Membership letters??!

[Fiyahstarter]

Originally Posted by bishoph

D4T,
If I have read these posts and misunderstood their meaning then I will be the first to apologize. However it appears to me that much of the comments here suggest that some have no intention of leaving and finding a place they can support, they just choose to not support the place they are being fed. The reality IMHO is simple, if the situation was really so bad that you were not being fed and you could not stand to be there then you should leave. Otherwise by your continued attendance and receiving (eating) from the ministry of the "bad" church/leadership you are in essence someone who is eating and dipping out without paying.

When I first began attending this church, ten years ago, the only requirement for membership was "to just show up." And as a member, I tithed.

Now, they say I am no longer a member unless I sign this NEW agreement. Nope, aint signing nothing. Not BIBLICAL... sorry. My allegiance is to Jesus!

I don't feel an obligation to contribute to an organization that does not consider me a member. I am a guest at this country club. Guests do not pay dues!

BTW - If I could not STAND to be there, then I would leave. (And sometimes, I do get up and leave. LOL!)

[Digging4Truth]

Originally Posted by bishoph

D4T,
If I have read these posts and misunderstood their meaning then I will be the first to apologize. However it appears to me that much of the comments here suggest that some have no intention of leaving and finding a place they can support, they just choose to not support the place they are being fed. The reality IMHO is simple, if the situation was really so bad that you were not being fed and you could not stand to be there then you should leave. Otherwise by your continued attendance and receiving (eating) from the ministry of the "bad" church/leadership you are in essence someone who is eating and dipping out without paying.

What you have read are posts about a scenario where a person has been a contributing member of a church and, all of a sudden, the pastor has decided that they have to sign a piece of paper to be a member.

If that pastor no longer considers you to be a member because you don't sign a piece of paper then for what purpose would one continue to give?

This is not about any church who has not placed these requirements on membership. If a church requires you to sign a paper to have a vote or be called a member then would a reputable pastor even want them to give any longer?

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by Digging4Truth

What you have read are posts about a scenario where a person has been a contributing member of a church and, all of a sudden, the pastor has decided that they have to sign a piece of paper to be a member.

If that pastor no longer considers you to be a member because you don't sign a piece of paper then for what purpose would one continue to give?

This is not about any church who has not placed these requirements on membership. If a church requires you to sign a paper to have a vote or be called a member then would a reputable pastor even want them to give any longer?

Interesting take but seems appropriate to why this thread was indeed started. I do know that legally if you have put any money into an assembly and have documented proof then you can vote or sue. At least this was true in the 1980's.

There is so much fear in the hearts of people they are afraid to exercise their rights. Of course one would understand, sort of, why a group of people would leave and feel entitled to take the money back they had given to support a ministry they no longer believed in.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Rhoni

Interesting take but seems appropriate to why this thread was indeed started. I do know that legally if you have put any money into an assembly and have documented proof then you can vote or sue. At least this was true in the 1980's.

There is so much fear in the hearts of people they are afraid to exercise their rights. Of course one would understand, sort of, why a group of people would leave and feel entitled to take the money back they had given to support a ministry they no longer believed in.

Simply not true. Any group whether a church or not can have specific membership requirements. This may or may not include financial contributions.

The only way your scenerio could possibly be true, would be if there was an implied membership because of no written requirements.

[Hoovie]

Is there an assumption that one must be a "member" to be in the body of Christ??

[Digging4Truth]

Originally Posted by Rhoni

Interesting take but seems appropriate to why this thread was indeed started. I do know that legally if you have put any money into an assembly and have documented proof then you can vote or sue. At least this was true in the 1980's.

There is so much fear in the hearts of people they are afraid to exercise their rights. Of course one would understand, sort of, why a group of people would leave and feel entitled to take the money back they had given to support a ministry they no longer believed in.

Personally I don't believe it would be in keeping with my concept of a good Christian attitude to sue or demand money back.

Money given is just that... money given.

I won't take my brother to court.

If put in this situation I do still have control over my future giving but I consider my past given to be past. If the brother would not view me as a member without the letter but would still allow me to attend then I would do so and would consider my giving options from there.

If the brother would cause contention at my very attendance then I would remove myself completely. There would be no good come from fighting in such a situation.

When a church is conducted as a legal corporate body (a business) rather than the Body of Christ then the current head of that corporation takes authority upon himself to "cut 'em in and cut 'em out". If it is true that to whom much is given much is required... I would have to assume that a hefty requirement also waits upon those who take a level of authority not given.

That will rest between them and God.

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Simply not true. Any group whether a church or not can have specific membership requirements. This may or may not include financial contributions.

The only way your scenerio could possibly be true, would be if there was an implied membership because of no written requirements.

Well, it apeears that it can be true then - if there is no written membership qualifications. I know that for a time many of the UPCI churches were fulfilling legal requirements of membership by asking all members, new or old, to go through a membership class for insurance and legal documents regarding borrowing for property ownership.

No, one does not have to be a member of a church to be in the body/church of Christ.

Blessings, Rhoni

[Digging4Truth]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Is there an assumption that one must be a "member" to be in the body of Christ??

1Cr 12:27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

Eph 4:25 Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another.

Eph 5:30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.

We are, indeed, members of this one body. I don't think the "membership" being discussed here has any authority in the realm of the membership spoken of in the verses above and the many other verses like them.

When letters such as the ones being discussed are required for "membership" then this should be viewed in it's true context. This is about membership in a legal corporation.

A pastor can control my voting rights in the legal corporation but these letters hold no weight in anyone's membership in the Body of Christ.

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by Digging4Truth

Personally I don't believe it would be in keeping with my concept of a good Christian attitude to sue or demand money back.

Money given is just that... money given.

I won't take my brother to court.

If put in this situation I do still have control over my future giving but I consider my past given to be past. If the brother would not view me as a member without the letter but would still allow me to attend then I would do so and would consider my giving options from there.

If the brother would cause contention at my very attendance then I would remove myself completely. There would be no good come from fighting in such a situation.

When a church is conducted as a legal corporate body (a business) rather than the Body of Christ then the current head of that corporation takes authority upon himself to "cut 'em in and cut 'em out". If it is true that to whom much is given much is required... I would have to assume that a hefty requirement also waits upon those who take a level of authority not given.

That will rest between them and God.

Actually, I agree with you. But at what point are you no longer brothers? That is a topic that would get some length.

Blessings, Rhoni

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Rhoni

Well, it apeears that it can be true then - if there is no written membership qualifications. I know that for a time many of the UPCI churches were fulfilling legal requirements of membership by asking all members, new or old, to go through a membership class for insurance and legal documents regarding borrowing for property ownership.

No, one does not have to be a member of a church to be in the body/church of Christ.

Blessings, Rhoni

I would think a church would have a definition somewhere of what comprises it's constituents even if vague or limited to "attendees".