Ministerial Ethics, Dropping Out and TV: Did You Forget You Agreed to This?

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

2007 Manual Page 159

Position Papers/Ministerial Code of Ethics

ends with...

"Having accepted a pastorate, I will not use my influence to alienate the church or any portion thereof from the fellowship or support of the United Pentecostal Church International. If my convictions change, I will be honorable enough to withdraw."

Questions:

Will ministers withdrawing abide by the code of ethics they ascribed to in the manual when they affirmed their membership with the fellowship?

Will they simply withdraw w/o using their influence to alienate their church which may be UPCI affiliated? Will they not use their influence to alienate the fellowship or support of the UPCI?

Have not their convictions changed in regards to abiding to the current bylaws of the UPCI ... and so the honorable thing is to withdraw without trying to bring others w/ them?

Will their integrity be questioned ???... do they not also fall under question ethically if they break this code of ethics? ... which can seemingly then be adjudicated under resolution 3?

Uh.....this only applies to liberals!!

Seriously....all of a sudden the accusations of hypocrisy are turned on the conservatives using their own argument. This will be interesting.

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by ILG

Uh.....this only applies to liberals!!

Seriously....all of a sudden the accusations of hypocrisy are turned on the conservatives using their own argument. This will be interesting.

This is in a position paper, not the AoF.

Apples and oranges.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

No ... but the ethical thing to do ... I think ....according to this code is for the pastor not exert influence over the affiliated church as to make them vote to disaffiliate ... Am I wrong?

Nor should they influence others in the fellowship or in the support of the fellowship.

I think in order to not alienate the church from the UPC, they need to quietly resign and move on like my husband and I did.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

This is in a position paper, not the AoF.

Apples and oranges.

Well, the conseratives talk about the spirit of rebellion on one hand and then the black and white ink on the other. It all depends on what side you are arguing on. Suddenly, the prism changes color.

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by ILG

Well, the conseratives talk about the spirit of rebellion on one hand and then the black and white ink on the other. It all depends on what side you are arguing on. Suddenly, the prism changes color.

The premise of this thread was an attempt to stretch some black and white ink.

The conservatives, many of them, feel betrayed that the organization changed a core issue in their separation doctrine.

In matters of conviction, there is no way to effectively compromise without feeling as if you have been untrue to yourself.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

The premise of this thread was an attempt to stretch some black and white ink.

The conservatives, many of them, feel betrayed that the organization changed a core issue in their separation doctrine.

In matters of conviction, there is no way to effectively compromise without feeling as if you have been untrue to yourself.

Of course. That's not the issue. The issue is will those who pastor use their influence to take people out and away from the UPC or not? Here is where the crux is. Who will walk away alone?

[BrotherEastman]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

2007 Manual Page 159

Position Papers/Ministerial Code of Ethics

ends with...

"Having accepted a pastorate, I will not use my influence to alienate the church or any portion thereof from the fellowship or support of the United Pentecostal Church International. If my convictions change, I will be honorable enough to withdraw."

Questions:

Will ministers withdrawing abide by the code of ethics they ascribed to in the manual when they affirmed their membership with the fellowship?

Will they simply withdraw w/o using their influence to alienate their church which may be UPCI affiliated? Will they not use their influence to alienate the fellowship or support of the UPCI?

Have not their convictions changed in regards to abiding to the current bylaws of the UPCI ... and so the honorable thing is to withdraw without trying to bring others w/ them?

Will their integrity be questioned ???... do they not also fall under question ethically if they break this code of ethics? ... which can seemingly then be adjudicated under resolution 3?

It depends on whether the pastor accepted the pastorate of a local assembly, or if he were the one who pioneered that particular constincuency. I would think that one would not try and take a church that he himself did not pastor from the beginning. I also believe that it would depend upon wether or not that particular church was affiliated with the UPCI.

[Carpenter]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

The premise of this thread was an attempt to stretch some black and white ink.

The conservatives, many of them, feel betrayed that the organization changed a core issue in their separation doctrine.

In matters of conviction, there is no way to effectively compromise without feeling as if you have been untrue to yourself.

This is very true, however some folks, especially on the conservative side of the fence believe that progression and change is actually a compromise of conviction, no matter the end result. What is more important, reaching one soul, or laying down of a tradition that defines your position among your peers?

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by ILG

Of course. That's not the issue. The issue is will those who pastor use their influence to take people out and away from the UPC or not? Here is where the crux is. Who will walk away alone?

How can a shepherd desert sheep when he sees the wolf at the door?

This is complex, Sister.

These men have a deep conviction that this move by the organization is going to lead to a casting away of precious things.

What kind of pastor would leave people in that state?

This is a new thing we are facing, because this is the first time one of our distinctives has been removed from our manual.

That creates a whole new set of circumstances never dealt with before.

[BrotherEastman]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Can't cons be blacklisted by district boards for breaking this code of ethic ... if found guilty of using persuasion/influence to alienate ... let's say the affiliated church they pastor?

If found to be under question would it not also it against the rules to fellowship said pastor ... only for funerals and weddings?

Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. If a church was to go by thier bi-laws then I don't think it matters what persuasion one might be, whether conservative or liberal.