Church to out ex-member's 'sexually immoral relationship'

The original article said that there was a married man in the congregation dating a woman from the congregation. And that woman wasn’t his wife!

Isn’t that what this is all about?

No, it’s not:

From the article:
*"with **her boyfriend **public at that service.
Just **before the divorce was finalized **a few months ago, she **began dating a man *"

I would let my lawyer have a chat with them as they wait for their large “A” branding iron to warm up,

That’s what I said: she was having an affair while married to her husband.

While I generally consider myself to be in favor of tort reform, I would relish the opportunity to serve on this woman’s civil jury. If you go to the article, there is a picture of her standing in front of what could be … her new house!

Ironically enough, the “pastor-teacher” of the Grace Community Church is named T. Scott Christmas.
Strange story for this time of year.

Wait…if she’s an ex-member, than why are they going to make it public?

Yep, it’s not a Catholic parish, and I don’t think it was done to you, unless you also had a gender change. You’re a man, correct?

The question is, did she know this was the discipline this church uses?

Now in a Catholic parish, she’s not supposed to be dating anybody until her marriage has been declared null by a tribunal. But nobody will stand up in the pairsh church and tell her private life.

That’s what I don’t get. This woman left the church back in October and was no longer a member. In fact she even sent them a letter stating as such. It’s after that, December 8, when she gets the letter that they are going to make her sins public on January 4. So, they are making public the sins of someone who is no longer a member of that congregation? That makes no sense what so ever. What is the purpose of making public the sins of someone who is NO LONGER a member of your congregation?

In regard to the picture, I believe that is a picture of the church in question and not a house.

Posts by the 1st few users:
"I am very sorry that, that happened to you. "

Good Grief! She doesn’t even belong to this “church” any more!

Like…‘God…they are persecuting me for living an adulterous life’ ?

Exactly, if she is no longer a member of the Church.
Then why is the Pastor doing this.
If she did not want her children to be embarassed why go to the media? Something is just odd here!

This will probably make alot of people mad, but I think this is a really good thing, even if it is being handled a little ungracefully.

If she committed adultery and finds it acceptable, that influences people she knows, ex. children.(Scandal). If the children still attend that church and the church explains the situation, and that the situation is wrong, then the church is actually doing a very good deed to impressionable people in that congregation, pointing out a real example of how not to live. As long as they dont judge her soul and make clear a penitent person is always welcome, i dont see this as anything wrong. This is not ‘casting the first stone’. How much happier would the congregation be if she said she did wrong and made amends for her actions? Many people on this thread are assuming she has no choice in the matter.

It is just a another example of our secular culture. Personal privacy is cherished at the expense of leading people to sin, perhaps mortally so. Dying and going to hell is much worse than being embarrassed.

And, the Catholic church also does things like this. Teachers at Catholic schools are fired for getting pregnant out of wedlock, marrying divorced people, etc. It is the same in that it is trying to prevent scandal, which is a really good thing.

archives.chicagotribune.com/2007/oct/03/news/chi-defame_03_bothoct03

Matthew 7
Judging Others
1"(A)Do not judge so that you will not be judged.
2"For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and (B)by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.

3"Why do you ©look at the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?

4"(D)Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ and behold, the log is in your own eye?

5"You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.

6"(E)Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.

The catechism says we can not judge people’s souls, I made that perfectly clear in my statement “as long as they do not judge her soul…”

We are certainly free to judge peoples actions as adultery or murder, etc. We cannot say that they are destinned to Hell or Heaven by those actions. Now that would really be ‘judging’.

What is your point? This was not approved by the Church. It was the action of a single Priest.

They were not punished by the Diocese and are still there running the parish.

You have no idea what went on in terms of discipline there. The Church has never made a practice of being public about such things.

I have to wonder why, as a Catholic, you are so interested in playing “gotcha” with the Church.

Do you or have you attended that Parish?

I just do not care for hypocrisy or ignorance. I have not time for both. It pains me a great deal to see the Church’s priests, Bishops and laity, being hypocritical these days.

There are other things I have experienced the past couple years, and especially this year, that pains me a great deal. I have ranted enough in other threads about it.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.