing is the same as my pastor sending our church bulletin to all the members of your church.

[tstew]

Now what does that kind of an attitude have to do with (religious) politics?

:) Yeah, I guess that is where it falls apart.

[Bowas]

I've always felt WPF is a power play, the more members the more power. Let them solicit those who are independent. What they are doing is the same as my pastor sending our church bulletin to all the members of your church.

Try this and see what happens.
Find an issue(s) in which you have a disagreement with your pastor in his church. While still attending the church, talk to other saints about your disagreements with the pastor and the church and when you get a sufficient number of saints from that church that you have convinced you are more right than the church in which you all have been attending, well, just split and start your own church across town.
Oh, and while you are over there, get together with those that you convinced to go out with you to develop a mailing list of all the saints/friends from the church you just left and keep them informed of what you have going on in your new church across town. And while you are at it, make a magazine that you can send to the church members you just broke away from and think of a name for the magazine that would describe your spirit and attitude. Hey. I have an idea, call it "Together". Makes since to me. Break off with several saints from a church and keep the saints that stayed up to date with a message of "togetherness".
Naw. Nothing unethical about that.
Try it at home. Remember, it is not unethical if you allow them to unsubscribe to your advances.
This is all just my opinion as I see it...but I am right. ;)

[jaxfam6]

I can remember back in the 70's and 80's when I was still ULTRA CON and attending a church that was part of the super ultra con organization. If someone left the UPC, ALJC, PAW, or any other org and wanted to come to them they did not ask questions and they did not ask them to tell their pastor why they were leaving or to t least leave on good terms. They simply accepted them in.

When I left that group and went to an ALJC church the pastor told me that if I wanted to attend where he pastored I needed to make sure I told my former pastor why I was leaving. He said to do it in person if possible, if not by phone. In my circumstances he advised I could also write a letter if I felt it best but it had to be done and be read by the pastor before I could attend. He also wanted me to state where I was going to go. I did so and life was horrible for my family for several months. See my brother had been my pastor and it was not just a church thing but we had to be able to see each other at family get togethers. He did not talk to me for 6 months and then when he did it as because I forced him and he was nasty. Took him 3 years to get through it and finally understand why I did what I did.

Now that all said to say this.

I had a friend that had not being going to church for 5 years. If he did it was only a visit from time to time but not regular. His wife still went to that church I had left. After about 2 years of going there and still being in touch with him and his family he told me that he had been thinking of coming to visit with us but wanted his wife to come with him. He did not want his family going to different churches. She refused. Two more years and his dad passed away and he again expressed desire to attend with us. I looked at his wife and told her he was the leader of his family and to be biblically correct she should go where he said. She said she had a church and was not going to leave it. I told her then that when her marriage was distroyed and they were both not serving God she only was going to have herself to blame. If he wanted to go some place else where he felt he could serve God she should go with him no matter where it was as long as it taught truth. Well today they are divorced and both live with out people and neither of them go to church.

To bring to a close. I was accused of proslytizing. This boy did not even go to church there only his wife did. You would think that they would be happy about him going to church ANYWHERE just so he was going. Not so.

proselytize
intransitive verb
1 : to induce someone to convert to one's faith
2 : to recruit someone to join one's party, institution, or cause
transitive verb
: to recruit or convert especially to a new faith, institution, or cause

If you are trying to get people to join your church you obviously think that the church they go to is wrong. Does it make it right to do so? Well from my experience the general mind set is that it is okay for me to do it to you but not for you to do it to me.

[A.W. Bowman]

Now, aside from the fact no one has actually defined ethical conduct or how it relates to one's moral character or personal integrity, we are left with one glaring issue, which is the question of spiritual loyalty.

What we have expressed on these pages is that one must be loyal to one’s organization, one’s pastor (or other appointed authority) and to be loyal to the local assembly.

We also have had expressed the idea that it is wrong to engage in “sheep stealing”, e.g. inviting members of another church (same organization) to visit (or even join) your church.

That the proselytize other churches, religious groups and organizations is Okay – or even from the same organization if the pastor gives his/her permission, as it is currently done in a number of churches I have attended.

That local church attendance is really all about people numbers and the money they bring into the coffers.

What have I missed?

Oh yes, our first loyalty is to be to people, things, and activities, in that order. I can’t think of a book, chapter and verse right off hand, but that’s Bible. Right? Yet, somewhere burred in all of those words, is a little known and even less practiced principle concerning the theory that there is but one God, one Spirit, one Christ and He has only one undivided church – consisting of many parts. Now, even though there are no scriptures to support this strange concept, I am convinced that my allegiance is to be to God through Jesus Christ, and I am to give honor (not allegiance, worship, or lordship) to those appointed over me. And, to those to have the responsibility of teaching the word of God, I am to render double honor. Abstract concepts, I realize, but gee, would it not be nice when we all reach the unity of the Faith among the brethren rather than just conformity of look and actions within a closed meeting? What if all of the really called of God ministers of the faith came together and created a area wide counsel of elders to over see the many local assemblies? And, weeded out those wolves in sheep’s clothing from among us!

Ah, what if we were no longer in bondage to building programs? What if we actually spent out our money, not on mortgages, utilities, and building maintenance but on spreading the gospel of the kingdom of God, taking care of the elderly, the widow, the orphan, the sick, the poor, and imprisoned? First to those within the body of believers and also to those outside of our group. What ever happened “to the Jew first and also the Gentile”? Novel concepts, I know. These ideas will never fly except in someone’s flight of fancy.

So I charge you all, keep your priorities straight: Keep your allegiance to the pastor first (be he right or wrong, called of God or just another wolf, it makes no difference as long as you don’t make any waves), the congregation second (growing in the Spirit or not, even stunted or dying), and your programs third (do what makes one look good among the congregation and even within the society at large) – then if you have any time, money or energy left, you might consider your family’s needs, and we can always let someone else take care of the lost, the dying and the hurting.

I have met a few church leaders who actually practiced what they preached. I can hear their voices almost as if they all said the same words. “If you cannot get your spiritual needs met here, under my teaching and leadership, please let me help you find a church that will met your needs, and where God can put you into the ministry He has called you to. Your soul and spiritual growth is more important to God than your presence on Sunday morning in this church.” Strange words coming from A/P preachers - who actually meant them - in love,compassion and concern!

But, these pastors aren’t very spiritual men in the modern American church way, they were not socially pragmatic or spiritually practical, they only wanted what was best for the saint of God. What a novel concept!

-------------------

Alright, I do apologize for preaching down to everyone here. But, I do so for only one reason, to shake us all from our parochial attitudes for a moment, so we might see how our seemingly important differences and profound theological discussions really fit into the kingdom of God/heaven worldview. Our modern-day churches have become more obsessed with power, money, influence and feeding our personal pride than with the things of God and what actually matters to Him. Mt 23 seems an appropriate passage to reference, with Lk 18:9-14 added just for good measure.

Shalom Aleichem
Peace be Unto You

[Melody]

In all probability those who oppose WPF it will never matter what they do good, they are wrong and forever will be wrong, WPF would have never started had the UPC upheld the manual. There is never to be a resolution that would bring about a division and the leadership went ahead, lets see how many years until they felt they had the conference loaded enough to get the failed resolution passed.

How far does the upci org have to go before it is shocking enough?
Isnt' youth congress a good enough example? How about the CO convention isn't is a good enough example?

At least Phillips disagreed and left, Hutchins disagreed and left, Suber disagreed and left.

So the resolution passes albeit marginally, so men who had a different view left, but they also left letting ministers who also disagree that they would be open to fellowship, I do believe all the name calling has been one sided, from the UPCI org, any letters from any of the other men? Didn't think so.

Amazing how all those letters haven't been termed as unethical.

As for the mailing list information headquarters can be contacted at 314-837-7300. You can even email them go to upci.org.

[A.W. Bowman]

Beloved sister - Melody

You really do well in your comments. You open up so many doors for exposure to "the light".

For example, you have exposed a great lie: Here were have two (of the great many) oneness organizations and who knows how many independent churches, who all proudly proclaim that they have “the truth”. When compared to other O/A/P churches and organizations, each proclaims that they alone possess (live, preach, teach) “the truth” or a better version, or "more of the truth" than those churches (organizations) across town. Now, what is wrong with that picture?

One of our religious mantras is that those who teach (or accept) false doctrines are going to hell. Well, we can’t get a full agreement of what constitutes the true and absolute doctrines even within with in a single congregation over 25 people, much less throughout the entire Christian community.

Which brings us to my final two questions:

First, if you exist, will the one person who does not hold to any false doctrine (i.e., judged as worthy of heaven according to holding to only true and pure doctrines. i.e., doctrines without any error) please stand up and identify yourself?

Second, why would anyone think the members of your church are better suited (ensured) of going to heaven than the members of another church (same organization) who will not fellowship with you over doctrinal issues?

My conclusion: I am more obsessed with being justified in my own eyes and in the eyes of my congregation, than I am in establishing my personal and intimate relationship with God and being justified by Him alone.

Shalom v'Shalom
Peace be multiplied unto your peace.

[Bowas]

In all probability those who oppose WPF it will never matter what they do good, they are wrong and forever will be wrong, WPF would have never started had the UPC upheld the manual. There is never to be a resolution that would bring about a division and the leadership went ahead, lets see how many years until they felt they had the conference loaded enough to get the failed resolution passed.

How far does the upci org have to go before it is shocking enough?
Isnt' youth congress a good enough example? How about the CO convention isn't is a good enough example?

At least Phillips disagreed and left, Hutchins disagreed and left, Suber disagreed and left.

So the resolution passes albeit marginally, so men who had a different view left, but they also left letting ministers who also disagree that they would be open to fellowship, I do believe all the name calling has been one sided, from the UPCI org, any letters from any of the other men? Didn't think so.

Amazing how all those letters haven't been termed as unethical.

As for the mailing list information headquarters can be contacted at 314-837-7300. You can even email them go to upci.org.

It appears you are attemting to justify unethical behaviour (prosthelizing by the WPF) by detailing why an individual(s) may want to leave.
The topic is Prosthelizing or the ethics of it.
The men you mentioned as having left the UPCI did things very differently than the WPF. They did not actively send unsolicted literature to the memembers of the organization they had just left.
The reasons are way obvious.
If an individual wants to leave, they may, That is not unethical. If however,
they try to take members with them, that is.
I have left a church because of majors differences with the pastor and the direction he was taking the church. I did not in any way try to sway other members in that church to leave with me. I could have swayed some to see it my way had I been laying the foundation (subversive) in the years prior to me leaving. I had already conferred with the pastor long before I left, and when the time came for me to leave, I left. I did not cause a ruckus and confuse other members, I left. I could have callled the members staying informing them of what I was doing and how the Lord really was continuing to blessed me after I left. I did not. Ethics!
Either it is or it isn't.

[Encryptus]

Unethical?

To receive unsolicited mailings (news papers, political advertisements, store sales, catalogs, outreach mailings/door hangers at houses for folks to attend other churches, inviting friends, family and even strangers to visit your church for special events, etc.) one considers to be trash, then simply trash it. No one is "required" to read such magazines - and yet, who knows, there just might be an article in there you could find interesting, perhaps even valuable. I can't say - I don't get any. LOLOL

The lack of ethics comes merely from the issue that ministers left the UPCI and are now using that mailing list obtained while they were members to promote defection.

It is a clear understanding the list is not to be used for solicitation purposes.

It was and still is an unethical use of that information.

OTHER than that I agree with your assertion above.

[A.W. Bowman]

Excellent point, Encryptus! And, it is good to see you again!

If the mailing list is used for a purpose other than intended by the issuing organization, then there is a breach in trust and confidence, even if the mailing of the magizine is not a clear solicitation effort. If there is no clear statement concerning the used of the mailing list (membership list/book, etc.), or if there is a claus against non-members using the list, then there is a true ethics issue.

The problem is that these agreed to understandings have not been published until now, rather than at the start of the thread. Actually, the official agreement to the use and/or dissemination of any official membership list is still rather vague. The additional item is does anyone know for certainty the mailing list come from the official UPCI list, and were not names contributed from private lists of defecting members? If this latter point is the case, then while the use of such lists might be legal, it could still constitute an ethics issue.

Now, who among the UPCI membership receives these complementary mailings? Everyone? Only a few? Are these mass mailings or selected mailings? Are they overt invitations for membership or informational and/or instructional in content? Sometimes black and white issues are not always so black and white.


For example:

If there is a membership agreement clause that states that members of this organization shall not use any personal or organizational information derived from their membership in this organization for any purpose not specifically sanctioned by this organization, it shall be deemed as a breach of trust. Or, some other such wording which is used to preclude any non-member (including former members) from using any information (personal or organizational) for any purpose other than that intended by the bylaws of such organization.

Then perhaps there also needs an additional clause that prohibits fellowship between members of the organization and those who have left it. That would make mailing/phone lists containing friends among several organizations null and void, along with the exchange of information among (former?) friends.

So, the entire issue now stands or falls on what does the membership agreement actually state? Anyone care to publish it here? Or, would that constitute another breach in trust?

If any of my speculations are supported by facts, then you have an ethical issue. If not, then the discussion remains unresolved. And, like beauty, the issue shall remain defined only in the eye of the beholder.

[A.W. Bowman]

Sorry, I had to make a few editorial corrections to my original post, above. Plus this additional note:

I was remiss when I joined into the discussion for not requesting the clarifying information - that I noted in my latest post. Conclusions and decisions based on insufficient information almost always lead to bad conclusions and decisions.

[Sam]

... There is never to be a resolution that would bring about a division and the leadership went ahead, ....

The revision to the fundamental doctrine statement in 1973 could be considered divisive. The adoption of the affirmation statement could be considered divisive. Could these two resolutions fall in the category of Proverbs 6:19?

[Bowas]

Excellent point, Encryptus! And, it is good to see you again!

If the mailing list is used for a purpose other than intended by the issuing organization, then there is a breach in trust and confidence, even if the mailing of the magizine is not a clear solicitation effort. If there is no clear statement concerning the used of the mailing list (membership list/book, etc.), or if there is a claus against non-members using the list, then there is a true ethics issue.

The problem is that these agreed to understandings have not been published until now, rather than at the start of the thread. Actually, the official agreement to the use and/or dissemination of any official membership list is still rather vague. The additional item is does anyone know for certainty the mailing list come from the official UPCI list, and were not names contributed from private lists of defecting members? If this latter point is the case, then while the use of such lists might be legal, it could still constitute an ethics issue.

Now, who among the UPCI membership receives these complementary mailings? Everyone? Only a few? Are these mass mailings or selected mailings? Are they overt invitations for membership or informational and/or instructional in content? Sometimes black and white issues are not always so black and white.


For example:

If there is a membership agreement clause that states that members of this organization shall not use any personal or organizational information derived from their membership in this organization for any purpose not specifically sanctioned by this organization, it shall be deemed as a breach of trust. Or, some other such wording which is used to preclude any non-member (including former members) from using any information (personal or organizational) for any purpose other than that intended by the bylaws of such organization.

Then perhaps there also needs an additional clause that prohibits fellowship between members of the organization and those who have left it. That would make mailing/phone lists containing friends among several organizations null and void, along with the exchange of information among (former?) friends.

So, the entire issue now stands or falls on what does the membership agreement actually state? Anyone care to publish it here? Or, would that constitute another breach in trust?

If any of my speculations are supported by facts, then you have an ethical issue. If not, then the discussion remains unresolved. And, like beauty, the issue shall remain defined only in the eye of the beholder.

I am not sure if this is true, but I believe EVERY member of the UPCI recieves these publications. The UPCI is not the saints in the pews. It is a fellowship of licensed ministers.
One reason to only target that select group is no doubt varied, but if they can get the ministers, it is easier and cheaper to get the saints that would invariably follow the minister in the church they attend.

[CAD/JPY]

I think you need to remember that the UPCI is a fellowship of ministers. It is an organization of like minded brethern... ministering brethern.... not saints. To compare the topic of proselytizing membership of the UPCI to the equivalent of a saint being "wooed" over to a different church.... well, that is incorrect.

I am a licensed minister. I think of my membership as being similar to that of a doctor or a lawyer. I have a board I met for licensing, conduct issues, and membership in an organization that should be protecting the best interests of my license.

Part of protecting my best interests is allowing me access to periodicals, relevant events, and organized meetings that would support me in my endeavors...... even if you don't agree with it. I make the choice of what I want to learn about, or who I want to go listen to, or where I choose to hold license... OR who I fellowship with!

Even when we don't understand it We must trust, that others, like ourselves... are following the leading of the Holy Spirit.

[tv1a]

The phrase Like-minded is very misleading. The like-mindedness at the merger is a lot different than the like-madness of today.


I think you need to remember that the UPCI is a fellowship of ministers. It is an organization of like minded brethern... ministering brethern.... not saints. To compare the topic of proselytizing membership of the UPCI to the equivalent of a saint being "wooed" over to a different church.... well, that is incorrect.

I am a licensed minister. I think of my membership as being similar to that of a doctor or a lawyer. I have a board I met for licensing, conduct issues, and membership in an organization that should be protecting the best interests of my license.

Part of protecting my best interests is allowing me access to periodicals, relevant events, and organized meetings that would support me in my endeavors...... even if you don't agree with it. I make the choice of what I want to learn about, or who I want to go listen to, or where I choose to hold license... OR who I fellowship with!

Even when we don't understand it We must trust, that others, like ourselves... are following the leading of the Holy Spirit.

[HammondMan]

What is the opinion of the new org mass mailing to the UPCI ministers.
Do they have a statement as to their justification for this. My pastor has not inquired about anything from them and yet he recieves their magazine.

I'd recommend him to contact the WPF and request he be taken off their mailing list. I'm sure they would accomodate. If you want their number, and are really that concerned, here it is - www.worldwidepf.com. (and that's not prosthelizing).

I attend a UPC chuch in the ST. LOUIS, MO metro area, and my pastor recieves the TOGETHER magazine. I don't know if he paid for it, but frankly, I'd personally pay the subscription in order for him to recieve it (I pay for my own subscription, as well as one for my father). I'm 54 years old, and have been in a UPC church all my life. (and I've also worked at the Publishing House).

The Bible is our way to salvation not an organization. Why can't people get that through their heads? My parents remember when the UPC was first brought into being. Similar frustrations occured between both "factions". They've also watched the "progress" of both groups from their separation back in the 40's. Do your own research.

I decided to take a "see with my own eyes, and hear with my own ears" approach, rather than listen to all the ministerial gossip. I went to this year's Summit 2009 in Tulsa, and it was greatly refreshing. Perhaps those who read this forum would be better served by eye accounts of their own, rather than the "He said, She said", approach that's sometimes found here.

Yes, I'm UPC. I'll be going to the annual conference (it's only 20 minutes away). And I'll also be going to Summit 2010 in Tulsa next year. Excommunicate me. Jesus still cares anyway.