Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
My recollection concerning the Ball Rd property was that it was spoken of as a combined training center, LSM office and printing facility, and place for the church in Anaheim to meet...
|
I am not certain because I did not see the deed to the property. But, when in Irving I was very clear that my service was to the LSM ministry. I am relatively certain that the property was purchased by LSM and the donations were to LSM. Therefore the Irving property was in the name of LSM. It combined a meeting hall of the church in Irving with what is otherwise a LSM center, it housed the printing, publishing (music, etc) and residence of WL. But the meeting hall was referred to as "a training center". So although I am not 100% absolutely certain that the property in Irving belonged to LSM that was certainly my understanding and feel I am more than 95% certain that this is the case. Therefore, would the church in Irving have the right to tell PL to vacate the premises? No, it is not there premises. Do church elders have the right to tell LSM who to employ? No. These are not difficult concepts.
However, does the church in Irving have to meet on that property as a tenant to LSM and pay rent? No. Do saints in the church in Irving have to serve in the ministry of LSM? No. Do the saints have to provide hospitality if the LSM wants to give a training? No.
Assuming the situation in Anaheim was the same, the church could have held their meetings elsewhere, refused to serve in LSM and refused to provide hospitality for trainings. All three could have been done in a way that could not in any way be construed as being "rebellious" though it would require a high level of discretion. I think had they done those three things WL would have been forced to get rid of PL.