Talk:Universal Life Church

"New Age" or "Syncretism"

IP User:129.174.182.60/User:129.174.182.69 trying to add something about ULC being either "New Age" or "Syncretism" but sources don't stand up. One source has neither word. Other source is actually just a collection of Wikipedia articles, so definitely not reliable. Suggest page protection since whoever is behind it is changing IPs. Hyperbolick (talk) 00:03, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

I don't think we are at the stage where page protection is necessary. If an issue persists we can block the IP range for a time and see if that resolves the issue. BD2412 T 00:59, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Range blocks are icky. Hyperbolick (talk) 01:10, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

The idea isn't exactly a problem in and of itself. The issue would be WP:synth. If RS doesn't talk about these things then it can't really be in the article, regardless of how apt or clear the label is. 76.178.169.118 (talk) 18:58, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Official website

Based on this, do we know what the actual website of the church is? They both appear to be ULC. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:02, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

This has been discussed previously, but it's complicated because there are multiple entities having reasons to make some kind of claim to being the official website. BD2412 T 17:10, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Strange. I was confused myself when looking at the different sites. I did a rough search through Google for ULC and anything mentioning the website. I found a few references such as this, this and this, which when referenced to information they report about the site leads back to ULC.org. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:01, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

As the footer for ULC.org states, this is the website for Universal Life Church Ministries, branched from the original Universal Life Church, and is based in Sacramento, CA. ULC.net seems to operate out of Modesto, CA, where the Universal Life Church originated. Finalfenix (talk) 23:57, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Except the two websites you placed at the top show from operating from two different locations. This causes even more confusion and is WP:OR. This seems to be difficult to figure out which is which (as far as the website, not the entity) so I went with what a secondary source says. Right now, that is the best source we have which is why it was changed. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:43, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Here are some sources from the original Universal Life Church based in Modesto, CA.

http://www.ulchq.com/links.htm displays a link to http://forum.ulc.net/ which redirects to https://ulc.net/forum/ (note the "ulc.net" domain).

This site (note the "ulc.net" domain) states that the official Universal Life Church network is: ULCHQ, ULC Online, and ULC Seminary (note the "ulcseminary.org" domain in last link)

This site (note the "ulcseminary.org" domain) explains that the "ulc.org" site changed hands in August 2006, as well as some of the circumstances around that change. Basically, it states that "ulc.org" is currently in the control of a George Freeman and associates, and is using a variety of other websites, including "themonastery.org" (which is run by Universal Life Church Monastery, not to be confused with Universal Life Church based in Modesto, CA.

Additionally, that site states, "For a list of who owns which domains, so you can be sure you are supporting the group of your choice, please click DOMAINS." There are many different websites listed at that link, including a clarification of which sites are not affiliated with Universal Life Church in Modesto, CA. It shows that "themonastery.org", "ulc.org", and many other listed sites are not associated with Universal Life Church in Modesto, CA.

That site also shows many other sites that are affiliated with Universal Life Church in Modesto, CA, including the following "main sites":

- Modesto: ulchq.com

- ULC Seminary: ulcseminary.org

- ULC Online: ulc.net

Conversely, this site (note the "themonastery.org" domain) references "TheMonastery.org and ULC.org Web Site Updates" (emphasis mine). "themonastery.org" is associated with Universal Life Church Monastery, not to be confused with Universal Life Church based in Modesto, CA). - Mav5000 (talk) 17:15, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Except these, references and here state different. As they are secondary and are independent of the Universal Life Church, that is what we use. CNMall41 (talk) 18:05, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Also, all of the websites (confusing as they are) are listed under external links. It may be something where we just leave the link out of the information box and put all the links under external links, naming them based on the header of each website. CNMall41 (talk) 18:08, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

After reversion of the Universal Life Church wiki, three external links point to "themonastery.org", "ulc.org", and "universallifechurchministers.org". The article in the first site listed does not appear to contain any links to or mention of "themonastery.org", "ulc.org", or "universallifechurchministers.org". The article in the second link does have a single hyperlink to "ulc.org". The article in the third link only contains a reference to "ulc.org" in the embedded document from the Tennessee Office of the Attorney General, and even then, that document refers to "Universal Life Church Ministries" (emphasis mine). The news article itself makes no mention of an actual website address for ULC.

Furthermore, "themonastery.org" is listed as the "Official website" at this Wiki entry for Universal Life Church Monastery. I think we can agree that these are two separate organizations. As previously stated, this site (note the "themonastery.org" domain) references "TheMonastery.org and ULC.org Web Site Updates" (emphasis mine). Clearly, "themonastery.org" is associated with Universal Life Church Monastery (not to be confused with Universal Life Church based in Modesto, CA), and the ULC Monastery is claiming affiliation with "ULC.org". Mav5000 (talk) 19:17, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Still clear as mud, no offense. If the secondary sources are wrong, then it looks like journalists are as confused as some editors here have been. After looking closer, I think the best thing is to err on the side of caution so as not to confuse readers. I think we put back what you had in the information box but move it to external links (saying "Universal Life Church and branches websites"), leaving nothing in the information box since there isn't a requirement that we have to put one there at all. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:32, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

I still firmly believe that "ulc.org" should not be listed as an external site for the Universal Life Church wiki. If anything, "ulc.org" could/should be listed as an external site for the Universal Life Church Monastery wiki. As yet an additional data point, I just found that site footer at the bottom of both "themonastery.org" and "ulc.org" each show "Universal Life Church Ministries".

I think there is overwhelming evidence that both "themonastery.org" and "ulc.org" belong to the Universal Life Church Monastery. This is especially given that Universal Life Church (Modesto, CA) has clearly stated that they are not affiliated with Universal Life Church Monastery. Universal Life Church (Modesto, CA) stated on one of their own sites that the "ulc.org" site changed hands in August 2006. They also stated that the official Universal Life Church network is: ULCHQ, ULC Online, and ULC Seminary, followed by stating, "There are no other site names or affiliations considered official or recognized by our Headquarters other than the three sites listed above." Universal Life Church (Modesto, CA) seems pretty clear about this.

Basically, if Universal Life Church (Modesto, CA) is claiming affiliation with only only the three sites, AND if Universal Life Church Monastery is claiming affiliation with "themonastery.org" and "ulc.org", AND if we know they are two different entities, then it seems clear that "ulc.org" should be removed from this wiki's external links. Maybe add it to Universal Life Church Monastery wiki instead. Otherwise, this page isn't avoiding confusing readers, it's just providing incorrect information. Mav5000 (talk) 23:27, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Keep in mind WP:VNT and WP:OR. I understand what you are saying but it isn't clear and as such I don't see how we can say one website is one group while another belongs to something else. Even your own research saw ULC.org as saying "ministries" (not Monastery). If that is the case, how can we justify adding it there as you suggest? My thought about not misleading is simply to err on the side of caution, not that I am arguing it from a policy. If there is a concern with associating one group with another, simply remove the wording "Universal Life Church and branches websites" and only add the links. Otherwise, I say we go with what is WP:Verifiable from the secondary source and simply add ULC.org back to the information box. Or, remove all links just be sure. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:58, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Two years later, you still seem to be single-handedly fighting to keep the .ulc.org link while everyone else in this conversation, and others through their edits, recognize that it belongs to another organization. Please allow the edit to take place. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 22:50, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Not single-handedly, but yes its on my watchlist and have been reverting IPs who have been reverting despite this discussion stalling. I will say that after two years I am still as confused as before about which website belongs to which organization. And, really tired of arguing about it. Can you we tell for sure which is which so we can put this to rest?--CNMall41 (talk) 23:05, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

I am not sure where the confusion is coming from. The website says it's owned by an organization called "Universal Life Church Ministries". The website makes it specifically clear that this is not the ULC. "The Universal Life Church Ministries (ULCM) is philosophically descended from some of the ideas of the Universal Life Church founded in the 1950s by Kirby Hensley. That original Modesto ULC was accused of some unethical practices. The ULCM has no links to that earlier organization" I think that's pretty dang clear. This is an article about the ULC founded by Hensley, and not any group of a similar name that wants to usurp their businesss. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 00:40, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

I spelled it out above (beginning of thread) but maybe my confusion is causing confusion. It happens to the best of us. I think there is a lot of confusion with secondary sources which is likely the offshoots usurping the main. So.......if we take each website on its face (using your quote above and a goodle search for Universal Life Church Modesto), then ulchq.com would be the Universal Life Church we are discussion in this article correct? That would be the original edit that caused me to start this discussion. If that is the case, I will simply change it back. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:48, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, this article is about the Modesto church, Thanks for taking care of that. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 00:17, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Beliefs and practices

The first sentence of this section states, "The Universal Life Church traces its doctrine back to the anticlericalism of the Protestant Reformation and ultimately to the words of St. Paul that the church is a 'priesthood of all believers.'[28][29]" This is actually just a quote coming from court documents which come from the cite from OpenJurist.org, and it's incorrect at that; There's no record of Paul ever declaring that the church is "the priesthood of all believers." This is something derived from 1 Peter 2:4-9, where the writer of 1st Peter (not Paul) declares that those who believe in Jesus have become a royal priesthood. This first sentence should either be removed entirely, or have quotes around it emphasizing that it's ULC's own views, and not directly based on a quote by Paul the Apostle.Adrift* (talk) 16:25, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Surely better to adjust than to remove. Hyperbolick (talk) 08:35, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

I've removed the sentence. The sentence is a direct quote from the court document found here: https://openjurist.org/775/f2d/576/lynch-v-universal-life-church. I don't know if this is an actual view of ULC or a claim made by one of their lawyers, the judge or what. If the article is edited to add the claim back, I suggest a better source (something from ULC directly), and a clarification that this is the church's subjective view of the origin of that phrase. Adrift* (talk) 14:53, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Twisted tangle of ordination services

With the several variants of the names used to refer to "Universal Life Church", it's difficult to keep them straight. It's not really apparent to what extent the names must match, and whether the geographic location isn't really a better indicator than the exact name. This comment applies to both "Universal Life Church" and "Universal Life Church Monastery". Attempting to untangle this might be inferred to violate WP:OR and/or WP:SYN.

There are various other ordination mills, such as American Marriage Ministries as well as "Alliance of Divine Love", "First Nation Ministry" and "Open Ministry" (and almost certainly others based outside the U.S.).

Anyway, if we're going to cover ordination mills, we perhaps should figure out how this should look, because when I look at what we currently have, it doesn't seem very pretty. Fabrickator (talk) 03:04, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

It occurs to me that it will be pretty common that people who go to the "Universal Life Church" article are really interested in learning about ordination mills in general rather than any specific organization, and currently we really sidetrack most of them with a lot of historic information about the history of the several "Universal Life Church" entities. If we include a list of ordination mills in the ordination mill article and provide a referral link at the top of Universal Life Church and Universal Life Church Monastery articles, it will take them more directly to the information pertinent to their needs.

I think you are correct. Labeling this as an ordination mill or inferring so with the link would violate WP:OR. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:45, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

@CNMall41: I am not intending that "ordination mill" would be a disparaging term, this is just the name we have for an existing article applicable to these services. Regardless of the term used, the term is intended to refer to services that provide a certificate of ordainment with minimal cost, possibly affirming one's acceptance of some sort of generic belief. I can't decide which is the more appropriate term: "ordainment service" or "ordination service", but either one should avoid any implicit disparagement.

While different services may make some attempt to distinguish themselves from others, all the ones I have looked at have virtually identical operating models, i.e. a very simple process to be ordained, usually no actual fee for this service, but they may ask for a donation or sell certain additional documentation or even educational materials, but this is almost always optional. Mostly it's done online, occasionally they'll ask you to mail them some document, and I have not come across any indication that there is a distinction as to the level of acceptance of documentation between the different services. Fabrickator (talk) 22:49, 17 August 2024 (UTC)