Rebecca Hancock, 49, of Jacksonville, Florida may be done with the Grace Community Church and Rev. T. Scott Christmas, but they are not done with her. Hancock left the church after it demanded that she leave her boyfriend Frank Young because of their “sexually immoral relationship.” Her children, however, remained in the church. Now, the church was told her that if she does not leave the church, her sins will be exposed to the entire community.
Christmas has given her until December 8th to meet with the church and end her immoral lifestyle. Christmas told local media that he is doing “nothing more than following the practices of what biblical churches have done through history.”
Hancock got into trouble when she revealed the relationship to a church mentor. She says that she was told that she was “biblically wrong” and need to dump Young.
She was then confronted by other women in the church who knew of her private relationship. One lady allegedly told her “I was at your house when you didn’t come home all night.’”
After leaving the church and refusing to take repeatedly calls, she received a letter informing her of the public outing planned in December: “Your refusal to repent and be restored in your relationship with God and His Church leaves us with no alternative than to carry out the third step of the discipline process. . . .In accordance with Matthew 18:17, we intend to ‘tell it to the church.’”
This would occur in front of her 20-year-old son and 18-year-old daughter.
This could make for a really interesting tort case. Normally you lose the protection of the privacy torts when you disclose private facts. Such voluntary disclosures make it difficult to bring an Intrusion Upon Seclusion tort or the Public Disclosure of Private Facts. However, the question is whether her disclosure to the mentor was thought to be private under the rules and traditions of the church. Courts tend to be reluctant to allow lawsuits in areas protected by the first amendment.
For the full story and a copy of the letter, click here.
Wrong tab – wrong comment – too early in morning – sorry.
Delete please to avoid confusing people.
Thanks
Now a real comment –
The poor woman is screwed I guess. I doubt she could win a tort case over this matter, even if she wanted or could tolerate the greater attention it would bring her.
Do I have this right? This woman WANTS to remain part of this church? She’s RESISTING leaving their warm and loving fold? Her “sin” is that she’s living with a man without “benefit of marriage” while people in California are TRYING to be married and these same folks are preventing it.
> One lady allegedly told her “I was at your house when you didn’t >come home all night.’”
She was WHERE? I’m constantly amazed by the irony (paradox? hypocricy?) of conservatives freaking out over any kind of government involvement in business, but they sure want to allow their religion to invade the most personal aspects of other people’s lives.
3And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto Him a woman taken in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst,
4they said unto Him, “Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5Now Moses in the law commanded us that such should be stoned but what sayest thou?”
6This they said testing Him, that they might have cause to accuse Him. But Jesus stooped down and with His finger wrote on the ground, as though He heard them not.
7So when they continued asking Him, He lifted Himself up and said unto them, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.”
8And again He stooped down and wrote on the ground.
9And they who heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning with the eldest even unto the last, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing in the midst.
10When Jesus had lifted Himself up and saw none but the woman, He said unto her, “Woman, where are those thine accusers? Hath no man condemned thee?”
11She said, “No man, Lord.” And Jesus said unto her, “Neither do I condemn thee; go, and sin no more.”
John 8
I guess Rev. Christmas missed this passage during Sunday School.
Nice shot, mespo.
Excellent point Mespo!!
The Bible also speaks against gossiping….maybe those gossiping women ought to be brought up in front of the church for gossiping about others! They too, ought to be kicked out of the church.
And also any person who has been envious of their neighbor because they have more money than they do, because the Bible also speaks against envy.
Everyone is guilty of sin and those church members are not innocent by any means either
Mespo,
You hit the nail on the head. It always amazes me how so many so-called Christians and Christian ministers fail to live the tenets of their religion and they just want to attack people for their failings. What Would Jesus Do?
Are we sure this Church isn’t really located in “Harper Valley?” This lady looks like Jeanne C. Riley to me. See below:
http://assets.mog.com/pictures/wikipedia/1620940/JeannieRileyAlbum.jpg
There are so many things that are evil about the actions of these church members and everyone has done an excellent job of pointing them out. If Rev. ASS-HOLE is determined to go through with this, I think she should take him up on his injunction to follow the bible. As soon as he’s done pointing out her “sinfulness” she should demand immediate and unconditional forgiveness as is her right in the new testament. If the congregation won’t come through, she can tell them they are hypocrites and say she’ll be back to church when they start living the gospel. She should also demand that everyone come forward to publically confess their “sins”, just as her chruch demanded of her.
As a “recovered” evangelical and proud member of a “liberal” Episcopal church, I just don’t get this story. What in the world gives a church the authority to “discipline” an adult living in a free society? It seems that this church operates according to some arcane traditions that were perhaps common in the early church. What baffles me further is all of the Christian blogs defending the church and its efforts at “discipline.”
While I understand Biblical teachings about sex and marriage, this woman is almost 50 years old. She has already been through a marriage and had two kids. Having seen individuals in my own family go through a variety of “stuff” through the years, I can say that life is not always so cut-and-dried. People make choices the best they can according to what life hands them.
The legalistic pack mentality is creepy and reminds me of the short story, “The Lottery,” by Shirley Jackson. I pray for the continuation of mainline denominations in America that can balance out the lunacy of the fundamentalist fringe.
Mespo,
You are right that she does fit the Harper Valley PTA image. Jill, the whole idea of some of these ministers is to control the members lives and therefore their pocketbooks! The teachings of Christ has nothing to do with it. I think this woman should hire a private detective to follow this minister because it always seems that the ones who scream the loudest about people sinning, are usually the biggest sinners.
She’s looking pretty good for a woman who’s almost 50 years old.
No wonder she’s having sex.
Seriously, though I agree with the comments so far. Like Mespo said, when confronted with “sinners” caught in the act of sexual transgression Jesus never once condemned one of them. He was apparently not as preoccupied with the notion of sexual transgression as are his so called followers, the clearest example being the one Mespo showed where the woman caught in the act of adultery was brought before him, yet he refused to condemn her. He also didn’t condemn the Samarian woman at the well who was sleeping with like 7 different guys.
He just wasn’t as anal retentive on this stuff as the religious leaders who claim to be his ministers. Personally I think they’re just jealous because they can’t get any action themselves.
Well, thanks, thanks a lot. I now have that earworm “Harper Valley PTA” playing in my head. Well, at least it isn’t Mani…never mind….
Is “Christmas” really the reverend’s birth name or did he legally change his name later? So many of the names and situations seem to fit much too well within this blawgs’ titles and coverage.
I prefer the Kingston’s Trio “Reverend Mr. Black”
I think as a child of this woman who still attends this church I would stand and deliver on some of the lifestyles of other members of the church. I’d especially be digging around the preacher’s life/past. Everyone’s got dirt, I’d make it my mission in life if they did that to my mother.
I think I’d find a new church.
One without so many a$$holes in it.
Yankee, you would have made a good Rebel…
I found the scene from John’s Gospel in one of my favorite movies,”King of Kings.” Enjoy Hollywood when it knew how to make a movie and write a score.
(Scene at about 3:06 but worth the entire view)
That’s my idea of old time religion.
I’m surprised that the good reverend in question has not suggested stoning as an appropriate form of discipline. However, the abysmal ignorance and corrupt moral theology which apparently attend the fulfillment of his pastoral duties are subjects best left to his peers to analyze. With respect to Ms. Hancock, I believe that there may be several remedies potentially available to her. Florida permits compensatory relief for invasion of privacy, defamation and the tort of outrage. I believe that a strong argument could be made that the intended publication of her “sins” falls outside the scope of protected speech in the context of this situation.
What a white Jesus?
Sorry, that was to you Mespo.
That was excellent mespo, thanks!
P.S. I’d forgotten Jesus was blond haired and blue eyed, nevertheless the movie should show at the church. Maybe you send the link to the churches’ website.
Jill:
Common mistake!
Mike:
I hope you’re right!
That’s no tort of outrage, it’s cherries jubilee made via flame-thrower!
Mike:
How does breach of fiduciary duty to maintain confidences grab you?
Anne Hanson:
“I can say that life is not always so cut-and-dried. People make choices the best they can according to what life hands them.”
******************
You would make a fine lawyer, if you aren’t already. Your words pretty much summarize the problem the law seeks to address. Only the fool is certain of anything.
Ironic that I wrote about this same topic on my site. In the area for related posts, your post was listed. Two different angles however.
And I agree with the previous commenters on the hypocrisy of it all.
http://thechocl8tdiaries.wordpress.com/2008/12/19/grace-community-church-not-so-full-of-grace/
Anne,
I wanted to echo what Mespo said. I know it must have been very difficult to leave your church of origin. You’re right about that pack mentality and it applies in JT’s post this A.M. as one part of the reason so many people will torture or root it on. Just as the pastor is committing an act of cruelty, others are only too happy to “help out” or condone it by silence.
Matthew 18:15-17
“If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that BY THE MOUTH OF TWO OR THREE WITNESSES EVERY FACT MAY BE CONFIRMED.
If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.”
1 Corinthians 5:11-13
But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler–not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? But those who are outside, God judges. REMOVE THE WICKED MAN FROM AMONG YOURSELVES.
bc:
I suppose these two verses are meant to prove something, but given the contradictory nature of much of scripture I am not sure just what. I much prefer your opinion to some iron age mantra repeated robotically as if I am supposed to stand in awe of its prose or profundity. Personally I’ll take Fitzgerald’s or Dostoevsky’s prose over Matt’s and Paul’s.
If you want to trade quotes here’s some better ones:
“The caterwauling horns has reached a crescendo and I turned away and cut across the lawn toward home. I glanced back once. A wafer of a moon was shining over Gatsby’s house, making the night fine as before, and surviving the laughter and the sound of his still glowing garden. A sudden emptiness seemed to flow now from the windows and the great door, endowing with complete isolation the figure of the host, who stood on the porch, his hand up in a formal gesture of farewell.”
and
“So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”
–F. Scott Fitzgerald, The Great Gatsby
“I meant to end it like this. When the Inquisitor ceased speaking he waited some time for his Prisoner to answer him. His silence weighed down upon him. He saw that the Prisoner had listened intently all the time, looking gently in his face and evidently not wishing to reply. The old man longed for him to say something, however bitter and terrible. But He suddenly approached the old man in silence and softly kissed him on his bloodless aged lips. That was all his answer. The old man shuddered. His lips moved. He went to the door, opened it, and said to Him: ‘Go, and come no more… come not at all, never, never!’ And he let Him out into the dark alleys of the town. The Prisoner went away.”
“And the old man?”
“The kiss glows in his heart, but the old man adheres to his idea.”
Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Grand Inquisitor from the Brothers Karamazov
Doesn’t she have an expectation of confidentiality if there the disclosure was made within a pastoral relationship?