Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay
It was known that in some circles leaders were able to get away with it, but to say that it was an era of tolerance concerning it would be incorrect. Bro. Westburg, Bro. Terry, Bro. Bean, Bro. Ballestero, the Davis family, Bro. A.D. Urshan, Bro. Price, Bro. Clyde Haney, to name just a very few of the better known names held to a high standard. The fact is that many of these men left the organization (I can name many more of their spiritual heirs that have also left in more recent days). This contributed to the loosening of the standards.
The fact that there were churches such as Laurel, where worldiness was permitted actually proves nothing. Laurel was founded with strong holiness standards, but over the course of time pastors who were loose took it away from its roots. One of these men was elected as the District Secretary or Treasurer. It was tolerated in Mississippi simply because no one could do anything about it until the pastor left.
I could name other examples, however it is not necessary. That vaunted 'age of tolerance' did not tolerate worldly apparel on men or women.
|
Your point is noted. However, I did not infer that there weren't many conservatives and ultra conservatives in the UPC in the past 65 years. I would not only agree with that, but also think there were times when they were in the majority.
This does not negate the fact that men were elected into UPC office, even General Superintendent, who did not hold hard-line positions on things like jewelry and cut hair on women, not to even mention contrasting views of what constitutes the New Birth.
This speaks of tolerance we don't see today - in spite of the fact (as you accurately pointed out) many conservatives have now left the UPC.
For what it's worth your bias is showing when you state, "worldiness was permitted"...
Threaded Mode
