Talk:United Church of Christ/Archive 1

message: I just reverted changes from 64.233.197.49, which were justified simply as "Revert to original, unbiased version." I do not see what bias Mr. 64.233.197.49 objects to. He really needs to discuss these changes, as his "unbiased version" tells very little about the church and I question its relevance. IF there are sources for the allegations this version makes, I can see including them, but NOT by deleting the church's history and the other things contained in this version. Dave Farquhar 17:08, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note on reversion, 21 April 2005 

message: To answer some questions, this article is part of Project Massachusetts only insofar as the United Church of Christ has a large presence in the Commonwealth and is related to congregationalism.--AaronS 21:13, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Project Massachusetts

message: I think we should start a category like :Category:Lutherans, which raises the question of what to call them. 
#Is "UCCers" the right word? 
#Another question is whether to include people like Cotton Mather and others who were congregationalists but not members after 1957. 
#A Third question is whether people "raised" UCC who may or may not attend  a UCC church should be counted, for instance David Letterman.
Well, anyways, I'll add the strawman list below and you can feel free to add to it. MPS 18:45, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that "UCC members" would be more accurate.  I have never heard of the useage of UCCers. Assawyer 05:09, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Famous UCCers

message: I have installed an NPOV-section on this topic as I believe it conveys a liberal bias. Speaking in such term as equal marriage rights for all people, regardless of gender this tends to present same-sex marriage in a liberal light. A more appropriate approach would be a matter-of-fact statement of when and how the Church inagurated its policy of performing same-sex marriages, and may include direct quotation from this church's guiding documents. 
The disputed language smacks of proselytizing propaganda pandering to liberal people, and a subtle  diatribe against those churches who affirm the 'traditional' form of marriage, i.e., mixed-gender only.   
Constitutionally, it does not appear that same-sex unions of any sort were codified as a fundamental right, the creation of such a right would be a clear innovation. The approach taken previously seems to assume that it is such a right, and would thus not only be a netrality violation, but a factual error as well. [Unsigned comment by User:KriZe 19:10, 29 December 2005]
:I hear you that equal marriage rights for all people, regardless of gender  smacks of bias, but that is the language used in the resolution. [ link to resolution... see lines 15/16. The resolution itself is titled "In Support of Equal Marriage Rights for All". This is the resolution's language, not Wikipedia's language. You will also note that the section is entitled "Same Sex Marriage Controversy" and that the article states "This decision was considered highly controversial by some local congregations ..." Much of the controversy around the resolution is due the resolution being biased towards one particular policy of performing same-sex marriages . Because of the congregational nature of the UCC, doctrinal decisions like definition/understanding of "marriage" should not be dictated from a central Synod. I think the article fairly conveys the facts of the case, so I am removing the NPOV tag. I will try to add a little more about congregationalism so readerrs see that the language in the resolution seems biased rather than Wikipedia. MPS 20:13, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Same-Sex Marriage 

message: An interesting story that dates to the beginnings of Oberlin is the arrival of the Lane Rebels which has been re-enacted at the college. I know a little bit about this story, but, perhaps someone else is more informed. There is no page as yet for this subject. [Unsigned comment by User:Williambrandes 04:22, 6 March 2006]
:Check this out: Lane Theological Seminary. MPS 15:36, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lane Rebels 

message: Is the NACCC reference really necessary here?  It seems more relevant on the page(s) on the Congregationalists.  As a comparison, if you go to the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America page, there is not a reference to every little dinky spit off group that decided not to join every time their predecessors merged.  Sure, the Congregationalist dissent / NACCC piece was significant at the time of the 1957 merger, but given that the vast majority of Congregational churches did end up joining the UCC, I'm not sure that now 50 years later, it's hugely relevant to the UCC article.
Ideally, when I get time, I would like to write up a much expanded History of the UCC section for this article--one that covers pieces of the merger story and our history since 1957.  Currently, the page only gives historical perspective to our pre-1957 roots.  In such a history section, perhaps the NACCC piece would be relevant, but I don't think it is in its current context in the article. Emerymat 19:49, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the NACCC piece really necessary here? 

message: My most recent edit had edit line "per old discussion" as I seem to remember a discussion here concluding that there are no UCC churches in Canada. I can't seem to find this discussion. Did I have it somewhere else? I don't know. So anyways, I deleted the "there are two UCC churches in Canada" bnecause it is my understanding that the United Church of Christ is only in the USA and that UCC sightings in Canada are probably United Church of Canada. If I am wrong about this please provide a source when you add it back in. MPS 23:37, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I will begin by saying that I was not the person who inserted the Canada congregations information.  Nevertheless, the UCC Yearbook does list two Canadian congregations, both in the Northern Plains Conference:  Josephburg UCC in Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta, (UCC congregation #48-1090) and Filipino United Community UCC in Winnipeg, Manitoba (#48-1122).  (I will hazard a guess to say these two congregations might be why the conference is not simply named the "North Dakota Conference"?)  As I said, I didn't put the "two congregations in Canada" disclaimer in the article in the first place, and quite frankly wonder if its a level of minutiae unnecessary--especially in the "introduction" section of the article. Emerymat 06:58, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: United Church of Canada

message: Unless a blog is substantive and/or exclusive to the UCC, I believe these types of links should not be included. For instance, if the UCC had an an official blog, that may be relevent. However, a typical blog that isn't exclusive to blogging about the UCC should not be included. Thoughts-- UCCer 19:56, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: IMHO, A compromise is to start assembling all known UCC-ish blogs on the talk page until we get enough "candidates" to really assess what makes a UCC blog. Are there really that many UCC bloggers out there? *Googles* Maybe we could advertise UCC blogrings like this one and then let the reader discern what is spam and what is real. For now I would recommend listing blogs and then we can talk more. MPS 21:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I am not the person making the blog edits, I would like to confess that IM-not-so-HO, the utter trash that gets put up by the so-called UCCTruths.com blog also should not be linked from this page, either.  I agree that these two other blogs are only tangentially related to the page, but garbage by a different name still smells like a landfill, right? :-) Emerymat 01:28, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as UCCtruths.com is concerned, I don't believe it is a blog and as long as a source has verifiably accurate information that is relevent, it should be permitted. Our own biases need to be kept in check but, if there is incorrect information, it should be edited out. UCCer 17:55, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not so comfortable trusting wikipedia editors to say in a neutral point of view, "my friend joe runs a good UCC blog, but this other guy Bob has a terrible UCC blog." Judging which blogs represent UCC opinions is a bit like asking which words in Webster's dictionary represent English. One useful criterion for "blog notability" is whether or not UC news or other "formal settings" of the UCC have referenced the blog address in an article. That would probably include chuck currie, UCCtruths, philosophy over coffee. By that criterion, it would also include any blog that is referenced by a UCC Local Church web page. Just some thoughts... I don't think I have seen have "the answer" yetMPS 18:50, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Adding blog links

message: An acronyms section??? You've got to be kidding me--I swear this article becomes less and less like an encyclopedia article by the minute. Emerymat 23:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh... what is wikipedia's guidance/policy on acronyms section? It's not verboten, is it? MPS 13:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acronyms section 

message: Hi, by "Evangelical" do you mean Evangelicalism or Evangelism. Bear in mind that the former has stong connotations of "conservatism," and the latter of "outspoken sharing of the Gospel." If you can't agree to either of those, perhaps you should consider simply removing the link (but not the text, since it is important in context)  to Evangelical. At present it only links to an unhelpful disambiguation page, and linking to dab pages is kinda discouraged. Thanks, --Ling.Nut 01:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the question, lingnut. Within the UCC, Evangelical means a lot of things to a lot of people. I would say linking to the somewhat ambiguous definition would be appropriate in this case, since the UCC's German Protestant roots evoke "Evangelisch but people who say evangelical also might mean good newsism and evangelism. UCCers are generally not likely to identify the UCC as a conservative organiazation although about 25% of UCCers do consider themselves conservative or somewhat conservative and perhaps evangelical. MPS 21:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I'll leave it linked to the dab page.. but I can't promise that some other person won't come along and change it in a month or two. So... I dunno, if it is an important link, maybe you should check it once a month or so. Thanks for the reply! --Ling.Nut 22:14, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Evangelical"  Disambiguation link repair - [[Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links|You can help!]] 

message: Check it: Resolutions of the United Church of Christ. MPS 07:06, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Resolutions of the United Church of Christ

message: On german Wikipedia Benutzer:Hansele doesn t believe, that Paul Tillich and Reinhold Niebuhr were members of the UCC after 1957. Have anyone here a good link, where that is written ?GLGerman 23:09, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe you should do your work for the german wikipedia there and not attack other users here... --84.160.58.246 23:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paul Tillich/Reinhold Niebuhr 

message: I have no connection to this page, but saw it could use a bit of editing so I stayed around.  I've begun implementing detailed ref tags if anyone would like to help out and switch the current references over to the detailed reference format used in the beginning of the article.  I'll plug away at it when I have some spare time. Hewinsj 06:24, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: I'm just a UCC member, and I noticed the link to the Woodmont UCC page (http://www.woodmontucc.org).  If such links are welcome here, may I suggest another:  http://www.campbellucc.org
Disclaimer: I'm a member of the Campbell church, but I have nothing to do with the webpage. Gawbl 19:41, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, no--it is not appropriate to have links to individual congregations here, and so the Woodmont link has been removed. Emerymat 02:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  another local church website 

message: If we are linking to notable "unofficial" links in the external links section, I don't see where WP:EL implies we can't link to http://groups.myspace.com/uccstillspeaking ... which is apparently the only UCC myspace group out there. An even more compelling reason that this link should stay is that  the first forum post in the group was by somone neamed Sora Sol... and she claims to be somone working in the stillspeaking office. If the GISS people are posting on this particular myspace group in an official capacity, then I argue that it is more notable than your average myspace group.  MPS 23:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Most average myspace groups aren't notable in the first place. What makes this one have information that's relevant to the article? Shadow1 (talk) 20:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: reread what I just said... multiple posts by Sora Sol... aka this girl whose name should be obvious but I won't type here, the web content Coordinator for the UCC's God Is Still Speaking, campaign. It is clear from her posts that the campaign attempted to use myspace as part of their official communications to  young adults.  I can provide more links MPS 21:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Um... do note that we are not a linkfarm. If people want to find the myspace group they can use a search engine. Please don't forget that we are an encyclopedia. Cheers! —— Eagle 101 (Need help?) 21:04, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: there are plenty of links that we have already eliminated.... you will see above that we discussed linking "UCC bloggers" but I personally believed that to do so would be promoting wiki-link-spam. ... Listen, I appreciate what you're trying to do, but I think you are taking the word "avoid" in WP:EL too literally. I agree that we need to reduce/eliminate superfluous external linking withing wikipedia, but in this case I think you have gone over the top in forcing the issue on the United Church of Christ page. I understand that there is no cabal, but I am starting to feel bullied by shadowbot's nasty Rv messages and the multiple personal talk messages I have received from wikispam project users reminding this experienced wikipedian that there is a policy called WP:EL. I get it. I really do.  I am glad you are eliminating wikispam, but I just feel liek your approach feels overly aggressive and not tinged with the appropriate dose of wikipedia:wikilove and wikipedia:assume good faith. Grace and Peace, MPS 21:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I am not in any Cabal and am nearly a member of this church (well, my mother was a congregationalist anyway) but this article does have a serious link issue. For example, see section "United Church of Christ institutions". When we are referring to other institutions which have their own page on Wikipedia it is highly unconventional to put an external link to the institution next to the internal one when listing them. In the odd cases where I have seen it I have cleaned the external link up (i.e. deleted). Here we have about 30 inappropriate links which ought to go. I suggest that you do this yourselves to avoid other people getting involved. There are also a number of references not meeting WP:EL and a section of "Websites of other UCC related groups" which isn't really part of the article and basically adds no comment except as a link-list which we are not. Some work to do in fact. --BozMo talk 11:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: myspace

message: I am moving the links here... and deleting them from the article. MPS 16:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Officially related educational institutions

message: The two churches cited are very large and perhaps prominent in terms of newsworthiness, but they very atypical and unrepresentative of UCC churches.  There are only ~16 UCC churches with over 2,000 members (2008).  In terms of numbers of churches, financial strength, and Congregational history, the New England conferences are very prominent, but none of them had churches over 2,000 members in 2002 - except Wethersfield CT, which has since left the UCC.  How to present a more realistic picture?  Albany45 (talk) 23:06, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Some churches mentioned in this section are prominent, but most are not.--IACOBVS (talk) 18:24, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This issue isn't whether a UCC church is 'typical' of the denomination, Albany45. It is also not an ecclesiological issue ('church' vs. 'congregation'), Bikerbudmatt. It is whether a 'local church' (to use UCC parlance) is prominent in the typical sense of that word. Most people have no idea about the UCC's polity and probably don't care. Prominence could be architectural, historical, or by association with a person or persons or events. It seems some have simply listed their local churches as 'prominent' when they do not pass muster. I have deleted those churches and left the ones that do have some noteworthy aspects. IACOBVS (talk) 07:10, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prominent Churches 

message: Eliminated the sentence beginning with "Page two...".  It points to one clause among several that leads to "We now declare ourselves to be one body."  The grammar is problematic, and the point of including this is unclear. The referenced document stands by itself. --Albany45 (talk) 01:00, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relationships with Other Churches 

message: I have changed the orientation of the UCC from Mainline/Calvinist to Mainline/United and Uniting - see the Wikipedia article on United and uniting churches. While the UCC and most of its predecessor churches have their origins in the Reformed wing of the Protestant Reformation, it is difficult to defend the position that the UCC is in its present form a truly Calvinist denomination. By way of illustration, the history of the New England Congregationalism that is still dominant in the UCC begins with the the 17th century Puritans of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. They were indeed Calvinists, but by the time those churches evolved into Congregationalist churches in the 18th century, there was already a sharp move away from classical Calvinism. By the early 19th century, the Unitarian controversy emerged, splitting the churches along doctrinal lines. By this point, the "orthodox" Congregationalists who maintained a Trinitarian understanding of God were nonetheless already far removed from the beliefs of their Puritan forebears. The Congregationalist churches began to steadily embrace progressive causes such as the abolition of slavery and were chief among the exponents of the Social Gospel movement. By the 20th century, all the predecessor denominations were largely non-evangelical (in the conservative usage of this word), embraced ecumenism and church unity and were often deemed liberal. These trends resulted in the creation of the UCC as one of the United and uniting churches in 1957. While the UCC, like many United churches, has roots in the Reformed branch of Protestantism and maintains membership in the World Alliance of Reformed Churches, stating that the UCC's present orientation is Calvinist, as that term is commonly defined, is inaccurate. I invite further comments for those who may oppose this change. 
--Jm3106jr (talk) 23:23, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Calvinist vs United and Uniting 

message: I deleted the reference that the UCC is in full communion with the United Methodist Church. The UMC was not part of the 1997 Formula of Agreement between the participating Lutheran and Reformed churches in the United States. The reference given in this section to the UCC's webpage on ecumenical relations mentions the UMC only as an ecumenical partner via Churches Uniting in Christ, but CUIC has not yet resulted in a full communion agreement among its participants. If you look at the footnotes, the UMC along with the Episcopal Church is specifically noted as not in a relationship of full communion with the UCC, but only in ecumenical partnership as currently provided by CUIC. --Jm3106jr (talk) 23:22, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  United Methodist Church not in full communion with the UCC 

message: I have changed the polity listed for the UCC from "modified Congregationalist and Presbyterian" to simply "Congregationalist". The local church is supreme per the UCC Constitution and thus its form of Congregationalism is not at all "modified" - it is pure Congregationalism. There is no actual Presbyterian polity in operation in the UCC. This was not the case for the pre-merger Evangelical and Reformed Church which did indeed have a modified Presbyterian polity, but that polity did not survive the merger in 1957. In effect, the E&R congregations became congregationalist local churches overnight once the merger was completed. While other UCC bodies, like the general synod, state level conferences, and area associations have influence and can make recommendations, they cannot direct or order a local church of the UCC to comply with its decisions. The only definitive action an association or conference can take against a local church of the UCC is to terminate fellowship with it. This would in turn mean that the local church in question would cease to be a congregation of the UCC, but it would remain a Congregationalist church with all its assets intact. --Jm3106jr (talk) 00:24, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that Conferences are not always "state level" bodies. Two examples:
* Northern California Nevada Conference covers roughly half of each of two states
* Pacific Northwest Conference covers Washington, North Idaho and Alaska --Tony Lewis (talk) 17:54, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changed UCC Polity from "Modified Congregationalist and Presbyterian" to simply "Congregationalist" 

message: Note to all interested editors, I've created an article for the National Council of the Congregational Churches of the United States. This was the first formal nation-wide denominational structure established by the Congregationalists and existed from 1865 until 1931 when it merged into the Congregational Christian Church. It's still pretty much a stub, so any expansion would be appreciated. Ltwin (talk) 11:50, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: National Council of Congregational Churches of the United States

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on United Church of Christ. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100201212501/http://i.ucc.org:80/StretchYourMind/UCC101/TestimoniesofFaith/tabid/88/Default.aspx to http://i.ucc.org/StretchYourMind/UCC101/TestimoniesofFaith/tabid/88/Default.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110708071517/http://unitedchurchofchrist.blogspot.com/2008/02/support-uccs-legal-defense-against-irs.html to http://unitedchurchofchrist.blogspot.com/2008/02/support-uccs-legal-defense-against-irs.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051230040915/http://www.ncf.edu:80/about/history.html to http://www.ncf.edu/about/history.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:55, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on United Church of Christ. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070311104833/http://news.ucc.org:80/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=581&Itemid=54 to http://news.ucc.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=581&Itemid=54
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070929120503/http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/apps/nl/content.asp?c=fwLYKnN8LzH&b=312458&content_id={01D1316F-EAA5-42EC-91BB-81E250805BFC}¬oc=1 to http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/apps/nl/content.asp?c=fwLYKnN8LzH&b=312458&content_id={01D1316F-EAA5-42EC-91BB-81E250805BFC}¬oc=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080121180732/http://www.onenewsnow.com:80/2007/06/barry_lynn_obamas_ucc_speech_n.php to http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/06/barry_lynn_obamas_ucc_speech_n.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080302000018/http://ap.google.com:80/article/ALeqM5jlQQQuZKZmCSwpSPaZL-1qFIFX8QD8V2C8NO1 to http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jlQQQuZKZmCSwpSPaZL-1qFIFX8QD8V2C8NO1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110722162051/http://unitedchurchofchrist.blogspot.com/2008/02/support-uccs-legal-defense-against-irs.html to http://unitedchurchofchrist.blogspot.com/2008/02/support-uccs-legal-defense-against-irs.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080620021736/http://www.ncf.edu:80/about/history.html to http://www.ncf.edu/about/history.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:51, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on United Church of Christ. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100302195024/http://i.ucc.org:80/StretchYourMind/UCC101/BriefHistoryoftheUCC/tabid/93/Default.aspx to http://i.ucc.org/StretchYourMind/UCC101/BriefHistoryoftheUCC/tabid/93/Default.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080121180732/http://www.onenewsnow.com:80/2007/06/barry_lynn_obamas_ucc_speech_n.php to http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/06/barry_lynn_obamas_ucc_speech_n.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080302000018/http://ap.google.com:80/article/ALeqM5jlQQQuZKZmCSwpSPaZL-1qFIFX8QD8V2C8NO1 to http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jlQQQuZKZmCSwpSPaZL-1qFIFX8QD8V2C8NO1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110722162051/http://unitedchurchofchrist.blogspot.com/2008/02/support-uccs-legal-defense-against-irs.html to http://unitedchurchofchrist.blogspot.com/2008/02/support-uccs-legal-defense-against-irs.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080620021736/http://www.ncf.edu:80/about/history.html to http://www.ncf.edu/about/history.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:48, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on United Church of Christ. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080121180732/http://www.onenewsnow.com:80/2007/06/barry_lynn_obamas_ucc_speech_n.php to http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/06/barry_lynn_obamas_ucc_speech_n.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080302000018/http://ap.google.com:80/article/ALeqM5jlQQQuZKZmCSwpSPaZL-1qFIFX8QD8V2C8NO1 to http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jlQQQuZKZmCSwpSPaZL-1qFIFX8QD8V2C8NO1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110722162051/http://unitedchurchofchrist.blogspot.com/2008/02/support-uccs-legal-defense-against-irs.html to http://unitedchurchofchrist.blogspot.com/2008/02/support-uccs-legal-defense-against-irs.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080620021736/http://www.ncf.edu:80/about/history.html to http://www.ncf.edu/about/history.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:44, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on United Church of Christ. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130303050404/http://www.ucc.org/synod/pdfs/REPORT-From-the-Committee-on-Ecumenical-and-Interfaith-Relations.pdf to http://www.ucc.org/synod/pdfs/REPORT-From-the-Committee-on-Ecumenical-and-Interfaith-Relations.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:47, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Does this church originate in the United States? If so, perhaps something should be added to the lead as there is no mention of geographical scope there at the moment. Alansplodge (talk) 11:46, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is American. I added mention of it in the lede. Ltwin (talk) 22:11, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  An American church? 

message: Praise our Lord Jesus Christ, I am pastor Paul Wekulo. Have been searching for Evangelical church of Christ for a very long time. Having learned of the merger to form ucc, as a family we're happy and thankful to God for his direction. I am a Kenyan citizen aged 43 years with a family of four children. Luciah, Henry, Hillary and Hadassah. My beautiful wife is Caroline. Will be happy to hear from you. Thanks and Happy new year of Divine Establishment, 2chronicles 20:20. Pastor Paul Wekulo Simiyu (talk) 17:26, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  God's revelation