SC

Episcopal Drama: Lowcountry Judge Acting Erratically?

“SCHISM” TRIAL HEATING UP …  S.C. circuit court judge Diane Goodstein has been accused of acting erratically in a high-profile case involving the breakup of the Episcopal Church in South Carolina. A website supportive of the liberal national Episcopal Church (TEC) – which is fighting to keep its South Carolina affiliate…

“SCHISM” TRIAL HEATING UP … 

S.C. circuit court judge Diane Goodstein has been accused of acting erratically in a high-profile case involving the breakup of the Episcopal Church in South Carolina.

A website supportive of the liberal national Episcopal Church (TEC) – which is fighting to keep its South Carolina affiliate (TECSC) in the fold – accused Goodstein of engaging in an “ugly spasm of abuse and threats directed at one of the Episcopal Church’s most esteemed attorneys.”

“With arms flailing, an enraged Goodstein lashed out at mild-mannered Church attorney Mary Kostel,” the website S.C. Episcopalians alleged.

Goodstein is presiding over the “Great Episcopalian Schism” – a drama this website broke wide open in late 2012.

So far, she’s been rejecting efforts by TEC to unnecessarily broaden or prolong the case – judgments that appear to have landed her in the crosshairs of the liberal denomination, which appears to be looking for ways to discredit her by casting doubt on the integrity of her rulings.

DIANNE GOODSTEIN
DIANNE GOODSTEIN

“This is laying the groundwork for an appeal,” an observer at the trial told FITS.  “They are attempting to portray (her) judgments as having been issued under a cloud.”

The South Carolina suit is ground zero in the battle taking place all across the country between socially liberal and socially conservative congregations in multiple protestant denominations.  The Palmetto State’s drama revolves around “rogue Bishop” Mark Lawrence of Charleston, S.C. – an Episcopal priest who was booted from the national church for refusing to adopt its views on gay marriage and the ordination of gay and female clergy.

As a result of the church’s action against him, Lawrence announced his intention to disassociate South Carolina’s Lower Diocese from the national church – a threat he later made good on.

Now Lawrence and other leaders of the breakaway diocese are being accused of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, trademark infringement and civil conspiracy, among other things.  According to the national church, the result of these alleged actions has been to “deprive Episcopalians loyal to the Episcopal Church of their property rights.”

Accordingly they’re suing … seeking an estimated $500-$800 million worth of assets.

As we have stated from the beginning of this process, we believe individual congregations should be allowed to worship as they see fit – associating or disassociating with national denominations as they wish.  If a simple majority of a church’s members determines it wishes to enter or leave a specific denomination, then it should be permitted to do so.

That’s the nature of religious freedom …

Related posts

SC

Upstate South Carolina Police Investigating Animal Cruelty Allegation

Will Folks
SC

North Charleston Councilman Accuses Cop Of Falsifying Police Report

Will Folks
SC

‘Carolina Crossroads’ Update: SCDOT Set To Unveil New Plan To The Public

Will Folks

110 comments

Bad Judge Exposed July 25, 2014 at 2:16 pm

Don’t get me started on Goodstein and her thug husband, Arnold who fleeces tax payers of everything he can sucker them for. There are countless skeletons in both of their closets from the days before the internet – and beyond.

Reply
Edgar July 25, 2014 at 6:26 pm

Yeah, but Toal likes ’em. So rant on, it won’t matter.

Reply
jimlewisowb July 25, 2014 at 6:49 pm

If someone is bat shit crazy, then why would anyone get concerned when they do bat shit crazy shit

Perhaps the case is way over Goodstein’s borderline mental/intellectual capabilities and since she knows anything she rules will be appealed so why not make it easy on everyone involved – win, win for all

Reply
guest July 25, 2014 at 2:26 pm

No, religious freedom does not mean being able to redefine a centuries old church organization to suit yourself, which is what the leaders of the breakaway dioceses is doing. They are also denying that there are any theological reasons for the schism, which is nonsense. Their entire reason for departing TEC is theological. You personally can believe whatever you like about church organization, and you can join a church that is organized according to your preferred principles. Fine and dandy. That is religious freedom. Bishop Lawrence, on the other hand, freely chose to take vows to conform to the canons and laws of the hierarchically organized Episcopal Church, and he has failed to act according to those vows.

Reply
Will Folks aka Sic July 25, 2014 at 2:40 pm

If hundreds of people have been subsidizing a church – and sending money to its parent diocese – and then the diocese decides it is going to reverse fundamental teachings without the consent of the church … you’re saying they have to swallow it? Sorry “swallow” may have not been the best word to use around Episcopalians, but you get my drift …

Look, this website is hardcore pro-gay – and opposes government attempts to impose ANY definition of marriage. But your argument in favor of the national church is a joke. Religious freedom > political correctness ALL DAY LONG.

Reply
Smirks July 25, 2014 at 3:18 pm

Right now they’re watching all of that subsidization of the church, both the local church and the parent diocese, being burned on legal fees over a stupid court case instead of more Christian things, such as helping out the community.

Might as well just spend that “tithe money” on a local charity and stay at home watching sports on the Sabbath. At least Harvest Hope doesn’t play “our steeple is bigger than your steeple” with its funds.

Reply
Mark Petereit July 26, 2014 at 8:43 am

You make a great point, Smirks. If churches were more about “doing the will of the Father,” there wouldn’t even be a need for charities like Harvest Hope, welfare or even Obamacare.

I heard it best expressed once that “the church is the only organization in the world that exists solely for the benefit of its NON-members.” By that definition, I think 99% of the inward-focused, navel-gazing “churches” in this country don’t even qualify.

Reply
SCBlues July 26, 2014 at 9:00 am

” . . . there wouldn’t even be a need for charities like Harvest Hope, welfare or even Obamacare.”
Huh? Welfare and Obamacare are charities? If we have more and better churches we do not need health insurance??

Mark Petereit July 26, 2014 at 9:06 am

Correct. Back before government and corporate interests took over health care, almost every hospital in this country was run by Christian charities. And the church was the first place people turned when they fell on hard times because the church was there to help them.

SCBlues July 26, 2014 at 9:47 am

So we do not need health insurance?

euwe max July 26, 2014 at 12:50 pm

let them die in church, in front of their “Messiah”

William July 28, 2014 at 1:40 pm

Obviously, only the rich need health insurance. The church will take care of everyone else. So the rich will not have to be involved.

William July 28, 2014 at 1:37 pm

What planet was this on and in what century? Because these statements are total BS. At no time in history did the poor have more access to reasonable health care than they do today in most of the world. Even the poor in the US have better access to health care than they did 200 years ago.

With the exception of a very few well funded Catholic Hospitals. The poor have generally received abysmal health care in the US. There is absolutely no evidence religion would provide adequate health care for any significant portion of the poor population. or e even middle class They never have. Despite your nonsense statements to the contrary. Again why do Republicans attempt to rewrite history, so as to ignore reality.

This is the plan of people who really don’t want to be involved. The let someone else deal with the poor crowd.

euwe max July 26, 2014 at 3:58 pm

If churches were more about “doing the will of the Father,” there wouldn’t even be a need for charities

——–
Did you forget the part about “few are those who find it?” There are damned few Christians, no pun intended, and in case you doubt me, Jesus said so.

by the very nature of Christianity, there will *always* be more who need help than there are Christians to help them. Without the help of pagans, there isn’t enough help to go around.

So when Christians opt out of pooling their resources with non-Christians, they’re denying the poor their help.

By putting the burden on Christians, you are admitting that won’t be enough.

Bad Judge Exposed July 25, 2014 at 2:32 pm

Its imperative to get court transcripts now on these outburst – and if possible, the audio back up – asap.

Reply
Who is your master? July 25, 2014 at 2:48 pm

Gotta loved churches sorting out their differences under/via government.

“One church under God”-Oops!

Reply
GrandTango July 25, 2014 at 3:22 pm

Greedy national church: They took The Bible from the Christians, now they want their property.

Anyone surprised FITS sides with the Greedy, money-grubbing gay lobby on this one?

This was covered 2 weeks ago here: http://scdigest.blogspot.com/2014/07/diocese-of-south-carolina-being-sued.html

Much clearer, objective, write-up on the link.

Reply
Lance Armstrong July 25, 2014 at 7:29 pm

Your bullshit is like riding a bike in circles: You don’t have to backpedal…

Reply
GrandTango July 26, 2014 at 8:13 am

Your ability to articulate anything thoughtful, reasonable or valuable is like riding a bike with no wheels or handle bars…

Reply
euwe max July 26, 2014 at 2:28 pm

You’re a value destroyer.

Reply
QFT July 26, 2014 at 12:22 pm

Are you dense? Can you read?

Quote from above:

“As we have stated from the beginning of this process, we believe individual congregations should be allowed to worship as they see fit – associating or disassociating with national denominations as they wish. If a simple majority of a church’s members determines it wishes to enter or leave a specific denomination, then it should be permitted to do so.

That’s the nature of religious freedom …

Reply
GrandTango July 26, 2014 at 1:30 pm

That’s not what the premise of the article, or my response, is reacting to, Dumb@$$.

It’s the matter of ownership, and the judge’s behavior. The judge is being attacked it seems because there are signs she is not in line w/ the greedy liberals, and homosexual lobby.

You make a declaration, to cover your @$$…then you proceed to perpetuate your leftwing bias. It’s a very common FITS tactic.

Reply
QFT July 26, 2014 at 1:37 pm

Go back and read the entire article, with your circular logic you FUCKTWAT.

Reply
trenchards July 25, 2014 at 4:02 pm

The lawyers for TEC abused the process by not complying with orders, by seeking to introduce evidence that is not property, and by thumbing a collective nose at SC law. Judge Goodstein is doing the best she can to reign in David Booth Beers and the other legal minds from off who need to tell her how it’s supposed to be done.

Reply
TontoBubbaGoldstein July 25, 2014 at 4:11 pm

… to reign in…

TBG is chomping at the bit to see how this turns out…

Reply
SCBlues July 26, 2014 at 9:16 am

“TBG is chomping at the bit to see how this turns out…”
It’s reign in men, hallelujah!

Reply
euwe max July 26, 2014 at 12:51 pm

It’s a Chinese Buffet!

It’s reign in Cats and Dogs.

Reply
SCBlues July 26, 2014 at 2:18 pm

The reign in Spain stays mainly in the plane. (Royal Pilots)

euwe max July 26, 2014 at 2:26 pm

God is the only being who, in order for it to rain, doesn’t even need to exist.

SCBlues July 26, 2014 at 4:17 pm

“It’s a Chinese Buffet!”
??????????

euwe max July 26, 2014 at 4:34 pm

???????????????

nyuk, nyuk, nyuk!

SCBlues July 26, 2014 at 6:19 pm

“nyuk, nyuk, nyuk!”
Getting a bit prickly, are ye?

euwe max July 26, 2014 at 7:38 pm

Beetlejuice

I Want To Know July 25, 2014 at 4:39 pm

That’s bulshit.

Reply
I Want To Know July 25, 2014 at 4:37 pm

Goodstein should either take Midol, or go to her doctor and get something more powerful. She reminds me of SC Family Court Judge Paul Garfinkel and his crazy mood swings. Both are very cantankerous, to say the least. She needs to resign immediately. The SC Judicial Merits Selection Commission (JMSC) will be flooded with complaints against her in due time. So the choice is hers. Either now, or go down in flames.

Reply
anonymous attorney July 25, 2014 at 6:24 pm

She is a Jean Toal favorite, so the masses can complain til the cows come home and it will make no difference. Toal completely and with utmost secretly controls all complaints against judges to her judicial discipline joke, the ODC. Complaints to the JMSC will only be forwarded to Toal for her review and put in the trash.

Reply
Bite Me July 26, 2014 at 1:17 am

I will send a copy of mine to the State Newspaper, the Greenville News, and the Post and Courier.

Reply
Lobeco July 26, 2014 at 9:23 am

If Brad Warthen was still at The State, there would have been little chance of your review of Toal being published. The other two just ignore her.

Reply
SCBlues July 26, 2014 at 9:05 am

“Goodstein should either take Midol, or go to her doctor and get something more powerful.”
Oh – but of course – female judge so she must be having her period. I did not even read your post past the first line since you proved yourself an idiot from the get-go.

Reply
Yep July 26, 2014 at 3:53 pm

She’s well past her period time. Now she’s just a hormonal, crazed idiot.

Reply
SCBlues July 26, 2014 at 6:16 pm

“She’s well past her period time. Now she’s just a hormonal, crazed idiot”
Are you into your Viagra time?

Reply
Father Forgive Me? July 25, 2014 at 4:38 pm

This is not about who gets to have a queer priest. This is about who gets to keep the $800 million that they accumulated when “they’s was a gittin along”.

Reply
8 or 5? July 26, 2014 at 12:46 pm

My understand is that it’s $500 million, but I’m nitpicking, you’re right regardless.

Reply
Soft Sigh from Hell July 25, 2014 at 4:59 pm

She could don breechclout, a skunk-hide skimpy for upper modesty, and war paint, and still not hold a candle to the crazy exhibited weekly by some agency managers . . . year after year.

Reply
Outsider Lawyer July 25, 2014 at 5:03 pm

This is ridiculous! The liberal wing of the church knows that they are wrong and going to lose so they are trying everything to sway public opinion. Judge Goodstein is a fair judge and does everything by the book even though she may be animated at times. “Lashed out” must the liberal website’s term for keeping her courtroom under control. Those idiots need to get over themselves!

Reply
Bite Me July 26, 2014 at 1:19 am

You need your head examined.

Reply
Coletrain July 25, 2014 at 5:22 pm

Gov. Haley: Immigration situation ‘just wrong’
In other words it makes me look bad to the other Teabaggers.

Reply
Coletrain July 25, 2014 at 5:24 pm

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) – Gov. Nikki Haley says it’s wrong for the federal government to expect states to accept children caught at the U.S. border while providing no information on them.

Haley said during a panel discussion of Republican governors at the Aspen Institute that they do care about the undocumented children, but states already have their own children to take care of.

Last week, Haley said the U.S. Department of Homeland Security assured her there are no mass shelters for the children in South Carolina. Her spokesman said Friday she intends to keep it that way.

Federal data released Thursday showed 350 children have been released to sponsors in South Carolina since Jan. 1, accounting for 1 percent of children nationwide who were released to someone whose information was found on them.

Reply
GrandTango July 25, 2014 at 6:52 pm

You support parents in SA who don’t a give a $#!t about their children. You MUST be an irresponsible child-hating democrat. You’re DISGUSTING. People like are the reason kids are getting neglected and put in government care, and killed.

Yall called Vietnam Vets baby-killers, but YOU are Baby Killers.

Reply
Manray9 July 25, 2014 at 6:32 pm

Yawn…. Just another pointless squabble among different groups of adherents to a mythological cult and, like most such squabbles, it is really over power and money.

Reply
Jackie Chiles July 25, 2014 at 11:33 pm

(he lisped, adjusting his fedora)

Reply
euwe max July 26, 2014 at 2:29 pm

Dr. Lecter.. Dr. Lecter… Dr. Lecter?

Reply
Webejammin July 26, 2014 at 12:29 am

First, let me remind everyone that the law suit was brought against TEC by Mark Lawrence and his legion of lackeys, and not the other way around.

What this suit is really about is who should control church property, PECDSC or TEC. Individual parishes will be kept in trust by either entity. The idea that parishes will be solely owned and controlled by parishioners who chose to affiliate with PECDSC is a confusion perpetuated by that diocese.

Also, this split has more to do with a difference of opinion about how the Bible should be interpreted than just gay rights issues. The Episcopal Church has always been about a more personal, reasoned interpretation of scripture than that imposed by fundamentalists. The theological issues center around the issue of acceptance and inclusion versus rejection and exclusion, and how to let God’s will be done. The “liberals” in TEC are more about what Jesus taught- loving our neighbor and loving God- than they are about digging for passages in the Bible that could be interpreted to support prejudice.

You want out of the Episcopal Church? Fine. Leave. But leave your church where you found it.

Reply
TontoBubbaGoldstein July 26, 2014 at 10:44 am

…more personal, reasoned interpretation of scripture…

Depends on what “abomination” really means, eh?

Reply
euwe max July 26, 2014 at 12:48 pm

I’m non abominational.

Reply
Yep! July 26, 2014 at 12:50 pm

Ha! Good point, the obfuscation is worse than Clinton on the word “is”.

Reply
Webejammin July 26, 2014 at 1:29 pm

Acts of perversion can be done by anyone independent of their sexual orientation- that is the abomination, as is any other act of extreme excess or hatred. It is not an abomination to simply follow the nature you were born with. If you believe that God grants salvation to anyone who seeks him, then that includes homosexuals. Episcopalians have always believed that the Bible contains everything needed for salvation, but not everything written in the Bible should be taken literally. It was written by men, translated by men, adapted and assembled by men. Do you think because Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell or George W Bush (for that matter) speak to God, they are infallible?

Reply
TontoBubbaGoldstein July 26, 2014 at 2:20 pm

For the record, TBG is a “Pro-Christian* Agnostic”.

Either The Bible is the infallible word of God…or it is not.

If it is not, what is the point of organised Christianity?

TBG has never believed that Pat, Jerry and George have ever spoke to or been spoken to by any deity.

*”Pro-Christian” in the sense that TBG is a huge fanboi of Western Civilization.

Reply
Webejammin July 26, 2014 at 2:48 pm

Good point. As someone who appreciates western civilization, then you must appreciate how Judeo-Christian culture has become interwoven into the American consciousness.

Among other things, Jesus teaches us what God and the Holy Spirit are, and that love is an existential truth.

Good Luck! July 26, 2014 at 3:35 pm

“It is not an abomination to simply follow the nature you were born with.”

Well, really to TBG’s point, it is specifically by the OT:

“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.”

…and so all Christians should hate sin, homosexuality as such, the notion that it would be accepted as “natural” in the context of being Christian, it goes to follow that one should also accept a leader of a church that is also a murderer by your argument…because he might be “forgiven” as well by God.

It’s a ridiculous argument, but by all means, continue to enlighten us to your viewpoint so we might understand how a whole segment of the church has come to believe it. It actually elucidates the problem.

It’s the whole, “hate the sin, love the sinner” thing…but when you don’t hate the sin(homosexuality) in this case, by in essence making a open/unrepentant sinner the leader of a church, you’ve actually embraced the sin instead.

Reply
euwe max July 26, 2014 at 3:53 pm

Well, really to TBG’s point, it is specifically by the OT:

“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.”

…and so all Christians should hate sin, homosexuality as such

——-
If you were to actually read the bible, you would find that Gentiles have never been bound by Mosaic Law, and when they became Christians, they were not then bound by it either.

The Jews, and only the Jews, were bound by Mosaic law.

and… if you understood the nature of Christianity, you would not be pressing to judge others, but rather be content with the sins that your judgement has found within YOU.

TontoBubbaGoldstein July 26, 2014 at 4:42 pm

*TBG is concerned about inadvertently hijacking this thread and is keeping an eye over his shoulder for cyber-Todd Beamer…*

If you were to actually read the bible, you would find that Gentiles have never been bound by Mosaic Law,…

So…uh, what’s the big deal with the Ten Commandments?

Although Judge Roy Moore shares his hometown with one of TBG’s deities he ain’t a member of TBG’s Tribes.

euwe max July 26, 2014 at 7:08 pm

So…uh, what’s the big deal with the Ten Commandments?

——
People who either haven’t read the bible on their own, or are deliberately ignorant of the progression of the 1st covenant, the establishment of the second, or the argument between Peter and Paul.

Some have heard people dismiss the concept with Jesus’ statement that not a jot or a tittle of the law will pass away – showing they don’t understand the authority of the Mosaic Law, or how Gentiles managed to get in on the action intended for Jews.

Paul explained it pretty well – not a lot of wiggle room to condemn gentiles using the Mosaic law to condemn them of failing to observe it. It doesn’t apply to them.

Good Luck! July 26, 2014 at 8:02 pm

“Paul explained it pretty well”

I’m glad you feel that way, I posted a quote of his above for you.

Good Luck! July 26, 2014 at 8:01 pm

“If you were to actually read the bible, you would find that Gentiles
have never been bound by Mosaic Law, and when they became Christians,
they were not then bound by it either.”

You are obviously not well read:

“we know that the Law is good if one uses it lawfully, knowing this: that
the Law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and
insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and
profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for
manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars,
for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to
sound doctrine”

The “Law” referring to be Paul in 1st Timothy is the OT. You cannot have one without the other, they are intertwined. I do not judge the homosexuals, I’m simply repeating my understanding of the Bible. If you would like to disagree, then make your case.

euwe max July 26, 2014 at 8:19 pm

You are obviously not well read:
———
Don’t feel bad, you have a lot of company.

Do you believe Gentiles are bound by Mosaic Law? Yes or no?

Do you believe that a Gentile who becomes a Christian is bound by Mosaic Law? Yes or no?

Good Luck! July 26, 2014 at 8:23 pm

I thought my answer sufficient, you argument is with Paul, not me. I do my best to follow the teachings as I understand them. It is from this understanding that I feel, yes, there is OT law to which I’m bound. Is it all of it? Where it does not conflict with the NT, yes. That is the purpose of the covenant.

euwe max July 26, 2014 at 8:49 pm

I thought my answer sufficient
———
obviously not.

I asked you two questions.. you can answer them yes or no. They are the basis for my assertion.

If you refuse, you opt out of your objection to my statements.

Good Luck! July 26, 2014 at 8:56 pm

I have answered your question, see the last three sentences….

Even further, I also quoted a NT verse(see below) by Paul as well to satisfy your concern over whether homosexuality is considered a sin only by OT standards….

Beyond both my answer to you and further citation in the NT that homosexual is considered sinful…I’m not sure what else I can do for you.

euwe max July 26, 2014 at 9:35 pm

I’m going to post what I think you said
1. Gentiles are under the Mosaic Law.
2. Gentiles who became Christian are under the Mosaic Law.

Here is the refutation of those statements.

The Mosaic Law was given to the Jews by Moses. They bind the followers of the law to the contract (covenant). The contract is – if you follow the law to the letter, you shall inherit the promises of Abraham. If you don’t, you will die. For the wages of sin is death.

Gentiles were not a party to this law. Only the descendants of Abraham.

When Jesus came teaching the Gospel, he reiterated this, saying that the Jews who refused to “come to the table” left seats open for beggars passing in the street (we Gentiles). As Paul said, we are grafted onto the tree of life intended for the Jews.

In explaining the reason why Christian Gentiles need not be circumcised, Paul made it clear that Gentiles were not newly bound to the law – whose purpose was to bring death – but in becoming Christians, die to sin, and are born anew in spirit.

This is the reason that Gentiles can eat food offered to idols, eat pork, not be circumcised (necessary for Jews to inherit the promises of Abraham), eat shellfish, touch women while they are on their period, not observe Jewish holidays, or read the Torah in church… among other things. Because our new covenant is bound to faith in Christ, not the letter which “killeth.”

In these latter days, the law is written in men’s hearts, not in stone, or some place where you can go see it. This law transcends the Mosaic Law.

Now, if you have a problem with any of the above, I can support every word with scripture from the New Testament, and from the Old.

Good Luck! July 26, 2014 at 9:41 pm

I understand and appreciate everything you wrote(truly!), I just see the issue of homosexuality as particularly clear both in the NT and OT.

I do not have hate for homosexuals, I am an imperfect sinner as well, but I am sorry for my sin…and that is the crux of the matter for me.

That is why I think it’s a mistake to put homosexuals into leadership roles in the church.

I wish you well and appreciate the dialogue.

euwe max July 26, 2014 at 10:09 pm

May I suggest the following tack for you to pursue in the future, then?

It is plainly spelled out by Paul that if you find that someone believes that a certain thing is a sin, but it is not a sin for you – you are *not* to encourage a fellow believer who believes such *is* a sin, to engage in it, because by doing so, you may cause him to sin.

That saves your tender soul from judgement, while making it clear that since you believe it is a sin, you should not be encouraged to believe that it is not a sin – especially by leaders of the church.

I don’t see any way you can get in trouble for that approach, and makes it easy to separate yourself into a denomination which has similar views on that type of behavior, while not specifically condemning those who don’t see it as a sin.

Paul, for instance felt that women should keep their heads covered, and men should not wear long hair… talk about trivially shallow customs by comparison! But if you went to church with Paul, I’d imagine you wouldn’t do so with uncovered head or long hair!

Most of the problems in the current church, I believe, are related to nosing around in other people’s sin, and becoming so preoccupied with condemning their actions, that they don’t ever get around to healing themselves.

Good Luck! July 26, 2014 at 10:18 pm

“Most of the problems in the current church, I believe, are related to
nosing around in other people’s sin, and becoming so preoccupied with
condemning their actions, that they don’t ever get around to healing
themselves.”

When you refer to the “current church”, are you referring to the referenced churches in the article, or churches in general?

euwe max July 26, 2014 at 10:22 pm

I my lexicon, there is only one church.. the body of Christ, made up of those Christ recognizes. There really are no further divisions to me.

Good Luck! July 26, 2014 at 10:36 pm

I understand. Let me say two things directly, one of which speaks to what I infer is the suggestion that I might like focusing on the sin of others:

1. I do not. I prefer everyone fight their own demons so to speak with the help of God, and I’ll help if they ask.

2. I will not sit by, while doctrinal changes to the effect of embracing sin(which is a reasonable conclusion on the basis of scripture in both the NT and OT as I’ve posted, even if you disagree) are forced upon me in a very public way. I’ve no choice to be involved at that point, they are allowing leaders that are openly and unrepentantly sinning(based on scriptures)in leadership of the church.(and I’m not suggesting homosexuals be forced from the church) They did not allow this before, now they are embracing it.

I supported this church before the embracing of this sin, and now that a significant number of us want to leave as a result of it, they want us to lose all the money & property as a result.

So I don’t judge, but I also don’t want to support or have to start over again because of major doctrine changes that don’t mesh at all with what I contributed time & money towards to start.

I wish I could ignore their sin, but in this case they’ve throw it in our collective faces and even more, want us to support it!

So while I agree with you sentiment in general, as churches generally speaking are filled with busybodies, this particular case is not one of those times where it applies.

euwe max July 26, 2014 at 10:41 pm

In that case, walk away from the money – you can always get more.

The battle isn’t to convince others what they’re doing wrong, but to find a place to fellowship and worship with others you aren’t offended by.

The battle isn’t to keep your coat, but to freely give your coat, and your cloak as well. Don’t use the world’s courts to settle your grievances… give those who would steal what they want, and more.. it’s not what you are focused on.

Next time, don’t spend so much money on brick, mortar, and pretty church things – worship outside in the rain – use money to help people instead. Hold onto material things lightly, so that if it is ripped from your grasp, you will retain your fingers, hand and arm.

Good Luck! July 26, 2014 at 10:46 pm

When it comes down to the end, the money will be let go if it’s necessary to keep the doctrine in tact, but the complexities of what the church property is and how it helps the community in general are amount to more than “pretty church things”.

No one would walk away without trying to retain what they’ve built without a least a fight, especially if they knew they were Biblically consistent.(including Jesus if he knew the message he was sent to deliver would be lost)

euwe max July 26, 2014 at 11:00 pm

It’s always hard to let go.

Good Luck!

Webejammin July 27, 2014 at 12:17 am

Some of us who have found sanctuary outside of PECDSC as loyal Episcopalians are doing just that- meeting in abandoned school houses or using/renting space in available facilities. Many of us are starting over. Some who have reached parish status have weekly attendance greater than the churches they left. And we are all stronger and more blessed than ever.

euwe max July 27, 2014 at 1:11 am

Good for you!

Webejammin July 27, 2014 at 12:08 am

Perhaps your efforts would have been better spent keeping the diocese together and supporting your idea of what it means to be Christian, and work toward greater independence at the diocesan level. If Mark Lawrence had remained bishop, this diocese would not be blessing gay marriage.

Instead, the cessationist mentality of the conservative Charlestonians is leading you down a path to nowhere with no chance of remaining “Episcopalian” without reconciliation.

Good Luck! July 27, 2014 at 2:57 pm

If you felt the church you were a member of was embracing sin, you’d step away too(I hope).

Webejammin July 27, 2014 at 4:31 pm

I’m not sure I believe any church is embracing sin that I know of. What I see in the church that moved with PECDSC was a lot of political conservatism, which I could live with. What came with that political conservatism, however, was also overt racism (and I’m not talking about the “politically incorrect” kind). If anyone needed God, it was those who practiced bigotry and me who needed understanding and God’s grace.

Homosexual behavior is disgusting to me, but when you find out that people you know, love, and respect are homosexual, good Christian people, it hits home how damaging to everyone any kind a judgment and prejudice against them can be.

Views of sexual behaviors, the sex act, contraception, etc. have changed over the history of mankind and vary between cultures. As big an issue as homosexuality has become these days, you really have to look pretty hard to find passages in the Bible that even reference that behavior, and most often when you do, that behavior is attached to emotions that are devoid of love or respect, and are attached to temporal/secular desire and excess. Jesus was all about love. The Judeo-Christian belief system is centered around right behavior versus sin- sin happens with deviation and separation from God and the spiritual. Mutual love and commitment between two people, regardless of their gender, is a good and spiritual thing. That relationship must be good and acceptable in the eyes of God.

I understand that marriage is, by definition, between a man and a woman. IMO, marriage between two people of the same gender is contrary to the traditional practice of the church and is not appropriate for the church. But IMO, civil unions should be recognized and blessed by the church, and should be equal to marriage in civil law.

Webejammin July 26, 2014 at 4:24 pm

I suppose you follow Levitcus to the letter or what Paul has to say about women in First Corinthians. And you probably believe that a flood happened exactly the way the Genesis says it did, and that the earth is flat, and the world is 6000 years old, and that Jesus lived with dinosaurs. You are what give Christians a bad name, Good Luck. But I still respect you as a Christian and human being.

TontoBubbaGoldstein July 26, 2014 at 4:55 pm

The folks that pick and choose which portions of a “Divinely Inspired Text’ to adhere to and which to to ignore, based on their [Michael Savage voice] feelings or current mores, don’t help the *Christian’s* image, either.

…and while Leviticus is certainly Old Testament…aren’t the Letters to the Corinthians part of the New Testament, ie Covenant?

…. the earth is flat … and that Jesus lived with dinosaurs.

TBG doesn’t believe these beliefs are Biblical.

Admittedly, TBG is somewhat of an outsider to these things…

Webejammin July 26, 2014 at 5:33 pm

Sorry to get a little carried away. I suppose my point is that, even in the NT, IMO, writers may have been inspired by the Holy Spirit, but what they wrote must be interpreted contextually and historically. Mankind progresses, and God reveals himself progressively. Not to mention that Jesus’ disciples most often didn’t get what he was telling them, so how are we to take them literally. They supposedly “got it” at Pentecost, but did they? The Word exists between the words guided by the Holy Spirit.

My apologies for even entering this discussion. My intentions were merely to state that the separation of the diocese from the Episcopal Church has been devastating for all who are involved on both sides, and there are no clear winners. If there is anything good that has come out of it, as a member of the Episcopal Church in lower state SC, it has been good to find others who are more like minded, and worshipping in that atmosphere has been refreshing.

Good Luck! July 26, 2014 at 8:03 pm

I can see the respect you have quite clearly, assumptions and all.

Webejammin July 26, 2014 at 8:08 pm

Peace.

Good Luck! July 26, 2014 at 8:33 pm

You act as if this issue of homosexuality is relegated only to the OT, would it have made everyone here happier if I had quoted this instead from the NT?

“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of
God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor
adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind”

SCBlues July 26, 2014 at 6:14 pm

“Well, really to TBG’s point, it is specifically by the OT:”
And you live by everything in the OT? I do not believe it.

Good Luck! July 26, 2014 at 8:59 pm

It’s not just the OT by which homosexuality is considered a sin….it’s also in the NT.

SCBlues July 26, 2014 at 11:10 pm

“It’s not just the OT by which homosexuality is considered a sin….it’s also in the NT.”
I see you dodged answering the question . . . can’t say I am surprised.

Good Luck! July 27, 2014 at 11:45 am

I answered the question above.

SCBlues July 27, 2014 at 4:11 pm

“I answered the question above.”
Where??????

Good Luck! July 28, 2014 at 9:43 am

See the Euwe Max line of questioning on the OT and my response.

Webejammin July 26, 2014 at 11:48 pm

“…and so all Christians should hate sin, homosexuality as such, the notion that it would be accepted as “natural” in the context of being Christian, it goes to follow that one should also accept a leader of a church that is also a murderer by your argument…because he might be “forgiven” as well by God.” -Good Luck

This is wrong on many levels. This is an illogical conclusion drawn from a faulty line of reasoning.

Catholics believe that priests should be celibate. Some denominations believe women should be not be priests. Based on the way I interpret the spirit of Christ’s teaching, homosexuality per se is not sinful. If that premise is consistent with God’s will, then homosexuals have the same access to the Word and the Spirit and salvation as any other church leader, and to treat them any differently is to be prejudiced. No one will convince me differently.

IMO, and from all that I have read and heard from people on both sides of this issue of separation, Bishop Mark Lawrence was brought to the lower state diocese with the expressed purpose of taking that diocese out of TEC, he had an opportunity to rectify any misunderstanding with TEC, he took steps to take property entrusted to TEC (thereby breaking his vows with TEC), and with encouragement from his standing committee, many of the priests and coerced delegates, wrote TEC out of their diocesan constitution.

Parishioners incorrectly believed that ownership and control of their churches belonged to them and majority vote gave them the right to move those churches to the renegade diocese through quit claim deeds made legitimate by Judge Goodstein, completely ignorant of, and irrespective of, church regulations. Many parish members who voted their loyalty to the renegade diocese were inactive in, or new to, their parish. Some churches’ vestries made the decision to move without consent of parishioners. Some parishioners were afraid of losing their priests.

Many of the parishes had families who supported TEC for hundreds of years and had donated millions of dollars through their parishes. To have their parishes claim loyalty to the renegade diocese was nothing short of thievery. There are graveyards associated with many of those parishes, and some parishioners are being told that if they don’t hold the same fundamentalist beliefs as Mark Lawrence they will forfeit burial rights next to generations of relatives. Some loyal to TEC were told that they would no longer feel comfortable worshipping in the only churches they’ve ever belonged to… many of these people don’t have a whole lot of years left.

It is a mess. Mark Lawrence may be “Moses” to that diocese. To me, he is essentially a defrocked charlatan, a deceiver, and once all of the legalities are sorted out, tens of millions of dollars will end up in the hands of dozens of lawyers, and the churches will go back into the hands of TEC lie almost all already have in several other states.

Good Luck! July 27, 2014 at 11:41 am

“Based on the way I interpret the spirit of Christ’s teaching, homosexuality per se is not sinful.”

Then you ignore both the OT and NT. If you feel otherwise, you must cite against both referred scriptures in this post.

Jock Stender, Charleston July 27, 2014 at 5:05 pm

The doctrine of sole scriptura, which TEC does not endorse, would naturally exclude the concept of the holy trinity, most sacraments, most church holidays, church governance, the Book of Common Prayer, and other beliefs at the core of most Christian denominations.

Parsing the Bible carefully, one can find all-encompassing love for all people expressed by Christ (including a Samaritan adulturer, a prostitute, a man “possessed by the devil,” a hated Jewish collector of taxes for Rome), as well as, on the other hand, Pauline letters denouncing prostitution, adultery, and homosexuality. The Old Testament is replete with denunciations of such “sinners” but Christ told his followers that He had come to this world to replace the Old Testament with a new one — Himself.

The “original” or “Orthodox” Church and a new “Roman Catholic” Church (or denomination) split in 1054 over issues involving high ecclesiastical interpretations and theological disputes, including most importantly the nature of the Holy Spirit (“filoque”), whether leavened or unleavened bread should be used in the Eucharist, the Pope’s claim to universal jurisdiction, and the place of Constantinople in relation to the Pentarchy.

Since this “great schism,” the Orthodox Church has remained united whereas the Roman Catholic Church has splintered into a cascade of denominations, and this dispute in America within the Episcopal Church does not surprise me.

I don’t find my church to be “socially liberal” but rather closer to Christ’s original commandment. C.S. Lewis reminds us that 400 years ago the church was burning people at the stake as “witches,” and I’m reminded that just 50 years ago black people were not allowed in white restaurants. As Christians we take a long time to accept our fellow man.

— Jock Stender, Charleston
Grace Episcopal Church

Reply
Internet & Micro July 26, 2014 at 1:36 am

Arnold S. Goodstein and his wife, Circuit Judge Diane S. Goodstein, settle suit that alleged improper property transfers during bankruptcy.

Reply
Slartibartfast July 26, 2014 at 1:37 am

The Hon. Dianne is a good and honest person. She is often given the hard cases with weird twists, while the good ole boys hang around safely drinking alcohol with little umbrellas in them. I might add that she is the brightest Yenta on our bench. She will and has ruled fairly but there will be not buddy-buddy, when the swords are finally laid to rest.

On a personal note, I know well the cretins from 815. Look at any MSM newscast and you will see these greedy heretics sucking up the wind passed by the Absentee Plantation Master.

Reply
Internet & Micro July 26, 2014 at 1:52 am

Summerville attorney Arnold S. Goodstein and his wife, Circuit Judge Diane S. Goodstein, will pay $500,000 to settle a “hotly contested” dispute over property they transferred before his personal bankruptcy filing in 2010.

The payment includes $375,000 from him and one of his companies. Another $125,000 will come out of an annuity controlled by her …. “multiple” property transfers to “insiders,” which under bankruptcy law can include family members.

” ….. properties changed hands for less than they were worth, which the Goodsteins have denied.”

Court records show threatening legal action against the couple (Goodsteins) over the transfers of their property.

$500,000 settlement eliminates the risk of an unfavorable court ruling and ensures more money for creditors.

Reply
Internet & Micro July 26, 2014 at 2:05 am

2014: Discussion had centered around what the Charleston County Aviation authority pays attorney Arnold Goodstein.

Authority board member Tommy Hartnett recalls that the panel got a prime example of the value of competition last year when it received bids for the legal work on bonds to pay for the $170 million renovation of the terminal at the Charleston International Airport.

Mr. Hartnett says that there was some resistance on the board to going the competitive route, rather than strictly sticking with the firm (Goodstein) that had long performed that role. But the authority saved about $90,000 by seeking bids. (Goodstein submitted a bid of around $180,000.00)

The winning bid for legal representation and work was about half that of the competition.
Some of the past record billings were shocking for little work.

Reply
TontoBubbaGoldstein July 26, 2014 at 5:03 pm

A crooked lawyer?

Quick, Aunt Pittie Pat!
Fetch TBG his smellin’ salts.

Reply
Internet & Micro July 26, 2014 at 2:15 am

“This is toxic,” said one Lowcountry lawmaker we spoke with. “You can stick a fork in (her – Diane Goodstein’s – Supreme Court candidacy).”

Read more at https://www.fitsnews.com/2009/02/27/lord-have-mercy/#QuCwBfMO7O5ILJAm.99

Reply
Internet & Micro July 26, 2014 at 2:26 am

Appeal From Dorchester County
Diane Schafer Goodstein, Circuit Court Judge

Opinion No. 4282
Heard June 6, 2007 – Filed July 26, 2007

REVERSED

Reply
Ha Ha July 26, 2014 at 11:52 am

So?

Judges get”Reversed” all the time.

Whats your point?

Reply
Edgar July 26, 2014 at 12:47 pm

It the Feds didn’t descend on Toal after this Fitsnews story in 2009, we now know it is hopeless to expect any help from Washington’s U.S. Attorney’s office. Thanks for remembering this one, Internet & Micro. I talked to a couple of folks who claim to be in the know about the allegations in the comments following this story. Even taken in Toal and Goodstein’s best light, there was not a comment or allegation in this article that tempered by a little time, has not been shown to be true. Sad, sad.

Reply
euwe max July 26, 2014 at 7:37 pm

On Sunday, 3 million people announce…

“Hello… I have cancer, and I can’t pay for treatment.. can you all help me?”

Reply

Leave a Comment