SC Supreme Court ruling threatens SC's oldest churches

Damn ... that's some twisted, backwards donkey thinking


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nothing new here. It happened to my BIL's church in Mobile. They left the national Episcopal church but since the national church owns all church property they were forced to conduct services in a new location. I grew up Episcopal and remember a lot of folks left our church as well. The Episcopal Church today IMHO is morally bankrupt and has little to no basis in faith. Thankfully for my parents our church is small enough they get retired priests who are a bit more traditional. I recall being about six and the feminist dyke priest we had praid for Saddam Hussien and not our tropps during the Gulf War.
 
There wasn't enough solid legal information in that article to form a real opinion. There was a lot of emotional pleas and a bare minimum of facts.

While I understand the emotional side of keeping the churches they built and maintained for generations, did they in fact, sign legal documents giving those properties over to the church hierarchy? Did they receive compensation for that transfer? Did they receive church funds to make repairs etc?

None of that is apparent in the article, and my thought is probably because it doesn't go well with the emotional plea they are making.

If they knew the consequences of signing on then they have no one to blame but themselves really despite the emotions involved. There's an old adage about lying down with dogs and waking up with fleas.
 
Last edited:
There wasn't enough solid legal information in that article to form a real opinion. There was a lot of emotional pleas and a bare minimum
I agree. Too little info to make an informed opinion. Too much emotion, not enough data. What is the legal, title information, of the property? Any lease agreements, etc?
 
Last edited:
There wasn't enough solid legal information in that article to form a real opinion. There was a lot of emotional pleas and a bare minimum of facts.

While I understand the emotional side of keeping the churches they built and maintained for generations, did they in fact, sign legal documents giving those properties over to the church hierarchy? Did they receive compensation for that transfer? Did they receive church funds to make repairs etc?

None of that is apparent in the article, and my thought is probably because it doesn't go well with the emotional plea they are making.

If they knew the consequences of signing on then they have no one to blame but themselves really despite the emotions involved. There's an old adage about lying down with dogs and waking up with fleas.
Agree. Very misleading article. Based on what it actually said versus what they were trying to incite in people, this is not a religious issue at all. It is a contract law issue. Albeit emotionally charged, but still a contract law issue.
 
This is one reason I think we will continue to see a rise in Nondenominational churches. The money stays local. National offices are becoming at odds with what the mainstream local church believes and when the locals don't like it, they are told to abandon all the property that they personally built locally and don't let the door hit you on the way out.
 
Another good reason not to get involved in "religion".

Seriously? If a poorly written article on a complicated (if acrimonious) legal matter is reason to obviate "religion," then how many asinine posts here there and everywhere should lead folks to not be involved with firearms? If stupidity, wrath, lust, sloth and pride are reasons "not to get involved," we should all be hermits in our secular shells.
 
I agree that this is a matter of contract law and not a question of Freedom of Worship. as @Chdamn said there isn't enough information in the newspaper article to form a good decision on the matter. I do disagree with the court's decision and do think that the episcopal judge should have recused herself. This decision may be appealed and get to the USSC. Yes, the National Episcopal Church did "take control" of all episcopal properties and a lot of churches didn't go along with that decision. I don't recall all the particulars about that, but remembering it happened. Many churches refused to hand over their properties, left the National Episcopal Church and either joined the Anglican Communion or some created their own separate communion. A lot of members left the Episcopal Church when they ordained the first gay bishop years ago. I don't think any organized religious group has the whole answer to the question of religion. This argument has been going on for thousands of years and not just in Christianity, but in all religions. The Sunnis and the Shi'ites are still killing each other over which group is "right" in their belief of what Mo taught and we're killing both of them in the effort to teach them what Christ taught - to love thy neighbor as thyself (and to stop killing and raping the 'infidels').

The church building is not where you find salvation. The church you attend is just a social organization where you come together with those of like mind - just like we do here on gun forums so we can discuss similar ideas and learn about things we don't know about. Most people on a gun forum "attend" the forum a LOT more than religious people attend their church building. I am not knocking attending church or disparaging anyone's religious beliefs. We all have to find our own path while we trudge this world. Sometimes discussing differences can lead us to the light - like 1911s vs Glocks vs CZs. This will be an interesting court case to follow, however.
 
We should be shocked organized religion is just an excuse to amass money and power? I hardly think so.
 
We should be shocked organized religion is just an excuse to amass money and power? I hardly think so.
It's no different in my view than organized politics. If you look at history, this is of no surprise as the two have been intertwined since the dawn of time.
 
I recall being about six and the feminist dyke priest we had prayed for Saddam Hussein and not our troops during the Gulf War.
WOW! That's why there were so many that went to the conservative Nigerian Anglican Church. I was a part of a small one in Apex for a couple years, it didn't take off and melded into two others.
 
Last edited:
This is one reason I think we will continue to see a rise in Nondenominational churches. The money stays local. National offices are becoming at odds with what the mainstream local church believes and when the locals don't like it, they are told to abandon all the property that they personally built locally and don't let the door hit you on the way out.
The problem with non-denoms (Baptist lite) is they have no accountability, if the Grand Puba leader goes rouge, the congregation suffers. A better biblical pattern is the local church has multiple elders/leaders that work with a Presbytery of church's elders, reason through decisions together, and hold one another accountable. The churches are still their own bodies with their own property. I've seen a church left leaderless in VA and the elders of 6 surrounding churches rotated to help fill the void, heal the wounds, and help find and raise up local leadership. The congregation with its property is still intact ten years later.
I couldn't resist-
 
Last edited:
@Pink_Vapor , I agree. The problem with a nondenominational is there is no oversight or standard. You can get anything. A cult, a great traditional church, a young hip church etc etc etc.
 
There wasn't enough solid legal information in that article to form a real opinion. There was a lot of emotional pleas and a bare minimum of facts.

While I understand the emotional side of keeping the churches they built and maintained for generations, did they in fact, sign legal documents giving those properties over to the church hierarchy? Did they receive compensation for that transfer? Did they receive church funds to make repairs etc?

None of that is apparent in the article, and my thought is probably because it doesn't go well with the emotional plea they are making.

If they knew the consequences of signing on then they have no one to blame but themselves really despite the emotions involved. There's an old adage about lying down with dogs and waking up with fleas.

Well put.

Despite what people may think when they read this article, the courts are concerned with the LEGAL aspects of ownership. Not wants and desires.

Which means what happened LEGALLY with the property over its entire history is what counts in the eyes of the law, not just what people are simply used to dealing with in recent years. What people are used to dealing with in the hear an now doesn't mean it's necessarily legally correct. And that's the often unfortunate truth of the matter.

For example, life sucks when the car you bought and have been driving for years suddenly turns out to be a stolen vehicle. You bought it with your own hard earned money...but that fact doesn't alter the other fact that it was a stolen vehicle to which you had no right to in the first place.

It kinda drives home the need to do the research on the history behind large investments BEFORE actually committing large amounts of time, money, and resources into them. Just to make sure things are free-and-clear and on the up-and-up.

To be sure, since it's in the historic downtown Charleston area, there's doubtless money, and history, behind this as well.
 
The problem with non-denoms (Baptist lite) is they have no accountability, if the Grand Puba leader goes rouge, the congregation suffers. A better biblical pattern is the local church has multiple elders/leaders that work with a Presbytery of church's elders, reason through decisions together, and hold one another accountable. The churches are still their own bodies with their own property. I've seen a church left leaderless in VA and the elders of 6 surrounding churches rotated to help fill the void, heal the wounds, and help find and raise up local leadership. The congregation with its property is still intact ten years later.
I couldn't resist-

And the problem with denoms is you get nothing.
 
Back
Top Bottom