ALJC vs UPCI

[2theX]

Hows it going fellas? mind if i jump in?

[Servant's <3]

Originally Posted by amh

Again, since there isn't a difference anymore I don't see why we don't just merge.

Can't you be licensed with both the ALJC and the UPCI?

Long as you are bringing us back to the original subject. LOL

[2theX]

I glanced though several of the postings on here.. very interesting.
Bro Epley mentioned the difference between the two was that one was "Episcopal" (UPCI) and the other "Ministerial" (ALJC)
That sounds like a significant difference.
Can anyone expound on that for clarification?

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by 2theX

I glanced though several of the postings on here.. very interesting.
Bro Epley mentioned the difference between the two was that one was "Episcopal" (UPCI) and the other "Ministerial" (ALJC)
That sounds like a significant difference.
Can anyone expound on that for clarification?

That was the original,difference the UPC has moved toward a ministerial fellowship in the last couple of decades although they yet affiliate churches and exercise more authority over their members(preachers).

[2theX]

One reason I think the UPC and ALJC might not want to merge is because (correct me if I'm wrong)
Is that the UPCI has certain "territorial" influences that wont allow other UPCI pastors within there "boundaries".
So if a UPC minister wanted to start a fellowship in the "area",
They have to "ask" permission from headquarters: who in turn ask permission from the pastor in that territory to have another pastor come into that Pastor's "territory".
That can be blessing or curse depending on who's sort of in charge of that "territory".
Or in some circumstances that particular territorial pastor may offer the proposing minister to be a daughter work in rare cases.
That way all the Tithes of all the "Territorial" pastors discretion would still come directly to him if any church members of his were to go there. (yes.. you heard that correctly: the Tithes would go to The Leading Pastor)
I hear some if these ole boys (pastors) can get rather unreasonable and downright stingy about there territories which in turn can hurt the growth of the kingdom of God.
So the politics can get rather messy.
So if another pastor comes from another oneness; like ALJC, then there's not much the prominent UPC Pastor can do about it.
So I personally think its good that there Not together. (although they should get along)
I think things should be kept in balance.
The pharisees gained a lot of control through this kind of political "correctness" of "territories".
Id love to think both groups are Angelic by nature.
But there's a carnal side to man even in those that have a calling to lead that is hard to tame once money is involved. (its in all of us, I'm not excluded) Especially when money and receiving tithing is involved and the like.
(wow.. i can feel the stones flying over my head as we speak about this)
So not wanting someone to come in and take "tithers" can be a real threat to some leaders.
That's not the only reason they wouldn't want some other minister to come onto there turf, there's legitimate ones as well.
But To sum it up I disagree with most. I think the two should stay divided for the sake of the Gospel.
That's why its so important for leaders to be transparent in how they spend the offerings of the Lords basket.
[/I] I really believe there's a very real lesson in the health of church's spiritual dominion by what and how that Pastor of that "territory" spends the Lords Basket- by that one fact alone.
This would declare his worthiness or unworthiness in so many ways.

[2theX]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

That was the original,difference the UPC has moved toward a ministerial fellowship in the last couple of decades although they yet affiliate churches and exercise more authority over their members(preachers).

Thanks for the clarification.
That's very interesting!
I really appreciate that.

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by 2theX

One reason I think the UPC and ALJC might not want to merge is because (correct me if I'm wrong)
Is that the UPCI has certain "territorial" influences that wont allow other UPCI pastors within there "boundaries".
So if a UPC minister wanted to start a fellowship in the "area",
They have to "ask" permission from headquarters: who in turn ask permission from the pastor in that territory to have another pastor come into that Pastor's "territory".
That can be blessing or curse depending on who's sort of in charge of that "territory".
Or in some circumstances that particular territorial pastor may offer the proposing minister to be a daughter work in rare cases.
That way all the Tithes of all the "Territorial" pastors discretion would still come directly to him if any church members of his were to go there. (yes.. you heard that correctly: the Tithes would go to The Leading Pastor)
I hear some if these ole boys (pastors) can get rather unreasonable and downright stingy about there territories which in turn can hurt the growth of the kingdom of God.
So the politics can get rather messy.
So if another pastor comes from another oneness; like ALJC, then there's not much the prominent UPC Pastor can do about it.
So I personally think its good that there Not together. (although they should get along)
I think things should be kept in balance.
The pharisees gained a lot of control through this kind of political "correctness" of "territories".
Id love to think both groups are Angelic by nature.
But there's a carnal side to man even in those that have a calling to lead that is hard to tame once money is involved. (its in all of us, I'm not excluded) Especially when money and receiving tithing is involved and the like.
(wow.. i can feel the stones flying over my head as we speak about this)
So not wanting someone to come in and take "tithers" can be a real threat to some leaders.
That's not the only reason they wouldn't want some other minister to come onto there turf, there's legitimate ones as well.
But To sum it up I disagree with most. I think the two should stay divided for the sake of the Gospel.
That's why its so important for leaders to be transparent in how they spend the offerings of the Lords basket.
[/I] I really believe there's a very real lesson in the health of church's spiritual dominion by what and how that Pastor of that "territory" spends the Lords Basket- by that one fact alone.
This would declare his worthiness or unworthiness in so many ways.

Just need to correct some things here. UPCI headquarters is not who gives "license" to someone who wants to start a church. That is typically done at the district level.
As with anything involving us "humans", (even Christians), this can become somewhat messy on both sides.
I have seen more cases where the ok was given and it should not have been, rather than the opposite.

[Jito463]

Originally Posted by 2theX

One reason I think the UPC and ALJC might not want to merge is because (correct me if I'm wrong)
Is that the UPCI has certain "territorial" influences that wont allow other UPCI pastors within there "boundaries".
So if a UPC minister wanted to start a fellowship in the "area",
They have to "ask" permission from headquarters: who in turn ask permission from the pastor in that territory to have another pastor come into that Pastor's "territory".
That can be blessing or curse depending on who's sort of in charge of that "territory".
Or in some circumstances that particular territorial pastor may offer the proposing minister to be a daughter work in rare cases.
That way all the Tithes of all the "Territorial" pastors discretion would still come directly to him if any church members of his were to go there. (yes.. you heard that correctly: the Tithes would go to The Leading Pastor)
I hear some if these ole boys (pastors) can get rather unreasonable and downright stingy about there territories which in turn can hurt the growth of the kingdom of God.

I don't believe this information is correct. I've been in the UPC my whole life, and I've never heard this. I will attempt to confirm this information, but I doubt it's veracity. I'm not accusing you of lying, I just believe you're misinformed and/or misunderstand.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Jito463

I don't believe this information is correct. I've been in the UPC my whole life, and I've never heard this. I will attempt to confirm this information, but I doubt it's veracity. I'm not accusing you of lying, I just believe you're misinformed and/or misunderstand.

Jito, this is fact.

There is a territorial pastor in my town of 60,000 that has had a dinky congregation of 50 for about 80 years. He wont let others' in UPC evangelize this town by starting another church. To do so, you must not be UPC.(I know him personally and others' affected by him personally)

[good samaritan]

This is true, but is not meant to be a bad thing. I believe this was put in place to keep two men from going into a community and sqaubling over congregants. If there is already a church that is teaching truth and you feel a burden for that area why not just go help him that is already there. If I know that God wants me to specifically do something then it shouldn't matter what men say, but a lot of times men are only looking for a leading role. It is possible that a minister in a town could try to block anyone else, but it is the exception and not the rule. There are two UPC churches in our city and about 4 in a neighboring city and it works fine. There is a bad apple in every bunch.