|
The issue is ethics. To sign a pledge to honor unity within your organization then to stay within that organization but attempt to draw others into a different assembly is totally unethical.
If this were a business situation it could easily result in a successful lawsuit for tortious interference. It is sad that business ethics would transcend those of ministers.
The men of ‘92 withdrew with honor, the issue is not whether or not they had leadership, it is how they conducted themselves while still members of the UPCI.
If some feel the need to form their own fellowship because they feel the UPCI no longer a holiness organization, they are to be commended for following their convictions.
If some feel that we need to use every technology available to reach the lost, they are to be commended for following their convictions.
As to the few who feel compelled to use all means at there disposal to draw away members from the organization they are still members of, and into a different organization, such actions are not only unethical, they are without honor.
IF the UPCI were a company and a current employee wished to form a new company, and covertly or overtly used company produced mailing lists, contacts, etc. to this end, they would be on the losing end of a lawsuit.
Lawyers, CPAs, and others have to take a course in ethics, and pass tests before licensure. It is becoming increasingly obvious something similar should be required of clergy.
And on the issue of ethics, neither side is void of blameless individuals. It is also unethical that many (if not most) ministers are signing pledges to uphold positions and standards which they have no intention of following or teaching. The rationale of I am just doing it because my DS says it does really mean anything is not worthy of a response.
|