Common law membership

[JohnDeereFan]

I agree with debbie, and I wish more churches would remove people who hadn't been there in years, don't know about our new church how many there are on he roll who do not attend, but our old one had more then 100.

Our church has such a rigorous membership process that we don't really have that problem, because in order to become a member, you have to be pretty committed just to get through the process. That weeds out the pew sitters and disappearing acts.

But we do have a process that removes people from the rolls after six months unexplained absence (after offering them counselling, of course). After that, they're free to reapply for membership, although I can't imagine why they'd want to, if they were so indifferent that they didn't even show up for six months.

In our church you first must be a baptized believer, or have become a believer and are seeking baptism, or you must join by testimony, or letter, they also require a new members class, but I am not clear if you are refused membership if you do not attend the class, I do know the by laws say you are.

In our church, you must submit your testimony, be baptised or be a candidate for baptism, and be mentored by one of our elders. If you're a recent convert, then you must also take a new believers' class. If you're a long time Christian, but are a prospective new member, then we strongly encourage you to take a new members class, but it isn't required.

 

[paul wassona]

when people move 500 miles away and do not tell the church they no longer want to be members, whats sad is the level of commitment these people had towards church, which was nonexistant.

Maybe it wasn't the commitment they moved 500 miles away from but the church?

If they moved that far away maybe they just didn't see the need to try and remain underthat membership.

I can see why some people have enough of a church's membership and its mean spirited members
to leave and not tell anyone they were leaving.

Been there, done that. They are still as mean as ever and 8 years later they still talk about us. What's so depressing is they still do people the very same way and wonder why their attedence is down while other churches are up.

Christians are supposed to be the nicest people on earth, but instead they are provoked to wrath and then condemned for reacting to the provocation.

Why is it so many are ready to condemn people for wanting to leave an abusive situation???

 

[donnA]

Maybe it wasn't the commitment they moved 500 miles away from but the church?

so you think people want to get away from churches so bad they'll move 500 miles away? yeah, right. thats crazy, but what else to expect.

If they moved that far away maybe they just didn't see the need to try and remain underthat membership.

In t he real world, people do move you know. Especially when they have family living away from them, like children and grandchildren.

I can see why some people have enough of a church's membership and its mean spirited members
to leave and not tell anyone they were leaving.

this doesn't even apply to my quote. so apparently your lost here on this topic.

Been there, done that. They are still as mean as ever and 8 years later they still talk about us. What's so depressing is they still do people the very same way and wonder why their attedence is down while other churches are up.

again has nothing to do with my quote.

Christians are supposed to be the nicest people on earth, but instead they are provoked to wrath and then condemned for reacting to the provocation.

and this has what to do with this topic or my quote?

Why is it so many are ready to condemn people for wanting to leave an abusive situation???

the topic is not abusive churches, nor does it have anything to do with my quote, once again.

so it's apparently your opinion people leave churches only because the church is abusive and the people mean, and has nothiong to do with God or life circumstances, like moving to be with their family.

When people move away and never bother to move their membership and are not members of any church it is not the church, but as I said their sad commitment to God and His church.

 

[sag38]

Donna, are you getting the idea that you are being argued with simply for the sake of argument?

 

[donnA]

Donna, are you getting the idea that you are being argued with simply for the sake of argument?

yes, this seems to be his normal habit, if it doesn't say it he'll add it and act like you said it.
and he talks about how unchristian other are.

 

[paul wassona]

Our church has such a rigorous membership process that we don't really have that problem, because in order to become a member, you have to be pretty committed just to get through the process. That weeds out the pew sitters and disappearing acts.

I wonder how many discouraged, wounded Christians your church has buried alive?

But we do have a process that removes people from the rolls after six months unexplained absence (after offering them counselling, of course). After that, they're free to reapply for membership, although I can't imagine why they'd want to, if they were so indifferent that they didn't even show up for six months.

Nice cut there calling them indifferent

In our church, you must submit your testimony, be baptised or be a candidate for baptism, and be mentored by one of our elders. If you're a recent convert, then you must also take a new believers' class. If you're a long time Christian, but are a prospective new member, then we strongly encourage you to take a new members class, but it isn't required.

Sounds just like micormanagement. Has anyone ever accused you of being a legalist?

The church is to be a hospital for the soul, and emergency room for the spiritually wounded. You make it sound like its a boot camp where only the fittest can survive!

Don't get me wrong, I fully support accountability, but if one isn't as faithful as we expect they are encouraged to become more faithful, but not cut off!

Only those faithful in theur stewardship are allowed to serve in any position. I count myself as one very undeserving to hold the position I hold. The sad thing is poeple with the same mentaility also think I should not be doing the service I have done nowfor over 5 years. They have gone as far as to speak to the pastor against what I have been doing and even he sent people in the "investigate" and bring their report back to him:laugh:

What a joke! The ran their little new converts class and they graduated all them. The only ones "moved up" are just as mean and critical as they are.

At least now that tie has been broken these very same ones are starting to realise it.:godisgood:

The ones we have left are sensitive to others and especially to the Lord. Are they faithful? Not as we would like. Do we then chastise the and bring them under church discipline? No, we preach like a wild man and get right in their faces encouraging them to do right.

IT WORKS!!!!!:thumbsup:

 

[paul wassona]

so you think people want to get away from churches so bad they'll move 500 miles away? yeah, right. thats crazy, but what else to expect.

How far is Waco, Texas from Atlanta, Ga?

Bro. Powers did just that

In t he real world, people do move you know. Especially when they have family living away from them, like children and grandchildren.

Moved several times growing up and we never even attended church

this doesn't even apply to my quote. so apparently your lost here on this topic.

again has nothing to do with my quote.

and this has what to do with this topic or my quote?

I was simply making statements about wha you said and you always take things to a personal level. Isn't that self-centerdness?

the topic is not abusive churches, nor does it have anything to do with my quote, once again.



When people move away and never bother to move their membership and are not members of any church it is not the church, but as I said their sad commitment to God and His church.

Why do you judge them so harshly to say this? All I've seen is just how abusive your reprot of them really is

so it's apparently your opinion people leave churches only because the church is abusive and the people mean, and has nothiong to do with God or life circumstances, like moving to be with their family.

Never said they ONLY leave under these circumstances.

Maybe the preaching/teaching needs to be set towards accountability morethan expectability?

 

[donnA]

seems in your opinion people never leave church unless it's someone elses fault, and not theirs. a common response to sin.
how about the topic of this thread.

 

[paul wassona]

seems in your opinion people never leave church unless it's someone elses fault, and not theirs. a common response to sin.
how about the topic of this thread.

It only seems that way to you and people like you.

I haven't even started to speak of those who have left for the WRONG reasons.


It's not looked upon as ignorance to ask questions unless the answer has been given at least three times.

 

[nodak]

Local cowboy church (baptist) is common law membership.

If you are committed to Jesus, it shows in your life and deeds and you don't need the judgement of a bunch of people.

If you aren't committed to Jesus, that will show also. No matter how tight your church membership or positions you hold.

But I admit, I grew up Landmark and it is hard for those so inclined to grasp the idea of THE CHURCH rather than the local name on a piece of paper group.

As to submitting to authority, that works itself out naturally. Those committed to Jesus lead by example and folks generally follow them. Those that come in expecting to be somehow rulers folks submit to are sent back to the Bible to find out what Jesus said about leadership.

 

[paul wassona]

Local cowboy church (baptist) is common law membership.

If you are committed to Jesus, it shows in your life and deeds and you don't need the judgement of a bunch of people.

If you aren't committed to Jesus, that will show also. No matter how tight your church membership or positions you hold.

But I admit, I grew up Landmark and it is hard for those so inclined to grasp the idea of THE CHURCH rather than the local name on a piece of paper group.

As to submitting to authority, that works itself out naturally. Those committed to Jesus lead by example and folks generally follow them. Those that come in expecting to be somehow rulers folks submit to are sent back to the Bible to find out what Jesus said about leadership.

gOOD OST ANDMY SENTIMENTS EXACTLY

 

[Jerome]

not legal here

"Supose that a couple enters into a valid common law marriage in Pennsylvania, then later moves to Kentucky, which requires a formal marriage ceremony in front of an authorized religious or civil authority, a license, a blood test, and such. Will Kentucky recognize the validity of the couple's common law marriage? Yes." source

not a commitment...a lack of commitment to refuse marriage.

In certain states, a common law marriage arises when a couple "have declared their commitment and consent to be married. In most states, they must also live together and publicly hold themselves out to be husband and wife. Interestingly, although most people believe that, in order to be married under the common law, two people must live together for a certain period of time, such is not actually the case in most states." source

an easy way out when your unhappy with the situation, no need for divorce

"In states that recognize common law marriage, it is a completely legitimate form of marriage. this means that, if the parties wish to end their relationship, they must do so through conventional means, i.e., divorce or annulment." source

 

[donnA]

these are peopel shacking up, nothing more. and it's off topic. this topic has been discussed many times here, with a few christians supporting shacking up. i suggest you find one of those threads or start a new one.

I did find when investigating this same topic, several times for this board. that it requires the two be liars. they must tell everyone they are married, they can not suggest to anyone they do not have a marriage license, they must tell epople they are legally married, for a certain length of time, before they are considered married by common law, menaing they must be liars first. is this a christian thing? nope.
and common law marriage is not legal in ky.

 

[Aaron]

I was going to suggest that Salty choose his labels better. He is erroneously assuming that common law marriage is synonomous with cohabitation.

All marriages are common law marriages.

 

[Salty]

I was going to suggest that Salty choose his labels better. He is erroneously assuming that common law marriage is synonomous with cohabitation.

All marriages are common law marriages.

The thread is about church membership, not shacking up. The title was simply an anology. Many attend church, saying they are part of it, but not making a full commitment.

Salty

 

[Aaron]

Then call it cohabitation, don't call it common law. Common law marriage requires the exchange of vows.

 

[paul wassona]

Then call it cohabitation, don't call it common law. Common law marriage requires the exchange of vows.

Not really Aaron, even though I share your sentiments.

Georgia used to allow commom law marriages as binding, my sister was "married" this way without any exchange of vows. All they did was "shack up" 5 years and that sealed it according to Ga law. Georgia doesn't recognise these any more
and a license is required by law.

Their "sealing it" was simply filling out a form at the health department in our county. It was then sent to a judge for signing. They received no certificate or exchanged any vows, but it was recorded by the county.

Every state is different concerning this. The analogy doesn't do justice to what is being asked.

Our policy is all about position, membership and being active in ministry. We want all the help we can get. We only allow a low level in participation in ministry to those who don't formerly commit to membership and in good standing, yet not holding any position but to sit in the pew and visit,clean, mow grass, etc.

I meant to add they went through a court divorce and he was supposed to pay child support for a son which he never did. this "low life" died in prison a few years ago of hepititus B & C, LOST!

 

[Crabtownboy]

Then call it cohabitation, don't call it common law. Common law marriage requires the exchange of vows.

No vows have to be exchanged, at least in some states.

Common-law marriage, sometimes called de facto marriage, informal marriage or marriage by habit and repute, is a form of interpersonal status which is legally recognized in some jurisdictions as a marriage even though no legally recognized marriage ceremony is performed or civil marriage contract is entered into or the marriage registered in a civil registry. A common-law marriage is legally binding in some common law jurisdictions but has no legal consequence in others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_marriage

The law in Virginia:

A "common law marriage" is one in which the parties may hold themselves out as a husband and wife, and under certain circumstances, be deemed married without a marriage license or ceremony.

Virginia does not allow the creation of a “common law” marriage, a relationship in which a couple lives together but have not participated in a lawful ceremony. Unlike some other states, in Virginia a couple cannot acquire marital rights and responsibilities by living together for a particular period of time. You do not need legal action to end such a relationship, if it was created in Virginia.

However, Virginia does recognize as valid, common law marriages created in other states if the legal requirements of those states have been met. As a result, legal action is needed to dissolve legal “common law” marriages performed in other states and foreign countries in compliance with their licensing and ceremonial regulations. The courts are available for determining the rights of parties now living in Virginia.

As long as a couple lives together as husband and wife, the question of validity of their marriage is unlikely to arise. However, for purposes of inheritance or the benefits of pension plans or social security, a valid marriage is required.

http://www.vadivorceonline.com/vapages/alimony/commonlawmarriage.asp

Common Law Marriages

A common law marriage is a marriage that takes place without a license or ceremony. This is currently possible in only 9 states (Alabama, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah) and the District of Columbia. The law is unclear at the moment in Oklahoma, and it may not be possible to form a new common law marriage there. However, Oklahoma, as well as a few other states (Georgia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania), does recognize common law marriages that took place there before the state’s cut-off date (cut-off dates in these states range from 1991–2003). New Hampshire recognizes common law marriages there for purposes of inheritance only. All states recognize valid common law marriages from other states.

http://family-law.freeadvice.com/divorce_law/common-law-marriage.htm

 

[JohnDeereFan]

I wonder how many discouraged, wounded Christians your church has buried alive?

None.

Nice cut there calling them indifferent

Well, if they don't show up for six months, don't respond to people reaching out to them, don't answer the phone, don't respond to counselling, what else are we to make of them? You make it sound as if we say "Well, we haven't seen Bob and Betty in a while. Guess we'd better cross them off the list." It isn't like that at all.

Sounds just like micormanagement. Has anyone ever accused you of being a legalist?

Not in regard to following Biblical instruction on church membership.

The church is to be a hospital for the soul, and emergency room for the spiritually wounded.

Hang on while I look for that verse...

You make it sound like its a boot camp where only the fittest can survive!

I'm sure people said the same thing to Paul when he wrote Hebrews 5:11-14.

Don't get me wrong, I fully support accountability, but if one isn't as faithful as we expect they are encouraged to become more faithful, but not cut off!

And how long do you allow them to be unfaithful before you speak up?

Only those faithful in theur stewardship are allowed to serve in any position.

Really? Have you ever been called a legalist?

Still looking for that verse about the church being a "hospital for the soul, and emergency room for the spiritually wounded". Not coming up with anything.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

Your self-centerdness keeps you from asking me about the "other side of the coin", instead you repeatedly attack my person and call me names.

...says the guy who just implied that I'm a legalist and that our church "buries" "discouraged, wounded Christians".

Funny how you neglected to ask me about the "other side of the coin", isn't it.