oldiesman

To my knowledge, ULC doesn't support rape adultery and pedophilia, but only "that which is good". Of course, "good" may be defined by an individual. :lol: But I'm not sure if they actually defrock ordained clergy who have been convicted of these crimes. I have to check...they have a website and a discussion board. It's very interesting. :lol: :lol:

My favorite Elvis Gospel single is "Joshua Fit The Battle". Another favorite is "We Call On Him". I looked for these pictures sleeves in my collection and found Joshua and Milky White Way, but couldn't find We Call on Him. I might have sold it on ebay. BTW, this "Joshua Fit The Battle" picture sleeve is perhaps the nicest example in the country. I kid you not. You hardly find this particular sleeve without some kind of ringwear, and the previous owner of this sleeve was a big Elvis collector and kept this thing immaculate. Belle, my favorite is "Run On". Sounds just like a Rap song but with a gospel theme. "what you do in the dark will be brought to the light!"

I made a mistake. It is not Universalist, it is the "Universal Life Church". BTW, I can also perform Exorcisms. Here is the official Holy Water I may use.

Umm, I'm not sure right now. Let me look up with the principles of my church is and I'll get back to you. :lol:

I do not believe this to be the case. We can be loyal to people as well. Here's an excerpt from Craig's companion letter of April 14, 1989: (I have added paragraphs to make it an easier read).

I misspoke. I couldn't have made that conclusion back then, because at that time, I hadn't known anyone who was complaining about LCM's sexual misconduct, or that his sexual misconduct was a reason they gave for not standing with him.

Bluzeman thanks for your support. The guy who was sent home was definitely treated unfairly compared to others. I know premarital sex was tolerated, that's for sure. I had heard rumors that many folks in my WOW branch were "doing it" back in Amarillo TX in 1974-75. I mentioned this to the branch coordinator. She poo poo'd my allegations, and said later (in front of a few folks) that I "squealed on" half the branch. That statement corroborated those rumors. I learned later that she was one of them having premarital. As I think back now, the person who was running the branch wasn't much of a leader. Sort of a fake "toughness", with little real substance. Boy oh boy, the absence of clear and consistent correct doctrine on sexual activities caused so many problems, didn't it?

At that time I didn't know anything about sexual misconduct. But you are correct, it couldn't have been a "conclusion", since it wasn't relevant to begin with.

Goey is correct. Let me pipe in here and say that I am an ordained minister in the Universalist Life Church. Marriage anyone? And stay the hell out of my parking spot. "we are one"

Then you would have had justification to leave, even BEFORE the loyalty letter; but that was not the reason from what I saw.I spoke with my twig coordinator, branch coordinator, area coordinator, limb coordinator about them leaving, and not one of these folks said anything about sexual misconduct of LCM. Nor did the many twiggies I spoke with about that. I personally spoke with the limb coordinator, June of that year (1989), asking him to stand with Craig. Had he responded something like this, "well Phil, the reason why I am not standing with Craig is, among others, cause he has committed adultery in the past, and doesn't want to change". Had he responded like that, I would have respected his decision! Instead of that, he said that I was carnal, my family was carnal, that the BOT is carnal and worshipping other gods, with no specifics. Gee, what a spiritual guy. Therefore I concluded that sexual misconduct of LCM had little to do with folks leaving, and I still hold to that opinion and haven't heard a whole lot of evidence otherwise. What I saw was he was asking for support from his staff and if at that point the staff and corps couldn't or wouldn't give it to him, for whatever reason, he was asking them to be honest about it and resign. Craig wrote Here he implies that one CAN stand with God in a situation other than standing with him, and he asked folks to be honest with themselves and if they couldn't support him, go elsewhere where you can stand with God with someone else.

Fear not. And have a great weekend...

Of course it depends on the severity of the crime, but it may also be that they don't want to rat on a brother/sister in Christ if they don't have to. But kicking them out immediately is strong punishment, and better than keeping them in, wouldn't you say?

WOW, I hadn't read this thread up until now, and it's very interesting. This may put to rest the idea that LCM was picked by "revelation". Ha ha! how true how true.Here's a little stow-ray: Don't know if I ever posted this, but I was one of the runners who ran one of the 10 mile legs, from Rome City to Athens, carrying the torch. I think I also was the only non-corps person running. As I recall, this effort was coordinated by Bob Moynihan and all who ran received a bronze medallion. I had been training for this event for 6 months prior to make sure I'd be able to run 10 miles straight without stopping. The day before the start at Rome City, I develop this sharp pain in one of my legs. I start limping around and start getting very worried that I might not be able to run. While limping by the reception desk, a gal at the reception desk saw me limping, and I told her what was wrong. She immediately layed hands and prayed for me. The pain was gone. Next day, I ran the 10 miles with no problems. Day after that, my body ached all over, except that one part of my leg that was healed the day before! True story. Anyway, back to Craig, yeah he had to have the spotlight. Those of us who did the marathon ran 10 miles each, but all of a sudden when the torch is coming around the corner guess who's carrying it? Craig. Did he run 10 miles? No. Apparently Craig grabbed the torch a few yards back, and started running carrying the torch to the front with some others behind him. So here we are, each one running 10 miles busting our butts while we watch Craig grabbing the freakin torch running his few yards and getting all the attention like he's been running for miles. :lol:

Goey, I submit that my belief in and agreement with Craig's 1989 letters are most likely minority beliefs. But I think my reasoning is still sound, nonetheless.However, as far as my overall experience and witness that twi was at one time "moving the Word" and a "ministry of God", I believe that may be the majority opinion of ex-wayers too. It depends on who you talk to I suppose, but I hold to that opinion not only because of my own personal experiences, and those of others that I know, some of who were in better position than me to know, but also those that are STILL THERE somehow hanging in and being loyal even today, plus all the plethora of folks in the offshoots, who have "eaten the fish and spit out the bones".

I still believe that Oakspear. You explained it well even though you don't believe it anymore.

At that point he did believe he was God's choice to lead the ministry as he was commissioned to do, and he had not quit and was still moving.And he believed his was God's choice from the installation. Here's an excerpt from his letter: If memory serves, I think the "genuine spiritual suspicion" false doctrine started sometime in 1994.

I simply think those who didn't want to stand with Craig in the movement of the Word were asked to leave, it's really that simple.Here is another way he put it in his April 14, 1989 letter, some biblical words: I believe the distinction was all the more necessary, because of all the purported hard feelings and ill will against Craig at that time.I have even heard some opinions (maybe you have too) that it even goes as far back as 1982, when Craig was installed as president. The ill will and resentment started with some leaders way back then. Some leaders of the way never accepted his installation, believing it should be someone else, believing Craig was an idiot jock or whatever, and all those years let the negative feelings brew, just waiting for an opportunity to rebel. No, I don't believe so. I think that is a slight extremist position. If you are talking, say, after 1993, I'd tend to agree.

Well this works both ways.While I can only be a witness to my own experience and that which I have personally witnessed, I'm always open to hearing and assessing others' experiences and try to factor that in. But, I am not going to ignore or poo poo MY experience, which you consistently seem to do. Versions of things other than yours might be something you might want to try to consider when making YOUR assessment of things.

And had folks who, instead of departing, made the commitment to stand with Craig for the movement of the Word, it would have been a credit to them, themselves. That was part of the whole point, to get folks to "move the word" rather than sit back and nag and finger point.Folks who DID make a commitment to move the Word with Craig, did so for that reason, to move the Word.

Yeah there sure were folks finger pointing and nagging back then. Then when Craig demanded they quit nagging and finger pointing, but in contrast stand with him in the movement of the Word, they declined.What do you suppose they might have been more concerned about? Continued movement of the Word, or nagging? And so Craig said, if you couldn't stop your finger pointing and nagging, you'd be better somewhere else. PFAL is not itself god breathed but it did communicate the rightly divided word in many areas of biblical teaching. And, twi was not only just about PFAL and there was more Craig was doing than just supporting PFAL alone.

Goey said: The call for loyalty and likemindedness was in light of moving the word, so yes I do believe he was standing at that point.Here is an excerpt of what he wrote in his companion letter to Staff Believers in April 14, 1989: He wasn't asking folks to stand with him selling french fries. He was asking folks to stand with him in the movement of the Word, and at that point he was prepared to move it, and he did. If they HAD spoken truth, or at least some applicable FACTS, there would have been items to investigate. But I didn't hear truth or facts...all I heard was that the BOT was carnal, worshipping other gods, and I was carnal, with no specifics.And it was very very peaceful, even joyous, not having to argue with my former twig coordinators anymore.

Nah Belle, I am serious. :) But IT'S FRIDAY happy happy happy

After 1994 I would agree. But the Word (or twi's version of) was still moving and being supported immediately after the letter was written, for about a 5-year window after.Just for fun, I took a gander at my piles of Way Memorabilia last nite, particularly from the time period of March, 1989 thru July 1991, when I departed my local twi twig. Yes, there were plenty of good things happening from the BOT on down and the word was moving and being supported, as opposed to being chopped up to pieces. I suppose it's difficult to understand if you weren't around those years, but only look at what happened after 1994 and beyond.

WhiteDove Writes: As a result of the events, I would surmise that they had to be careful to let folks back in who continued to think evil of Craig and the BOT and twi. They were very worried about future distruptions from former way grads, not standing with twi. Whispering, backbiting, evil speaking, and so forth. There was a lot of teaching in those days to us about walking away and departing from folks who think and speak evil of you. Cut out gangrene...and so forth.I would surmise then, that those folks who thought Craig and the BOT were worshipping other gods, and off the wall; those who thought others in twi were a bunch of foolish "yes men", worshipping Craig etc.;... forfeited their "right" to sit thru PFAL again, at least from twi. Don't know if that was "legal", perhaps it wasn't. But they had to be careful who they let back in at that point because of all the hard feelings. At that point, can you really blame them?

Wordwolf, I read your stuff. I moved up to Dutchess County, Poughkeepsie, from the Bronx, in 1988. So I know nothing about NYC after 1988 except that I work here. I did go to a few NYC twigs in the 80's, (of Steve B...) and his lovely wife. But no, I don't think I ever posted that about NYC.