Thursday, December 18, 2008

Florida Woman Says Former Church Plans to Make Her Sins Public

From Fox News:

A 49-year-old Florida woman says her former church is threatening to reveal her sins to its congregation after learning that she is in a "sexually immoral relationship."

Rebecca Hancock told FOXNews.com that Grace Community Church, a non-denominational church in Jacksonville, Fla., was against her relationship with boyfriend Frank Young because the two were sexually active but not married.



When she wasn’t willing to obey the church's orders to leave him, she decided to leave the church instead, allowing her two children to remain active members.

Now, she says, church elders have given her the worst ultimatum yet: In a Dec. 8 letter, they told her she either has to meet with them and end her "immoral" relationship or she will face public humiliation.

“Bottom line, on January they 4th they are going to the church publicly with my sins, and my children will be sitting in church at the time,” Hancock told FOXNews.com.

Ok, help me here... the woman is upset that the church is going to go public with her sins, so what does she do? She calls FoxNews?


A church leader wouldn't commit to an interview when contacted Thursday by FOXNews.com. The Rev. T. Scott Christmas, pastor of the church, told the Florida Times-Union that the "process of loving accountability" is made very clear to members, and the church is doing "nothing more than following the practices of what biblical churches have done through history."
Christmas is a Reformed Baptist pastor of a FIRE fellowship, seemingly practicing proper church discipline.

Hancock, who is divorced, said the problems began in March, when she started telling her church mentor about her relationship — in what she thought were confidential conversations.
Confidential? She was expecting a lay-leader to lie by omission for her?

“As it progressed I told her about it and she said, 'You’ve got to get out, you’re biblically wrong,'” Hancock said.
The mentor was right.

Despite knowing her relationship was against church rules, Hancock said she never realized that disclosing it would trigger the first in a three-step process used by the church to deal with sinners: private admonishment, admonishment in the presence of witnesses and finally public admonishment.

Yeah, nothing about that in the membership info you received when you were baptized/became a member?

“In the room, there were several women that I never told my business to. And they proceeded to tell me about my business and what I was doing and what a sinner I was — just persecuting me.” Hancock said. “One of the ladies was even saying ‘I was at your house when you didn’t come home all night.’"
It was then that Hancock said she decided to leave Grace Community Church.
“I told them, ‘I cannot believe you people are doing this. I’m not going any further — I’m never coming here again,’” she recalled.
Yes, just like marriage, if it doesn't work, just leave!

“The pastor kept calling her, and I informed him that she [Hancock] would appreciate it if neither he nor any member of his church contacted her ever again,” Young told FOXNews.com.

Almost two months later, Hancock received the letter from the elders of Grace Community Church, explaining that she had left them no choice but to continue the disciplinary process.

“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,” the letter explained. “In accordance with Matthew 18:17, we intend to ‘tell it to the church.’”
Sounds like what the Bible commands.

Darrell L. Bock, a research professor for the Dallas Theological Seminary, said that public admonishment is not uncommon in churches that focus on discipline but added, "Most churches would handle this much more privately than this particular community is choosing to do."
This kind of process normally would happen after "much more private interaction" with the person, Block said, and is normally reserved for church leaders as opposed to "a normal member of the church."
Not according to Scripture. Bock may be saying what goes on in typical evangellyfish churches, but not in Reformed/Calvinistic ones.

More importantly, he said, the actions are unusual given that Hancock had severed her relationship with the church.

Hancock sent a formal letter of resignation after receiving the elders' ultimatum in hopes of solving the dispute. She said she fears for her 20-year-old son and 18-year-old daughter if the church carries out its threat.
She fears for them? Why? They know she was screwing around with some unbelieving kid.

“I don’t really care what they do to me. But I am concerned about my children sitting in church with their mother being crucified by the church that they trust,” she said. “I am very concerned about how it would affect them.”
But not concerned about how exposing your sins for FoxNews would affect them? Perhaps this is the kind of thinking that started the whole church discipline thing to begin with?

5 comments:

  1. My first impulse on something like this is to say, "It's not my church, and it's not my business." Yes, the woman is living in adultery. No, there doesn't seem to be any indication that she is repentant. Yes, those circumstances require a disciplinary response from whatever church she may be attending.

    But there is no reason to believe that the phrase "tell it to the church" in Matthew 18 means that a church must reveal details of the case, or that this revelation must take place before the entire assembly of the local congregation. That is the meaning this church has attached to the phrase, but it is not the meaning that must necessarily be attached to it. This church is choosing to take the path of public humiliation as a means of "discipline." And now, when their policy of public humiliation is exposed to the world, they throw up their hands, shrug their shoulders and act like, "Well, the Bible made me do it."

    Uh... no, it didn't! The fact that a person needs discipline does not mean that it must come through the means of public humiliation.

    Of course, this lady's response does seem irrational, and at least as harmful to her children as anything the church might intend to do. I understand generally the practical and strategic value of preemption, but it doesn't look very smart in this case.

    ReplyDelete
  2. But there is no reason to believe that the phrase "tell it to the church" in Matthew 18 means that a church must reveal details of the case, or that this revelation must take place before the entire assembly of the local congregation.

    Nor is there any reason to think that they will, apart from her statements. What generally happens in said churches (FIRE congregations) is that they simply say "member X has been put out of the church for not complying with the rules", they don't go into the sordid detail she's claiming.

    Uh... no, it didn't! The fact that a person needs discipline does not mean that it must come through the means of public humiliation.

    So she calls Fox News to avoid public humiliation... riiight. ;) I understand what you're saying, but again, I don't think the church will "humiliate" her any more than her calling Fox News has. Not only that but, this seems to be a clear example of the kind of thing going on in the Corinthian church and look how Paul dealt with it.

    I understand generally the practical and strategic value of preemption, but it doesn't look very smart in this case

    The woman seems to be taking advantage of the current anti-christian climate in the US, with the gay marriage thing in California and the election of Obama. The article seems to attempt to cast a cultic image upon this typical FIRE/Reformed Baptist congregation... I believe it will backfire.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "The woman seems to be taking advantage of the current anti-christian climate in the US..."

    From my perspective it looks like she is cutting off her own nose, not to spite her own face, but because she thinks someone else is about to do it and she doesn't want to give them the pleasure. Your point is very well taken, however, in that she may not really know what her "discipline" actually entails, and as a result she may have taken off a much larger chunk of her own flesh (so to speak) than the church was about to do. Still if you name a person and say that she is being "put out of the church," even if you do not go into any detail as to the reason why, there is still public humiliation involved. I don't think excommunication should normally involve such a public and extensive loss of fellowship. It should normally mean a quiet exclusion from the Lord's Supper. By this the congregation is telling the unrepentant sinner that she is not receiving the Lord's forgiveness. At least let that have its effect before putting someone out of the congregation.

    Sadly, I don't believe the attempt to "cast a cultic image" will fail. Perhaps I'm just a bit pessimistic, but I tend to think persecution is coming. We should be sure that it comes for confessing Christ, and not for mistreating unrepentant sinners. I'm not saying that this church is necessarily mistreating a sinner, but they should consider the matter well and act with utmost charity and prudence, no matter what they ultimately decide to do -- always so, but especially considering that they are now under additional scrutiny.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree, I figure the "cultic" thing will get some traction.

    I was reading through the URC hymnal's section from their confession on church discipline and noted that their final, excommunication, statement basically says 'You all know member X and the sins they've committed... you're to have nothing to do with them until they repent.' It was evident that there had been church-wide discussion of their particular error.

    I think in our modern culture we take "privacy" for granted and expect it to be extended in our church life as well. If we take the story of Ananias and Sapphira to heart, we'd realize that such things are near and dear to the heart of the Lord.

    It may be that this church failed in educating her, but I know, not everyone CAN be educated.

    ReplyDelete
  5. An... amusing response from a group that used to burn people at the stake for less...

    http://www.surprisedbytruth.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6265

    ReplyDelete