Should the ALJC declare a UPC pastor out of bounds of fellowship if the pastor encourages an ALJC friend of his to join the UPC?
Organizations are not local churches with unscrupulous pastors trying to proselyte.
That parallel doesn't work.
I think a preacher ought to be free to join whatever organization he wants to join.
Why be so territorial and defensive and vindictive?
Agreed, it's not like a local church, but the UPC has to protect it's best intrest. If there's an outside or inside influence encouraging ministers to leave and join another organization, it'll hurt the UPC financially and number wise.
For that matter they have a right to try to block whoever it is.
Agreed, it's not like a local church, but the UPC has to protect it's best intrest. If there's an outside or inside influence encouraging ministers to leave and join another organization, it'll hurt the UPC financially and number wise. For that matter they have a right to try to block whoever it is.
Yer not about right, you ARE right! For this very reason, I don't think the double-dippers will be tolerated for long. Every pastor knows that when a saint (or should I say attendee) becomes disgruntled/apathetic/rebellious, etc., the first place you will usually notice a change is in their giving.
On an organizational level, I gather that many cons are questioning how monies are being allocated by FMD and I assume other departments. I have recently received letters promoting an alternative method of giving to missionaries. The idea is to send your money to this independent distributor who will then send 100% of your offerings to the missionary of your choosing-- whether they be UPC, ALJC, or some other OP group--thus ensuring that the missionary is really getting the money. This is a blatant end run around the org's bureacracy, and of course I received this letter soon after GC.
The first thing the Tulsa group will do (if they indeed try to stay in the org and become some sort of lobbying group to turn the org back in their direction) is try to starve the UPC of cash.
I say if you want out, just get out, because the effect this tactic will have is the UPC will then cut off the detracting group and swing even further to the left. The U-cons place in the org will then be quickly filled by U-libs, which I don't think is necessarily a good thing, but it's probably no worse than the other. I'm just not a big fan of extremism on either end. Anyways, in my evermore increasingly humble opinion (haha), the Tulsa group needs to generate a huge, diehard following quickly or they will be nothing more than a
self-marginalized splinter group that the average Apostolic will never know existed 5 years from now.
Yer not about right, you ARE right! For this very reason, I don't think the double-dippers will be tolerated for long. Every pastor knows that when a saint (or should I say attendee) becomes disgruntled/apathetic/rebellious, etc., the first place you will usually notice a change is in their giving.
On an organizational level, I gather that many cons are questioning how monies are being allocated by FMD and I assume other departments. I have recently received letters promoting an alternative method of giving to missionaries. The idea is to send your money to this independent distributor who will then send 100% of your offerings to the missionary of your choosing-- whether they be UPC, ALJC, or some other OP group--thus ensuring that the missionary is really getting the money. This is a blatant end run around the org's bureacracy, and of course I received this letter soon after GC.
The first thing the Tulsa group will do (if they indeed try to stay in the org and become some sort of lobbying group to turn the org back in their direction) is try to starve the UPC of cash.
I say if you want out, just get out, because the effect this tactic will have is the UPC will then cut off the detracting group and swing even further to the left. The U-cons place in the org will then be quickly filled by U-libs, which I don't think is necessarily a good thing, but it's probably no worse than the other. I'm just not a big fan of extremism on either end. Anyways, in my evermore increasingly humble opinion (haha), the Tulsa group needs to generate a huge, diehard following quickly or they will be nothing more than a
self-marginalized splinter group that the average Apostolic will never know existed 5 years from now.
Could it be the IAM foundation that you are talking about. This particular effort was started by Jonathan Alvear, and has been around for quite a while. It has nothing to do with the UPC or Tulsa. He is AMF. But I do know that a lot of UPCI ministers are tired of the beurocracy and deceit of the FMD, and have rerouted their funds to the missionaries through IAM.
I think that IF the main goal is that the missionary gets the funds he needs to fulfill his calling, then the goal is reached no matter where it comes from. I personally will send nothing through the FMD.
Could it be the IAM foundation that you are talking about. This particular effort was started by Jonathan Alvear, and has been around for quite a while. It has nothing to do with the UPC or Tulsa. He is AMF. But I do know that a lot of UPCI ministers are tired of the beurocracy and deceit of the FMD, and have rerouted their funds to the missionaries through IAM.
I think that IF the main goal is that the missionary gets the funds he needs to fulfill his calling, then the goal is reached no matter where it comes from. I personally will send nothing through the FMD.
St. Matthew, could you elaborate on the bolded portion? Perhaps give me an example?
I can't remember the group that sent me that info, although that name sounds familiar for some reason. I could have just saw it in the bible,though. I just know I had never received anything from them before and then suddenly, after GC, it appeared in my mailbox.
I agree that so long as the missionary gets the money, the source doesn't matter. But IMO the org will not sit idly by if huge amounts of finance are being siphoned off. They will figure out a way to regenerate their funds.....Just hoping they don't see raising our dues as the best short-term solution.
St. Matthew, could you elaborate on the bolded portion? Perhaps give me an example?
I can't remember the group that sent me that info, although that name sounds familiar for some reason. I could have just saw it in the bible,though. I just know I had never received anything from them before and then suddenly, after GC, it appeared in my mailbox.
I agree that so long as the missionary gets the money, the source doesn't matter. But IMO the org will not sit idly by if huge amounts of finance are being siphoned off. They will figure out a way to regenerate their funds.....Just hoping they don't see raising our dues as the best short-term solution.
I do know that FMD does take some % for administrative use. it exceeds 10% but is not 20%. if you send any missionary any money via FMD, they will take that %.
as to the hypocracy issue, there have been many charges thru the years. there are ongoing issues even now. As to their validity, it seems to me, that depends on which side of the debate you are on.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
I do know that FMD does take some % for administrative use. it exceeds 10% but is not 20%. if you send any missionary any money via FMD, they will take that %.
as to the hypocracy issue, there have been many charges thru the years. there are ongoing issues even now. As to their validity, it seems to me, that depends on which side of the debate you are on.
No, but FMD is covering other depts. debt with money donated specifically to missionaries.
That is totally wrong and designed for wealth.
They should operate within a budget and no more. Under that system, they end up with money they have to figure out how to spend.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferd
I do know that FMD does take some % for administrative use. it exceeds 10% but is not 20%. if you send any missionary any money via FMD, they will take that %.
as to the hypocracy issue, there have been many charges thru the years. there are ongoing issues even now. As to their validity, it seems to me, that depends on which side of the debate you are on.
Could it be the IAM foundation that you are talking about. This particular effort was started by Jonathan Alvear, and has been around for quite a while. It has nothing to do with the UPC or Tulsa. He is AMF. But I do know that a lot of UPCI ministers are tired of the beurocracy and deceit of the FMD, and have rerouted their funds to the missionaries through IAM.
I think that IF the main goal is that the missionary gets the funds he needs to fulfill his calling, then the goal is reached no matter where it comes from. I personally will send nothing through the FMD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PreacherV
St. Matthew, could you elaborate on the bolded portion? Perhaps give me an example?
I can't remember the group that sent me that info, although that name sounds familiar for some reason. I could have just saw it in the bible,though. I just know I had never received anything from them before and then suddenly, after GC, it appeared in my mailbox.
I agree that so long as the missionary gets the money, the source doesn't matter. But IMO the org will not sit idly by if huge amounts of finance are being siphoned off. They will figure out a way to regenerate their funds.....Just hoping they don't see raising our dues as the best short-term solution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferd
I do know that FMD does take some % for administrative use. it exceeds 10% but is not 20%. if you send any missionary any money via FMD, they will take that %.
as to the hypocracy issue, there have been many charges thru the years. there are ongoing issues even now. As to their validity, it seems to me, that depends on which side of the debate you are on.
The 10-20% includes Health and Retirement for some and for some missionaries the money exchange rates are hurting them big time. Many feared the Resolution for fear it would cause them to lose funding. Some of the numbers thrown out are not factual given the exchange rates. If you gave $10 in July, that $10 is now $8.50 (or less) in some markets.
No one should completely drop Missionaries and should use IAM as an alternative if they have issues in their mind with FMD.
I don't think the issues of FMD are all about money but that is a closed subject for this board....
__________________
I am not a member here -Do not PM me please?
The 10-20% includes Health and Retirement for some and for some missionaries the money exchange rates are hurting them big time. Many feared the Resolution for fear it would cause them to lose funding. Some of the numbers thrown out are not factual given the exchange rates. If you gave $10 in July, that $10 is now $8.50 (or less) in some markets.
No one should completely drop Missionaries and should use IAM as an alternative if they have issues in their mind with FMD.
I don't think the issues of FMD are all about money but that is a closed subject for this board....
I don't have any "facts" to throw out, other than I do know someone who has had a close relationship with the foreign missions board over the years, and he doesn't have issues with how the money is handled.
Being as how he is the most financially responsible and fiscally prudent man that I know, I trust his opinion.
Hybrid Mode
