The Fallout Continues - Page 6

Sam · #51 10-07-2007, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoredOutOfMyMind

...
If a Pastor leaves the org and has anyone licensed in the church, those licensed must attend the nearest UPC church. Any licensed minister must sever all contact with any members of the former church.
...

If a pastor of an affiliated church leaves the organization, and the Dist. Supt. becomes the pastor by default, why would licensed ministers in that local church have to go elsewhere?

FRINGE_NUTTER · #52 10-07-2007, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam

If a pastor of an affiliated church leaves the organization, and the Dist. Supt. becomes the pastor by default, why would licensed ministers in that local church have to go elsewhere?

WHat happens to the church property if a church votes to become UNaffiliated? If the majority wants to pull out?

Margies3 · #53 10-07-2007, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoredOutOfMyMind

if a Pastor of an affilated church resigns, the District Sup becomes the Pastor within the guidelines of either the local bylaws or the national bylaws.

If a Pastor leaves the org and has anyone licensed in the church, those licensed must attend the nearest UPC church. Any licensed minister must sever all contact with any members of the former church.

Affliated churches have a place, but the mass exodus is collapsing some kingdoms that should have never been there and on the other side are seeing both Conservative and Liberal Pastors looking for alternatives.

Isn't that shunning? Sounds very Amish-like to me

triumphant1 · #54 10-07-2007, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FRINGE_NUTTER

WHat happens to the church property if a church votes to become UNaffiliated? If the majority wants to pull out?

ONe more time...

If the church is affiliated, and the pastor loses or turns in his license, he cannot pastor that church any more and must vacate the property. The church then would be "overseen" by the district until a new UPC preacher is voted in.

If the church is NOT affiliated, it matters not whether the pastor is licensed UPC or not. If the pastor loses or turns in his license, and the church is fine with that, they simply become an independent church...because in a church that is NOT affiliated, the only thing that makes it a UPC church is the UPC licensed pastor....

So, although the UPC claims no authority over the autonomous churches...they do leverage some control in the affiliated churches because those churches MUST BE pastored by a UPC preacher...but in the non-affiliated churches, there is NOTHING stopping the preacher from leaving the org other than the wishes of the congregation itself...because the district can't do one thing to them if he chooses to leave.

Margies3 · #55 10-07-2007, 08:01 PM

I don't understand.............

If the rules say no one should have a tv or advertise on tv or whatever, then everybody is expected to abide by that rule.

On the other hand, if the rules say that it is OK to have a tv or advertise on a tv, then that doesn't mean you HAVE to have a tv or advertise on one.

So if someone doesn't like the new ruling allowing more freedom, all they would have to do is hold fast to the old ways on a personal level. They might be allowed, but they are forced to do it.

So why the need to leave over it?????

#56 10-07-2007, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CC1

If it is true TLC is turning in his card then I am truly amazed. That does not seem like him at all.

He is not reactionary. At most I could see him having misgivings but waiting to see what happens in the future.

I also wonder about this because Chris Craft is the new Pastor of FPC and I can't imagine him thinking leaving the UPC over this would be a good idea.

CC1,

Chris Craft is VERY close to Bro. Odum, one of the oranizers of the Tulsa convocation.

Also, keep in mind that TLC "retired" to Bro. Nate Wilson's Rock Church in CA.

These facts might give some credence to the assertion of Linus and Lucy's friend CB.

pelathais · #57 10-07-2007, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margies3

I don't understand.............

If the rules say no one should have a tv or advertise on tv or whatever, then everybody is expected to abide by that rule.

On the other hand, if the rules say that it is OK to have a tv or advertise on a tv, then that doesn't mean you HAVE to have a tv or advertise on one.

So if someone doesn't like the new ruling allowing more freedom, all they would have to do is hold fast to the old ways on a personal level. They might be allowed, but they are forced to do it.

So why the need to leave over it?????

Personally, I think it's a matter of "proving" one's salvation. When you've failed to place your trust in the cross and work of Jesus Christ but instead have adopted a theology of "works," then you can never really do enough to be saved.

We have this (for want of a better word) "spirit" in our movement whereby some people have always felt that a part of their walk with God was running down their brethren. This practice seemed to placate the nagging doubts that they were not doing enough to deserve their salvation. So you run down someone who doesn't share the same views and opinions on every issue that you do. Then you go to a meeting where the preacher runs the same group of people into the ground- your subjective feelings are now "confirmed" in a tangible fashion and you rejoice: you are "saved." And the cycle continues.

Every group that fails to put all of their hope and confidence in the work of Jesus Christ will from time to time, bite, consume and devour one another. It's inevitable.

Steve Epley · #58 10-07-2007, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timlan2057

You know what I find that makes me shake my head slowly in amusement when I read these threads on this subject?

I think back to my debating days.

Now Epley ... you never had this problem.

But UPC debaters like Welch, Hicks, Cannon, Ferguson, Bayer, me and on and on heard from Church of Christ debaters about our "creed" - that we revered the manual as much or sometimes more than the Bible.

Now Church of Christ debaters like Woods, Sutton, Reynolds, Hafley etc. sometimes went to extremes by saying we equaled the manual to the Book of Mormon.

I refuted it passionately.

But when I read all these grave and awesome pronouncements over "The Articles of Faith" or "removing a landmark" because a majority of UPC preachers finally decided to join the 20th century when the world is now in the 21st -

I think I'll look up Carl Allen when I'm in Lufkin next time if he's at a nursing home somewhere and if I ever make it to Renda's for that homecooked meal I'm going to go stand at Guy Woods' grave around Halladay, Tennessee ...

... and I'm going to apologize to those Church of Christ debaters.

Turns out they were right all along.

When they were debating the Campbellites I would cringe BECAUSE what was being said had some merit to it. In one of my debates the guy tried to bring the same stuff up. I told he was NOT debating a UPC preacher he was debating me and honestly me and the UPC preacher might debate over some of that.

You have a point.

RevDWW · #59 10-07-2007, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

When they were debating the Campbellites I would cringe BECAUSE what was being said had some merit to it. In one of my debates the guy tried to bring the same stuff up. I told he was NOT debating a UPC preacher he was debating me and honestly me and the UPC preacher might debate over some of that.

You have a point.

Could it be that some have transformed their "landmarks" into idols?

Steve Epley · #60 10-07-2007, 09:17 PM

Bro. Chambers years ago at a meeting declared holding the Bible in one hand and the manual in the other said the church shall be governed by these two books.(Or something very similiar.) I forget the exact words.