Is the No Double Dipping Rule being enforced?

[Sister Alvear]

Originally Posted by TJJJ

Sister Alvear

The question is.... So much for driving do YOU also have two licenses to preach? UPCI and WWPF?










This is in fun

Ha...really, I have neither...

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

Now, Dan does that really matter?
I have driver´s license in 2 countries...2 is better than one!

But, does one country say you cannot have a license in another counttry?

I think the rule by any organization that their ministers cannot be licensed with another organization is not right. It's restrictive of movement and fellowship within the body of Christ.

[TJJJ]

Originally Posted by Sam

But, does one country say you cannot have a license in another counttry?

I think the rule by any organization that their ministers cannot be licensed with another organization is not right. It's restrictive of movement and fellowship within the body of Christ.

I agree with you to a point. But don't forget, those ministers joined knowingthe rules, if they did not like the rules they should have had enough integrity to not join, period. I remember when there was a big fuss about the amount of money being taken from missionaries funds a few years back. The only problem was that they became a part of that organization knowing the rules, and then harped about the rules after they got in. If you dont like the structure... get out. Some of us have, others have decided to stay in and complain. It is personal I guess.

[bishoph]

Originally Posted by TJJJ

I agree with you to a point. But don't forget, those ministers joined knowing the rules, if they did not like the rules they should have had enough integrity to not join, period. I remember when there was a big fuss about the amount of money being taken from missionaries funds a few years back. The only problem was that they became a part of that organization knowing the rules, and then harped about the rules after they got in. If you dont like the structure... get out. Some of us have, others have decided to stay in and complain. It is personal I guess.

My good friend if you are referring to those brethren (highlighted portion) who were members of the UPCI and joined the WPF while maintaining their UPCI credentials, you are not quite correct in your assessment. At the time that the WPF was formed it was not (and still has not become) formed as an "organization" but rather a fellowship. IMPO the framers of the WPF knew that precedent was on their side. (AWCF, IAF, etc.) The UPCI does not have a written rule against belonging to a "fellowship," again there are many UPCI brethren who are members of the AWCF, IAF, and other fellowships. In fact the UPCI constitution and bylaws mainly address holding license or credentials with another organization which the WPF does not/will not issue.

Again IMHO, this is the reason that the GB left the enforcement of their "new rule" which specifically names only the WPF as the group one cannot be a member of and still maintain license with the UPCI. They realize that to enforce such a rule on a national basis would be catastrophic to the financial structure of the org.

If you were referring to something else.....please disregard my post.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by TJJJ

I agree with you to a point. But don't forget, those ministers joined knowingthe rules, if they did not like the rules they should have had enough integrity to not join, period. I remember when there was a big fuss about the amount of money being taken from missionaries funds a few years back. The only problem was that they became a part of that organization knowing the rules, and then harped about the rules after they got in. If you dont like the structure... get out. Some of us have, others have decided to stay in and complain. It is personal I guess.

Some times rules get changed after people have already been in the organization for a while.

[Sister Alvear]

Take what I say with a grain of salt...I just like to tease...love you folks.

[TJJJ]

Originally Posted by bishoph

My good friend if you are referring to those brethren (highlighted portion) who were members of the UPCI and joined the WPF while maintaining their UPCI credentials, you are not quite correct in your assessment. At the time that the WPF was formed it was not (and still has not become) formed as an "organization" but rather a fellowship. IMPO the framers of the WPF knew that precedent was on their side. (AWCF, IAF, etc.) The UPCI does not have a written rule against belonging to a "fellowship," again there are many UPCI brethren who are members of the AWCF, IAF, and other fellowships. In fact the UPCI constitution and bylaws mainly address holding license or credentials with another organization which the WPF does not/will not issue.

Again IMHO, this is the reason that the GB left the enforcement of their "new rule" which specifically names only the WPF as the group one cannot be a member of and still maintain license with the UPCI. They realize that to enforce such a rule on a national basis would be catastrophic to the financial structure of the org.

If you were referring to something else.....please disregard my post.

Sorry, my ignorance is at fault here. I did not realize that they were only against the WPF.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by bishoph

My good friend if you are referring to those brethren (highlighted portion) who were members of the UPCI and joined the WPF while maintaining their UPCI credentials, you are not quite correct in your assessment. At the time that the WPF was formed it was not (and still has not become) formed as an "organization" but rather a fellowship. IMPO the framers of the WPF knew that precedent was on their side. (AWCF, IAF, etc.) The UPCI does not have a written rule against belonging to a "fellowship," again there are many UPCI brethren who are members of the AWCF, IAF, and other fellowships. In fact the UPCI constitution and bylaws mainly address holding license or credentials with another organization which the WPF does not/will not issue.

Again IMHO, this is the reason that the GB left the enforcement of their "new rule" which specifically names only the WPF as the group one cannot be a member of and still maintain license with the UPCI. They realize that to enforce such a rule on a national basis would be catastrophic to the financial structure of the org.

If you were referring to something else.....please disregard my post.

Are you saying the edict was essentially "hot air"?

Does this make way for other break away ministerial networks acting a satellites?

[TJJJ]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Are you saying the edict was essentially "hot air"?

Does this make way for other break away ministerial networks acting a satellites?

Hot air, Like a balloon!



This is not the first time that this has happened! What we will probably find is that there were some men on the GB that had a difference between those on the WPF. Personal differences. Pride is a terrible thing.

[Sam]

I would imagine the double dipping rule is a lot like many of their other rules --generally ignored by most and only used on rare occasions when someone wants to "get" someone so they bring charges.