Letter From C.M. Becton Regarding Resolution 4

[rooted]

Dear Friend:

Christian greetings!

Having been a part of the United Pentecostal Church for most of my life, I felt very compelled to write some of my feelings concerning our last General Conference. Of course the Spiritual aspect, in my opinion was superb. One of the best.
My longevity includes the fact the I have attended every General Conference since the merger conference of 1945. In fact I had my 17th birthday during the time of that conference. I felt the call to preach some months after that conference and have been in the ministry full time for about 62 years.
Having served as the General Secretary for 25 years, I am perhaps more involved with facts and figures. I realize that facts are sometimes uninteresting but please hear me out as I feel they are very important especially with the passing of Resolution Number 4.
I went through the Manual of the UPCI, a booklet that is one of the many duties of the General Secretary's office. This is what I found:

1. In both "The Articles of Faith" and the "Position Papers" there is a total of 265 words regarding our being against television. One of these states that "no minister having a television in his or her home shall be permitted to hold license of credentials with the UPCI."

2. Resolution number 4 that passed at the General Conference affects only 16 words.

3. If it were a fact that we are for television, before this could happen the General Conference would have to pass many resolutions to eliminate the remaining 249 words. (In my opinion this just isn't going to happen.)

With the above statistics how could it be thought that the UPCI is now approving or is going to approve television. Is there really any need for anyone to leave the UPCI with the thought that we are letting up on our Holiness Standards?

Please conscientiously consider the facts and prayerfully think of what action that you will take. It is so important in these the last days for there to be a "CHURCH" that is without spot or blemish for the Lord is soon to come.

With great concern, I am


Cleveland M. Becton

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by PreacherV

I have the greatest respect for CMB, but I think he will eventually be proven wrong on this. I think this IS going to happen...eventually. However, if every word in reference to television were removed from the manual, this would not mean that we are FOR television...it would just allow each pastor to deal with the issue on the local level, which is what is happening anyway, regardless what the manual requires.

IMO, a lot of needless division could have been prevented if the statement regarding holiness in the Articles of Faith did not include a list of specifics.

Wouldn't this have been better? "We wholeheartedly disapprove of our people indulging in any activities which are not conducive to good Christianity and godly living." (PERIOD-DELETE-DELETE-DELETE) "We admonish all of our people to refrain from unwholesome practices in the interest of spiritual progress and the soon coming of the Lord for His Church."

You shoulda' wrote the book!

Keep it clean and simple. "Television" is increasingly becoming irrelevant as an issue. Kids are accessing things like pornography, which is far more dangerous than College Football with their cell phones and iPODS.

Porn on the iPOD is "okay" but a football game- "THAT'S WORLDLY!"

If we didn't have a bunch of nattering nannies undermining our fellowship all the time we could have addressed some of the more important principles and gone after people's hearts.

It's like WT Witherspoon said in 1945: "Much more could have been done" if not for "the division among the brethren."

[CC1]

I think someone who has been around since the merger in 1945 has a right to speak their mind.

[ManOfWord]

As long as people in the org continue to make TV the issue there will be problems. TV is NOT the issue. The issue is an issue of the heart. TV is not evil but the heart is desperately wicked, who can know it? What comes across the screen and what people choose to view is only a reflection of their hearts.

Once again, the cart is put before the oxen causing them to stumble shaking the cart and causing the "ark" to fall. Too many are reaching out to touch it to keep it from falling. Better be careful with that one.

The ark is the Lord's and He will protect it with any group He so chooses. If the org doesn't cease with its constant focus on outward things, the "ark" just might end up in someone else's camp.

[RevBuddy]

CMB is a wonderful man and minister...just not a great writer...

His message is coming in garbled...say again all after Dear Brethren!

[J-Roc]

Originally Posted by RevBuddy

CMB is a wonderful man and minister...just not a great writer...

His message is coming in garbled...say again all after Dear Brethren!

What's that stand for? Cash-Money-Brutha?

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

Originally Posted by PreacherV

IMO, a lot of needless division could have been prevented if the statement regarding holiness in the Articles of Faith did not include a list of specifics.

Resolution #4 could have passed overwhelmingly had they defined "Advertising" also.

[PreacherV]

Originally Posted by Pastor G

If you put a resolution in stating that I will vote for it... good post..

Pastor G, unfortunately we both know it would probably never get past the resolution committee!

I wasn't around when the ink first dried, but it seems to me that the prevailing view back in the day was that entertainment in and of itself is sin. The manual specifically bans "theaters"--not specifying whether movie or live stage performances. Fast-forward to present day and we find that Branson is now the Apostolic Entertainment Mecca because of its good, clean, old-fashioned family values with that good old harmless country and western style music we used to sing in church before the kids took over with their rebellious and abnoxiously repetitive praise music. Why, them good folks out at Silver Dollar City are still standing for the old-time holiness standards, what with wearin their long sleeves and ground-draggin dresses even on the hottest of summer days! (and isn't that saloon show the cutest thing!) And who could have foreseen the advent of IMAX with its educational, non-entertaining, and surely non-Hollywood-supporting "film strips"?

[PreacherV]

Originally Posted by BoredOutOfMyMind

Resolution #4 could have passed overwhelmingly had they defined "Advertising" also.

An amendment was offered to that effect by MJ but failed.

[Pastor G]

Originally Posted by PreacherV

Pastor G, unfortunately we both know it would probably never get past the resolution committee!

I wasn't around when the ink first dried, but it seems to me that the prevailing view back in the day was that entertainment in and of itself is sin. The manual specifically bans "theaters"--not specifying whether movie or live stage performances. Fast-forward to present day and we find that Branson is now the Apostolic Entertainment Mecca because of its good, clean, old-fashioned family values with that good old harmless country and western style music we used to sing in church before the kids took over with their rebellious and abnoxiously repetitive praise music. Why, them good folks out at Silver Dollar City are still standing for the old-time holiness standards, what with wearin their long sleeves and ground-draggin dresses even on the hottest of summer days! (and isn't that saloon show the cutest thing!) And who could have foreseen the advent of IMAX with its educational, non-entertaining, and surely non-Hollywood-supporting "film strips"?

And some people on here wonder why we just do our own thing and not worry about anyone eles...