Like you, I have been following the exposure and destruction of Dominic Foppoli. This guy is a scourge on civilized society and needs to be removed; sadly however, he has been protected by those around him. I have had to walk away from people before for their self-destructive behavior, so I am not advocating for something that I have not been willing to do in my own life. There is a vast gulf between loving a sinner in hopes that they see the light and enabling them in their evil ways.
Dominic’s behavior in Florida is the same M.O. as his conduct here in California (and Nevada) except a streetwise lady knew she had been victimized and went to the police instead of keeping the shame to herself. The fact that she had the presence of mind to give the police physical evidence including video helps too. Getting a lawyer representing the victims of Jeffery Epstein proves that she has a case. Filing the case days before the San Francisco Chronicle published their first story on Dominic sealed his fate.
Folks Dominic has admitted to sexual acts with one accuser already and also to having video of the dirty deed. As I understand it, he claims to have video of other victims as well. The alleged existence of said video has been used as leverage to keep some accusers silent. Funny how when the woman has the same type of video and goes to the police that Dominic folds like a cheap suit. Within three hours of finding out about the woman in Florida, he resigns. As a result of yesterday’s news, Dominic’s exploits are now not just a regional news story but a national and even international one.
Folks by my count, Farrah Abraham is the twenty fourth woman to come forward; the ninth accuser to do so in the media. Just so you know, I think that the number of women victimized by Dominic is north of 60, so many more victims have yet to come forward. (If you figure Dominic does this at least once a calendar quarter, and has been doing it since college, my number is actually on the low side.) The three women mention by The Chief in his account of Dominic’s college days have yet to come forward, but they should. He has told me the three names, but we will not print them on the blog without their permission.
Folks there is a vast difference between someone like Jeffery Epstein or Harvey Weinstein and Dominic Foppoli. Epstein and Weinstein both has some version of quid pro quo, the women did it for money or career advancement (I’m setting aside some aspects of Epstein’s operation) but Dominic is on a whole other level. In an edit of one of The Chief’s articles, I called Dominic a Neanderthal. I used that word because just like the stereotype, Dominic saw a woman that he wanted, clubbed her into submission, and took her by force. Dominic is just a perverted thief. His club is a chemical not a primitive baseball bat. The net result is the same, he violates women because he wants too.
As The Chief and I have mentioned in private conversations, this is not about sex. Dominic is worth millions and if he simply wanted sex, he could easily pay for it. No, this is about taking what you cannot have either because the woman is not interested or married or whatever. Dominic is a thief. He violates the woman and then discards her with all the callousness of tossing a napkin or candy wrapper.
A criminal case in California against Dominic is going to be hard to build, especially when law enforcement in the Windsor area has helped Dominic destroy or cover-up incriminating evidence. They have been running interference for him and not doing their jobs, hopefully The Chief will elaborate on this in his next post about Dominic’s enablers.
Dominic’s peril is the looming civil case. Dominic is about to lose not just his personal assets of about seven million dollars but the winery as well. If you figure in the insurance money that will be in play, plus the city of Windsor is in play too. Once the other victims get wind that they are looking at each getting a seven-figure settlement, the floodgate of accusers will really open. I can foresee that the civil case easily being a settlement over 30 million dollars.
Currently, Dominic will have to endure two criminal cases and at least one huge civil suit. If a judge seizes his assets along the way, he’s S.O.L.
If Dominic spends any time in jail, he will need to be treated as a child molester or pedophile and kept in solitary confinement. I think his life expectancy would be measured in days if he was placed in with the general population.
Dominic is so full of himself that he doesn’t know how much peril that he is in.
The Chief is right that Dominic will be placed on a registry of sex offenders. Dominic, I know a guy that’s on that list and thirty years later that scarlet letter still haunts him. It has costs him employment so many times that I’ve lost count.
Dominic Foppoli is about to reap what he has sown. I hope that when this is all over that he won’t be in any position to ever do it again.
In a developing story, embattled Windsor rapist/sexual assaulter Dominic J Foppoli has resigned. The intel we have says yet another women was set to come forward alleging yet another incident. Word says its reality TV Star Farrah Abraham, who claims she was sexually assaulted in March of this year. Abraham becomes the ninth women to publicly accuse Foppoli of sexual crimes.
Farrah Abraham
“It is with heavy heart that I am resigning, effective today,” it read. “I have always and will always maintain that I did not engage in any non-consensual acts with any woman. I recently learned that a woman in Palm Beach, Florida is accusing me of non-consensual acts while I was visiting there in March of this year.” Dominic Foppoli Statement
Now for the statement from an actual adult as opposed to a child masquerading as Mayor:
The statement referred to recent allegations made by a social media influencer and former reality TV star, Farrah Abraham, who filed a police report in Palm Beach, Florida on April 2 alleging what her attorney said was “very serious” misconduct “of a sexual nature” that he declined to describe lest it jeopardize the investigation.
Attorney Spencer Kuvin, who represented at least nine victims of the late prominent sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, said his client had physical and digital evidence from the incident in Palm Beach that has been turned over to police.
Spencer Kuvin
He said neither he nor Abraham would release details until the investigation was concluded, though rumors about the case reached Sonoma County more than a month ago.
“She wants him prosecuted criminally” Her attorney adds.
Foppoli attended a council meeting in his official capacity as recently as Wednesday he left the meeting after the Pledge of Allegiance not because he had anything better to do, but because if he wouldn’t have shown up a vacancy could have been called. This way he gets to keep his massive salary as Mayor of Windsor of about $500 a month! Nice to see he has his priorities straight.
Unfortunately for you Dominic it seems as though the Police Department of Palm Beach has physical and digital proof of your actions. All you have are statements denying your culpability, lest I remind you 9 women are accusing you, outside of a couple hired guns; namely your two lawyers, former campaign manager and Robert Styrk no one else with an IQ above room temperature seems to think you’re innocent. All you have is an alleged sex tape of you and Esther, seems like it curtains for you. Oh, the last nail in Dominic’s coffin is this little gem from the San Francisco chronicle story today, “Abraham filed her police report three days before Chronicle reporters first approached Foppoli about their investigation, and six days before the article was published.” This sir is called, game, set, and match!
Dominic a word to the wise. It just got real, and your money may buy a shorter sentence; however, the civil suit will likely drain a large amount of your worth, or worse yet, the insurance claims could make the family vineyard uninsurable. Trust me I’m in the business of the latter, insurance companies do not like paying out liability claims like this. In addition, the unsanctioned parties at your family vineyard may also place your liquor license at risk, as a licensed bar tender in my spare time while volunteering for a church group, I know a thing or two about that. I do not know how a winery makes money if they cannot sell wine. Also, the more serious part of all this; you likely will end up on a registry if the case leads to an arrest/trial but it is not the registry you’re familiar with…. the sex offender registry. My recollection is you are on it for life. In addition, if you serve jail time you may find a vintage of alcohol you are not familiar with, I believe it’s called pruno.
We will have one last post to attack all his accomplices: Ken McNab, Deb Fudge, Ruben Martinez, and Mark Essick. None of you are getting off scot free.
A word to Dominic’s friends/enablers, there cannot be many in the former group, in the latter, I am sure there are plenty. Dominic is no fool. He will not go quietly. It took a famous female figure to finally get him to step aside. He has been coddled his entire life. He will throw all of you under his proverbial bus in order to get a shorter sentence. Look at his past behavior, his refusal to resign, refusal to take accountability for his actions, attacking the victims, employing a hired gun to do the attacking for him, and most disturbingly, continuing his predatory action when he knew about the article being dropped by the Chronicle while he was in Florida! I would disassociate with him immediately. This sounds like a good time to call the authorities and at least get your story on the record before they call you. Dominic is the scum who tells folks all is well while he abandons ship in the last lifeboat, be forewarned!
Folks, as I reported, I recently took a position at California’s most publicized agency, Employment Development Department (EDD). While I’m just a tiny part of the organization, I can attest that there is a lot of crazy junk gumming up the works. This post is to give you an idea of what’s happening.
To collect unemployment in California, and presumably anywhere else, you must normally meet two conditions: first you must be able to prove your identity, and second, you must have worked in California and contributed to the state’s unemployment fund.
The following are all true. Names are withheld so I can keep my job.
While I was in a training session, an applicant for unemployment was randomly picked as an example. This guy applied with a variety of documents such as Green Card, driver’s license, etc. The training allowed us to actually see the documents submitted to the State of California. While the name on all the documents matched, the birthdays were very wrong. The initial batch of documents submitted by this applicant had birthdates in two different months and on two different days. Of the documents submitted, at least two had one birthdate and others had a second birthdate. In the initial pass, this guy was denied unemployment; however, he appealed the denial. He was approved in the appeals process by someone that seems to be designated as an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). Since he was now identity approved, the trainer, entered the Social Security Number that he provided into one of their many computer programs and the Social Security Administration (SSA) returned the same name with yet a third birthdate for this individual. At this point, I and another trainee, both with private sector background, challenged the instructor. How can a guy that submitted identity documents with three different birthdates in different months be approved for benefits? The instructor answered that when he appealed, he submitted two documents with the same birthdate; thus, he was now identity approved by the ALJ and it’s our job to mark the applicant as eligible.
Folks you can’t believe the ages of applicants for unemployment. A large segment of the applicants are minors. And no, I don’t mean 15 with a paper route. The youngest applicant that I personally have seen was 1 ½ years old. Born in 2019. But the little tyke is in good company. Here are some other years that I noted, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2010, 2007, 2008, and 2005.
One girl applied for unemployment because she earned $100 in cash during 2019 and due to Covid, she couldn’t babysit in 2020.
One applicant (still a minor) says he (or she) was a child actor but hadn’t worked in seven years and was applying for unemployment during Covid.
One applicant about 11 years old, said she was a part-time model and lost income due to Covid. She was the only minor that had any reported income to the state.
Not the be left out, the infirm and elderly are also trying to cash in on California’s Unemployment Give-away. The oldest applicant I personally have seen was born in 1930. This person is in good company also. Again, no reported income but they’re applying anyways. Makes you wonder if there’s a consolation prize just for entering.
Many people have notes on their accounts stating, “over 100 SSNs submitted from this address.” I’ve seen others with 35 at the same address. Multiple applicants at the same address are common to see.
Other notes on accounts include, “Claimant has not lived at address filed on this claim for 17 years” and “claimant letter … postmarked FedEx International from India” and “verified claimant address on internet maps, the address is a vacant lot.”
You may not realize that you can live virtually anywhere in the world and apply for unemployment in California. I spoke with my sister about this, and she correctly reminded me, it’s a matter of where you worked then, not where you are living now. Thus, applications have arrived from all over. In a brief time, I’ve seen applications from Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, Georgia, Oklahoma, Arkansas, North Carolina, and Texas. The thought of California sending money to Texas is funny, considering that they are already send many jobs there.
This reminds me that one fellow did have a note on his account stating that he had never lived or worked in California, only Georgia, but he applied anyways.
There is a diversity of applicants. I’ve seen many great leaders seeking handouts at the public trough including Buddha, Mohammed, Jesus, and Israel. Oh and a few folks named after Greek gods as well. No matter who you are or where you live, every applicant is given the same process. If we can check the boxes for you, then you can qualify.
Oh, all my examples above were approved for identity purposes. Whether they eventually got a check from Uncle Gavin is unknown.
EDD has the same problems as every other state agency, the computer programs can’t talk to each other. EDD has a mind-boggling amount of resources available but at the end of the day, its up to humans to enter data because processes and programs are limited. Again, the backbone of the agency are those pesky Unix programs that we patched back in the Y2K days.
I currently have to use four different programs to do my job but I’m aware of at lease five more that others in the agency are using. My first step is to match the claim information in three different programs, if the unemployment application is not entered in all three, it’s a hard stop and the email telling me what to do gets returned to the pool of limbo and despair and I go on to the next item.
Folks, I might get into more detail about the claims process in another post, but my overall point is that all these dead-end claims are clogging up the system. All these folks with no business applying are gumming up the works and preventing others from being vetted for eligibility. Yes, EDD is a mess, but they have plenty of help as I hope I’ve illustrated.
This is just a quick note to explain why I haven’t been posting too much lately. Its not that we’ve run out of content, I’ve just been busy with life. I took a new job a few weeks ago and the learning curve is steep both in terms of learning new processes and procedures as well as a crazy amount of new jargon and acronyms. The job I took is with California’s Employment Development Department (EDD) and yes there will be some posts on my misadventures at EDD in the coming weeks. I also have enough material on Kirk Uhler to regularly beat him like a piñata until next Cinco de Mayo. In my spare time, I’ve been painting the exterior of the house.
The rest of the staff has been waiting patiently for the Chief to pony up at least two more articles on Dominic Foppoli. Sadly, we have agreed to hold much really damning stuff on Dominic until the court cases against him go live. Trust me, whatever you’ve read is just the tip of the iceberg. Oh, and accuser number seven has gone public with her accusations.
When a politician employs the Park Brothers, one of their go-to plays is attempting to register the URLs of the other candidates in the race. Then the bogus websites are used to smear other candidates in the guise of providing information about them. A corollary to this is practice is registering fake sites for ballot measures. These practices are intended to smear candidates and/or mislead voters. They have been doing this for many years. Often the Just US Brothers are guns for hire employed by consultants to given them both more freedom to attack and also to give the candidate a degree of deniability. Most recently they set up a website to mimic the official site of Placer County elections.
Cybersquatting in Placer County
In Placer County, registrar Ryan Ronco realized he faced a serious problem when he was alerted to a website mimicking the appearance of the official county elections website, down to the same color scheme, identical photos and an official looking seal. Local officials asked for help from the Office of Election Cybersecurity and the federal Department of Homeland Security.
The Office of Election Cybersecurity emailed Facebook to alert it to the website and described it as cybersquatting, which is when a website is established to mimic another. The cybersquatting website was advertising on Facebook to promote itself and the state wanted Facebook to take action.
“It looked so close and mirrored a lot of the colors and style (of the official Placer County Elections website) and it was done intentionally,” Ronco said.
Aaron F. Park, president of the Placer County Good Government PAC, set up the site. The PAC bought ads on Facebook, which eventually removed three of the ads. Yet they received between 12,000 and 19,000 impressions before they were removed, according to Facebook’s Ad Library. Campaign finance documents show the Placer County Good Government PAC paid Facebook $4,546 for ads this election cycle, but Facebook’s Ad Library shows at most a $1,300 charge for ads.
One ad, which received the bulk of the impressions and was designed to be indistinguishable from the county’s official site, read: “Local Government Matters! They make decisions that affect you right where you live! Support law enforcement, security, schools and business. Click to see our picks for your community!”
Placer County responded to Aaron’s fake website by sending him a ceased-and-desist letter.
If you didn’t know it, Aaron has a special place in his heart for cease-and-desist letters. On his blog he claims to have received 29 of them. He publishes them in full on his blog and then ridicules the sender, and why not? Nobody has ever done anything to him as a result of such threats. It costs too much to enforce them and he knows it. Its not that he doesn’t step over the line but that he doesn’t do it in a way that will have meaningful negative consequences to him personally. Often his candidate and others in his circle are not so fortunate. Remember Clint Parish anyone?
While the Park Brothers are not a party in the legal document that I will introduce shortly, clearly their fingerprints are all over this; something they proudly proclaimed on camera in 2016.
Let’s go back to our blog post from 2016.
This year, Aaron has set his sights on Victor Bekhet. Bekhet—like many people in Placer County—is tired of the antics of Supervisor Uhler. Victor Bekhet however committed the unforgivable sin; he had the nerve to pull papers to run against Uhler. Kirk Uhler then decided to retain Park’s services of character assassination and dirty tricks to steamroll Mr. Bekhet.
Aaron created a fake website and assembled a bunch of nonsense to smear the character of Bekhet. Aaron’s antics got a feature story at KCRA TV.
Oh, lest you think I am sticking my neck out blaming Aaron Park for making this fake website, (VictorBekhet.com) here’s Park taking credit for the website and its content.
The website was created by RightOnDaily,com political blogger Aaron Park.
“There’s documentation backing every claim I made,” Park said. “I know better at this point in my life, doing different political stuff, than to make claims that I cannot prove. Because my God, if someone can sue you in the political world, they will.”
On the website, Park claims Bekhet, who is of Egyptian descent, used zoning loopholes for his own property and is not a registered financial advisor. He also links to Bekhet’s personal Facebook page — which includes posts written in Arabic.
On the website, Park said, “If you can understand any of that, please let us know what it says. We would really like to know who Victor Bekhet really is.”
Park is a friend of Uhler and was paid during his 2012 campaign for what Park describes as grunt work. He said the website was created of his own accord.
Mr. Bekhet took offense to this action and sought to regain the rights to the URL bearing in his name. I don’t know exactly what it took for him to right this obvious wrong, but the determination went to binding arbitration earlier this year. Folks you have to wonder why Park would continue to hold the website after the election which happened almost five years ago. I’ve accused Aaron Park of being a bully many times and this is one reason why. He clearly enjoyed taunting Bekhet or why continue to squat on the URL?
Anyway, Bekhet got his day in court—Ok, binding arbitration anyway. Enter the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).
The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center is a neutral, international and non-profit dispute resolution provider that offers time- and cost-efficient alternative dispute resolution (ADR) options. WIPO mediation, arbitration, expedited arbitration, and expert determination enable private parties to efficiently settle their domestic or cross-border IP and technology disputes out of court. The WIPO Center is also the global leader in the provision of domain name dispute resolution services under the WIPO-designed UDRP.
Complainant, a politician, asserts that the domain name was “used to impersonate me, deceiving voters into visiting the malicious website from flyers that purported to be circulated by me.” Complainant also asserts that the website to which the domain name resolves “continues to damage my business reputation and career aspirations through the hatred and prejudice targeted against me and my family,” contains libelous and defamatory material, and “tarnish[ed] my unique name and reputation […] causing me to lose economic opportunities.”
Victor Bekhet
Uhler’s response
Respondent, Complainant’s political rival, asserts that he “used the domain [name] […] to publish a website informing voters of my district about Mr. Bekhet’s positions on the issues that voters in my district cared about.” Respondent further stated: “Since Mr. Bekhet decided to publically put his name on the attack ads against me, … I found it necessary to once again remind the voters of my district about Mr. Bekhet’s positions and public statements by using the domain name I had purchased years earlier.”
Please note that Park claimed all credit for this website in 2016 but Uhler claims all responsibility in 2021. Oh, and this aspect gets even more interesting. Uhler claims the website was an expense of his business and the web registration was done by an employee.
Complainant filed the Complaint against Respondent Kirk Uhler. The Registrar, in its verification, indicated that the registrant of the Disputed Domain Name was Brian Jagger, and that Mr. Jagger is associated with Rensa Group. Complainant thereafter amended the complaint to add Mr. Jagger as a Respondent, noting that Mr. Jagger is an employee of Rensa Group LLC, and that Mr. Uhler is the member of Rensa Group LLC. In response to the Complaint, Mr. Uhler filed a Response in which he acknowledged that he was responsible for the registration of the domain name and that he used the domain name to publish a website about Mr. Bekhet. The Panel therefore concludes that it is appropriate to treat both Messrs. Uhler and Jagger as the Respondent.
The cybersquatting question generally focuses on the domain name itself. As the WIPO Overview 3.0 makes clear, in assessing whether a registrant has a right or legitimate interest in a domain name used for a criticism website, it is critical to assess whether the domain name communicates that the website at issue is a criticism site (as <sermosucks.com> did), or whether the domain name instead impersonates Complainant and purports to be the Complainant’s own site (as the Disputed Domain Name does):
Here, there is no doubt that the Disputed Domain Name consists, in its entirety, of Complainant’s trademark, with no additional words added. As such, the Disputed Domain Name impersonates Complainant. That impersonation is exacerbated by the flyers that were distributed in the community that also impersonated Complainant and encouraged Internet visitors to visit Respondent’s website on the pretext that it was Complainant’s website. Although the record does not contain sufficient evidence from which the Panel can definitively determine whether Respondent was responsible for producing and distributing those flyers, given that Respondent did not refute any involvement with the flyers, it is a fair inference that Respondent was behind those flyers (which, after all, encouraged community members to visit the website that Respondent admits he created and posted).
Because of the confusion and deception created by Respondent’s use of the Disputed Domain Name, the Panel finds that Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Name. In so finding, the Panel does not intend to prevent Respondent from creating a criticism site concerning Complainant, including in the event of any future political campaigns between the parties. Rather, this decision is only intended to prevent a stratagem that uses deception to trick Internet users into believing that the criticism site is somehow affiliated with Complainant. Such confusion is precisely what the UDRP is designed to guard against.
Respondent’s conduct in this case violates both the spirit and the letter of the Policy. It violates the spirit because Respondent has engaged in deceitful conduct in passing off his own website as Complainant’s. Respondent is free to engage in open and honest debate about the parties’ qualifications for political office, but Respondent should do so in a way that makes it clear that his domain name resolves to a website that is critical of Complainant rather than through a domain name that impersonates Complainant. The flyers Respondent appears to have distributed in the community exacerbated the confusion, and support the Panel’s view that Respondent registered and used the Disputed Domain Name in bad faith, to promote confusion as to the source of the website with Complainant.
Respondent’s conduct also violates the letter of the Policy.
First, Respondent essentially admits that he registered the Disputed Domain Name “to prevent the owner of the trademark or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name.” In particular, Respondent stated in his Response:“
Having learned that Mr. Bekhet was planning a run against me, I had researched the availability of domain names. . . . It never occurred to me that Mr. Bekhet would have been so foolish to file for public office without purchasing his own domain name, so you can imagine my surprise when my search revealed it was available. . . . I used the domain that I had legally acquired to publish a website informing voters of my district about Mr. Bekhet’s positions on the issues that voters in my district cared about.”
Never fear though, Aaron’s appearance on KCRA TV was noticed as part of the arbitration.
This statement is a plain acknowledgment that Respondent deliberately selected this Disputed Domain Name to prevent Complainant from launching his own campaign website reflecting his name and trademark. Although the Policy normal requires a pattern of such conduct (because such a pattern would be circumstantial evidence of the Respondent’s bad faith), when the bad faith is essentially admitted, the Panel finds that even a single incident of registering a domain name “to prevent the owner of the trademark or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name” can be sufficient to establish bad faith registration and use. In any event, there is some evidence that Respondent and his associates have engaged in a “pattern” here, as Respondent’s friend Adam Park (who also worked on Respondent’s 2012 election campaign) was accused by the Placer County counsel of improperly registering the domain name <placerelections.org> and using it for a website that impersonated the County’s official elections website, <placerelections.com>. Although Complainant did not name Mr. Park as a Respondent, Mr. Park did admit in published news reports that he created the website to which the Disputed Domain Name resolves. See Dana Griffin, “Website seemingly attacks Placer County supervisor candidate,” KCRA, April 13, 2016 (available at https://www.kcra.com/article/website-seemingly-attacks-placer-county-supervisor-candidate/6428098). Given that Mr. Park appears to have been acting in concert with Respondent, the Panel deems it appropriate to consider his conduct as well in assessing whether Respondent engaged in a pattern of registering domain names reflecting a third party’s mark.
Second, Respondent’s conduct also violates paragraph 4(b)(iii) of the Policy, which deems it bad faith if a respondent registers a “domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor.”
Complainant’s business is not the sale of commercial goods; rather, Complainant’s business (as reflected in his trademark registration) is the offering of political information and commentary. This business is separate from Complainant’s activity as an electoral candidate (as well as Complainant’s business as a financial advisor.) The Panel therefore needs to distinguish Respondent’s use of the website to campaign against Complainant as a political opponent from Respondent’s use of the website to disrupt Complainant’s political information and commentary business. Making this distinction is challenging given that Complainant’s business is so closely linked to his own political activity as an electoral candidate.
Here, though, Respondent’s conduct has made that distinction easier. That is because Respondent continued to use the website to impersonate Complainant even after Complainant ceased to be his electoral opponent. Specifically, after the 2016 election, Respondent continued to update the website to which the Disputed Domain Name resolves in order to criticize Complainant and respond to Complainant’s political commentary. Respondent’s post-election conduct thus demonstrates that Respondent was acting as a “competitor” with respect to the political information and commentary services provided by Complainant, and was using the website to disrupt Complainant’s offering of the registered services… That post-election conduct also supports an inference that, when Respondent first registered the Disputed Domain Name, he did so primarily to disrupt Complainant’s political information and commentary business. Accordingly, the Panel finds the Respondent registered and used the Disputed Domain Name in bad faith primarily for the purpose of disrupting Complainant’s business of providing political information and commentary.
For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the Disputed Domain Name, <victorbekhet.com>, be transferred to Complainant.
It’s about time that someone finally busted the Just Us Brothers for doing this, but these guys are rarely mistaken for ethical guys. Its good that Aaron’s name did make it into the decision even if he was called “Adam Park.” Sadly, this typo will make future searches of Aaron’s deeds even more dependent on websites like this one.
In summary, the binding Arbitration action found the following to be true:
Uhler’s Rensa Group was the legal owner of the site not Aaron Park. Aaron and Uhler have both taken credit for the content of VictorBekhet.com. Their use of a website in Bekhet’s name is cybersquatting and impersonation of Bekhet. This was done to impersonate Bekhet and harm his reputation. This resulted in “confusion and deception”, something Uhler & Park had no right to do. Their conduct “violates both the spirit and the letter of the Policy” and terms of website registration. Uhler and Park “registered and used the Disputed Domain Name in bad faith”.
Again, are these really Uhler’s words or Parks?
“I had researched the availability of domain names. . . . It never occurred to me that Mr. Bekhet would have been so foolish to file for public office without purchasing his own domain name, so you can imagine my surprise when my search revealed it was available. . . . I used the domain that I had legally acquired to publish a website informing voters of my district about Mr. Bekhet’s positions on the issues that voters in my district cared about.”
Folks, I have heard Park say similar things about registering domain names prior to 2016.
The arbitration finding further states that Uhler and Adam (sic) [Aaron] Park have engaged in a pattern of working in concert to improperly register domain names. Even more disturbing is that Uhler continued to squat on the web name for many years after Bekhet was no longer a candidate. This continued cybersquatting was solely for the purpose of continuing to attack Bekhet and to harm his ability to earn a living.
Concluding remarks
My hope is to never post about the Just Us Brothers (George and Aaron Park) ever again. I know—Kirk Uhler is technically the third Just Us Brother—and sadly, I’m not done with him just yet. I have another topic to hit him on that I may get around to in the next week or so. Nevertheless, since the Park Brothers are living so close to hell that they can see Sparks, I would really like to leave them be. However, just like Karen England, the Parks think they can reside in another state and still influence the politics of California. Sorry guys but moving out of state cuts your claim and any meaningful ties to what happens here. In fairness, I will be subject to the same limitations in about two more years when I abandon the once golden state.
So why expend any energy on blogging about Uhler and the Brothers Park?
The short answer is two things:
They won’t go away. Kirk Uhler is still clinging to Placer County politics even after his defeat as a Supervisor. Aaron Park is still doing his schtick as a political gun for hire. I suspect his brother George is hoping to pay the “Mouse Tax” sometime in the next few weeks.
All three Just Us Brothers are literally doing what they do in God’s name. Uhler is in good with the gang at Bayside Church in Rocklin and last I heard; the Parks were likewise doing their church thing somewhere. The disconnect between their professed faith and their behavior; especially in politics, is breathtaking to behold.
Lastly, I doubt you’ll be reading about this anywhere else so as is my practice, I’ve posted long excerpts of the sources cited above so I can’t be accused of taking matters out of context.
Folks many aspects of the Covid 19 search for immortality have proven utterly worthless. I say immortality because for the first ten months of Covid—which just happened to coincide with the Trump Administration—nobody died from anything other than Covid 19 except Saint Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
First the funny but true Babylon Bee strikes at the heart of the matter with this headline:
The article explores the barbaric practices used to produce vaccines for Covid 19. After reading this, I can only conclude that despite the promises of “the Greatest Generation” and the Jewish community that survived that era, the practices of human experimentation and eugenics which were the basis of the Nuremberg Trials are still alive in the West.
Here’s a few paragraphs to give you an idea of the article—which is thoroughly footnotes and sourced.
The two cell strains used by COVID vaccines are named HEK293 and PERC6. The name HEK293 stands for a Human Embryonic Kidney from the 293rd experiment — we can be confident that more babies preceded the final baby used for HEK293.
With fetal tissue research, cell death renders the tissue unfit for purpose: tissues and organs must be harvested “within 5 minutes” and at times this occurs while the baby’s heart is still beating — this was also revealed during a Planned Parenthood court deposition.
Vaccines produced in cell lines contain fragments of the child’s DNA — one study even found “a complete individual genome” of the aborted child. The divided cells the vaccine was grown in would have been the child’s as she grew.
The study, which has not yet been peer-reviewed, indicated that the B.1.351 variant of the virus was found eight times more in individuals who were vaccinated—or 5.4 percent against 0.7 percent—against those who were not vaccinated. Clalit Health Services, a top Israeli health-care provider, also helped in the study.
“We found a disproportionately higher rate of the South African variant among people vaccinated with a second dose, compared to the unvaccinated group,” said Adi Stern of Tel Aviv University. “This means that the South African variant is able, to some extent, to break through the vaccine’s protection.”
Isn’t it funny that the same folks that promise to keep abortion safe and lethal are the same ones that say a Covid 19 vaccine is safe? Facts are stubborn things, but I doubt you’ve seen this article on your favorite cable news station.
April 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — More than 10,000 people have died shortly after COVID-19 vaccination since December, American and European authorities have revealed. The deaths include more than 7,100 in Europe, according to the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and 3,005 reported by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC).
As of Tuesday, EudraVigilance, the EMA’s database of suspected drug reaction reports, noted that 4,036 “fatal outcomes” after vaccination with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot, as well as 1,922 and 1,234 deaths after administration of vaccines made by Moderna and AstraZeneca, respectively.
EudraVigilance also reported 20 deaths from the COVID-19 vaccine developed by Johnson & Johnson. The database has disclosed more than 200,000 injuries possibly linked to the four vaccines, with tens of thousands of cases deemed “serious.”
Covid 19 has a fatality rate of 0.15 percent so why do we need that vaccine passport other than to restrict our movement?
STANFORD, California, April 16, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A new study released by Professor John P. A. Ioannidis of Stanford University, California, has found that the infection fatality rate (IFR) of COVID-19 is significantly lower than previous studies indicated. According to Ioannidis, a medicine and epidemiology professor, the virus is less deadly than once thought, registering at a mere 0.15% fatality rate.
If I hear we’re following the science ever again, I might hurl without advanced notice. Time to quit wearing masks already.
Yep, after over a year of Covid shutdowns, California’s public schools are making preparations for standardized testing. The results are supposed to determine funding levels from the federal government. This year’s tests will be given to students with less security measures in place than Lori Loughlin’s daughters taking an SAT test. Most California students taking these tests will be unsupervised by anyone.
In a recent meeting of Elk Grove teachers discussing the topic, the following was announced to all in attendance.
“Whatever kind of shitshow it turns out to be, don’t sweat it and just move on. Relax, give it, and move on. Don’t stress your kids out or yourself out over it. It’s just another hoop we need to jump through for the federal government.”
Translation: this year’s testing results are gonna be a train wreck.
The test results are in on California’s children …
Some more conscientious teachers that I know, were concerned about such a comment. They know the test scores will be lower and think that’s bad because the quality of education over the last year has been abysmal. Some teachers really care that children have been harmed by the Covid restrictions.
My response was something like this:
Yes, the children have suffered due to the panic and isolation thrust upon them. They are suffering mentally and emotionally. It’s not natural for children to grow up without others to play with. They probably are being warped in their development.
But no worries. The good news is that the worse the test scores, the more money the teacher’s unions can get out of California taxpayers. I’m sure Gavin and our legislature will do much “for the children”. It really won’t help children recover from Covid—how do you give restitution to a kid for stealing a year of their already short youth—but the politicians will get facetime on camera saying that redistributing your wealth proved how much we care.
Yet another example of not letting a good crisis go to waste.
I have yet to meet anyone that demands that I celebrate Christmas on December 25th because it is the exact date when Jesus was born. The important thing is that Jesus was born on earth to become one of us. Celebrating his birth on a specific date in December or January (if you are an Orthodox Christian) is not a measure of piety or Christian orthodoxy. Contrast that with what you are about to read about Easter and Passover. It seems like some Protestant groups are always looking for ways to unchurch the rest of us. As you read this, I hope you keep this in mind…
If you thought we only swat Liberals on this blog, you’d be wrong. What follows is the result of an Easter weekend post on World Net Daily (WND) by the editor’s wife, Elizabeth. Before I get into this, let me just disclose that in the last days of the Sacramento Union that I knew Joe Farah and briefly worked for the Union. I even had an Op-Ed published in the paper. When the Union shutdown, Farah left the area and moved north—to Oregon I think—and started WND.
Elizabeth Farah starts her video with the claim that the topic that she wished to discuss (keeping Passover v Easter) was the first major schism of the Church. This is demonstrably false; the first schism was over Judaizes. Did Gentiles first need to become Jews and then Christians? Was circumcision, etc. necessary? In the 15th chapter of the Book of Acts, this issue necessitated the first church council in Jerusalem. Judaizes were a constant problem in the First Century Church.
“Keep the Passover of Jesus”
“The fact that most of ecclesia or churches of God kept Passover. It is important to remember. Rome’s will was to eradicate Passover and replace it with Easter; despite Jesus’ command to keep the feast and do this in remembrance of me.” Elizabeth Farah timestamp 8:10-33
“By the way, this is a biblical command not a custom.” Farah 17:31-35
Speaking of keeping the 14th day of the first month, “That was the Lord’s Command.” Farah 18:30-32
Farah is offended that Constantine wanted the Church to “separate themselves from the customs of the Jews”.
Farah thinks that we need to bless Israel (the Jewish people); however; the New Testament makes it plain that the Church is Israel. Or to paraphrase David Chilton, God divorced Israel for infidelity and took to himself a new bride, a new people, the Church. The Church is the new Israel.
Farah repeatedly tries to repudiate the Church Council of Nicaea by calling it a minority, which also undermines the legitimacy of the Creed. I find this very problematic and arguably just as intellectually lazy as parts of Constantine’s reasoning for adopting Easter. Constantine could have advocated regularizing fragmented practices of worship without dumping on the Jews but he didn’t.
At the end of her presentation, Farah also tries some bait and switch tactics to buttress her argument. She ignores that the Council was unanimous in its support of adopting Easter as a Christian feast and tries to flip it that Constantine is claiming that his will on the matter is God’s will. This is wrong. Anybody that has any experience with Churches making important decisions knows that a unanimous vote is understood as a group finding God’s will on the matter. In his letter, Constantine is simply repeating the declaration of the Council and using the vote to call for normalizing the practice throughout the Empire.
Farah is not the only person that you can find on the Internet promoting this understanding of Passover and Easter.
Many of the arguments on this topic seem rooted in strange interpretations of Scripture tied to the idea of the Regulative Principle of Scriptural interpretation. This idea is often invoked when people look at the Bible’s ideas of things like proper worship and moral behavior. Basically, the Regulative Principle of Scriptural interpretation is if it’s in the Bible we do it and if not, then we don’t. Some Protestant groups go further and say if it’s not specifically in the New Testament them we don’t follow it.
If you take this belief literally (especially limiting yourself to the New Testament), you can get some strange and theologically pretzel-like beliefs. For example, bestiality in only prohibited in the Old Testament but is not mentioned—let alone prohibited—in the New. Musical instruments are often mentioned as part of worship in the Old Testament but the New is silent on this topic, so what is the correct practice? This idea, especially when trying to divide the Bible against itself, results in crazy stuff.
You can see this belief being applied in the next article and when it is, in parts it’s gut splittingly funny.
The Apostle Paul confirms he maintained the customary observance of Passover, as was given to him by Christ Himself, when he said, “For I received of the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed [not Easter Sunday!] took bread” (1 Corinthians 11:23).
Ok, here is a twisted understanding of the Lord’s Supper. Yes, the first time Jesus celebrated it was on Passover, but the early church did this celebration every week, and not on the Sabbath to boot. The practice of the early church was to meet on the first day of the week—a regular workday for their society—and meet in the evening for a feast. In the Corinthians passage cited above, Paul was scolding them for abuses in how they were doing it. Some were eating too much and other were starving. At the conclusion of the feast, they would then celebrate Communion, Eucharist, the Lord’s Supper, or whatever your group wants to call it. Contrary to the claim above, this was not a once-a-year activity. It was weekly.
For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.
1 Corinthians 11:26
Emperor Constantine – Saint or Villain
The absolute proof that Christians shouldn’t celebrate Easter is this next quote:
It is important we remember: Jesus Christ never kept an Easter in His life! Unequivocally, it is undeniable that Easter has no Biblical connection, foundation, or authority on the name of Jesus Christ that requires observance and/or recognition by any who claim Christ as their Savior.
Yep, Jesus never celebrated his own Resurrection while he was alive on earth and thus, we shouldn’t either. This, folks is the Regulative Principle of Scriptural interpretation in action. Just because Jesus rose on the first day of the week and the early church met on that day to worship has no bearing on the issue. Oh, while he was alive, Jesus worshipped on the Sabbath not the first day of the week. Remember when I said the Regulative Principle can tie you up in intellectual pretzels?
Later the author comments on the results of the Council of Nicaea:
It was now made “official”: Easter Sunday, the day after the first full moon, after the spring equinox, became the day to celebrate Jesus Christ’s resurrection. This was a serious and critical shift of theology. Critical, because it not only changed the day of the observance, but changed the focus, the meaning of the observance. It now became an observance and celebration of His resurrection, contrary to the Biblical admonition of remembering His death!
The author now claims that Christians celebrating the Resurrection is contrary to biblical admonition. So dear author, why were they meeting on the first day of the week for worship if celebrating the resurrection of our Lord is wrong? I don’t know about your church, but my preference is to celebrate a meal with Christ every time we worship not once a year. Christians celebrate both Jesus’ death and his resurrection. Trying say we can only pick only one is the unbiblical position. This is the logical fallacy of the false dilemma.
Lest you think I exaggerate read on:
Notice what Paul says, “For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death [not His resurrection] till he come” (1 Corinthians 11:26). There is a purposeful point of significance our Lord placed exclusively on Passover concerning His death. It’s very fundamental, but crucial to understand; Passover was intended to distinctly address the impeccable fact that it was by Jesus Christ’s sacrificed life and shed blood that we have access to eternal life. Unfortunately, merging His death and resurrection into one holy day, as Easter describes, blurs the deep profound meaning of both these events by taking away the emphasis that each so richly deserves.
This guy again opens his mouth and removed all doubt about how foolish his argument is. Most of the Christian Church celebrates both Good Friday and Easter. We do not merge “His death and resurrection into one holy day, as Easter describes…” This is the logical fallacy of the strawman.
The reality is that many churches have Holy Week services on almost every day of that week. Starting with Palm Sunday, Maundy Thursday, Good Friday, a Saturday Easter vigil, and Easter (or Resurrection) Sunday.
If you want to read yet another article on the subject, try this one.
This article is written by a group claiming to be neither Christian nor Jewish. They call themselves the Natsarim. It has a lot of information and claims not only all the stuff that you read already about the Passover but claims that the modern Jewish way of reckoning the Passover is wrong as well; talk about a pox on both your houses! This article also quotes the full letter by Constantine.
All three articles seem to agree that abandoning a lunar calendar for a solar one was a bad idea and dumping a Passover celebration in favor of Easter was even worse. In Constantine’s letter, it is clear that the Jewish people were not generally liked by Christians in the West.
Comments
I could go deeper into this subject, but I think this post is long enough as it is so I’m going to wrap it up with some Scriptures that illustrate that the articles mentioned above are cherry picking arguments that can’t stand up before the biblical record. Farah and her fellow travelers will find the New Testament is not in agreement with their claims.
Regarding days is a matter of personal liberty
Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
Colossians 2:16
One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.
Romans 14: 5 & 6
But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.
Galatians 4:9-11
Christ our Passover
For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
I Corinthians 5:7b-8
Clearly these verses use Passover imagery, but to trying to limit their application to one day a year is a misreading of the text and wrenching them out of context. Paul is contrasting the way that people live, not discussing a literal Passover celebration.
The Bible makes it clear that Christ was both the Lamb sacrificed for us and also the High Priest. He died once for all and is seated at the righthand of the Father. We remember his words each time we gather together to eat the Lord’s Supper not just once per year.
Jesus raised on first day of the week
In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
Matthew 28:1
And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.
Mark 16:2
Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
Mark 16:9
Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.
Luke 24:1
The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.
John 20:1
Jesus appeared to the disciples on the first day
Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
John 20:19
And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.
Acts 20:7
Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.
1 Corinthians 16:2
Conclusion
The actual date of Jesus’ birth, baptism, death, or resurrection or other event in his life is secondary to the reality that it happened. Creating a false dilemma over celebrating the Passover or his Resurrection is trivial. The truth is many Christians celebrate both events in his life and more. Saying that we shouldn’t celebrate his resurrection because Jesus didn’t is a stupid claim.
Clearly Jesus worshipped on the Sabbath, but his followers worshipped on the first day of the week. Were his Apostles incapable of following his example?
If following Jewish law and custom was so darn important then why did the disciples decide that Gentiles didn’t need to be circumcised, keep the sabbath, or follow the dietary laws?
The truth is that Passover was a shadow and a type of symbol of the work that Jesus completed on the cross. He is our Passover Lamb. His was a sacrifice once and for all. He is our High Priest. He is seated at the righthand of the Father making intercession for us. We come to him not on the basis of keeping rules or festivals but by way of his blood shed in our place.
Whenever we gather in worship, we should gather around his table as he instructed.
For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.
I Corinthians 11:23-26
In the early church, remembering his death was a weekly occurrence not an annual one.
Jews and Gentiles all come to the Father thru Jesus Christ or not at all.
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
John 14:6.
It is a myth in certain Protestant sects that Jews have special treatment and need not bow the knee to King Jesus to go to Heaven. Such ideas are sentimental crap and damnable heresy.
Efforts to unchurch the rest of us for using the wrong calendar or celebrating the Resurrection of Jesus, are efforts not spent spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Rumor has it that CRA’s favorite warrior, Jorge Riley, may be granted their highest honor at the California Republican Assembly’s statewide convention later this month. The Freedom Fighter Award was first bestowed by CRA on Lt. Colonel Oliver North in 1991.
Why Oliver North got the award
Marine Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North did something really, really bad. He sold weapons to Iran in an effort to help fund rebels fighting Nicaragua’s Socialist government.
Translation, in the midst of the Cold War, North found a way to finance the opposition to the socialist/communist government of Nicaragua (funded by Russia) by selling US arms to another country (Iran) and funneling the proceeds to freedom fighters that the American Congress refused to help. The Congress was majority Democrat and loved hanging out with Communists like Castro and other likeminded dictators.
North’s nationally televised testimony before Congress portrayed the political class as a bunch of idiotic, children that knew nothing about protecting American interests abroad. His testimony shredded the premise for the hearings which really was a witch hunt that Democrats hoped would implicate President Ronald Reagan and give them an excuse to remove him via impeachment. Democrats were so sure they had Reagan in their sights that they never even bothered to depose North and others before the live television broadcast.
After the Congressional dog and pony show was over, Reagan was still firmly in control of the White House. North was charged and convicted of lying to Congress—something Congress does to the American people on a daily basis with no repercussions. North’s conviction was eventually overturned because he had been granted immunity prior to his Congressional testimony.
The California Republican Assembly invited North to speak at their convention and wanted a way to thank him for his service to our country and for making the other Party look like a bunch of jackasses. At the time, CRA was claiming more than 30,000 members.
The Award in Recent Years
In the years since, the Freedom Fighter Award has been occasionally granted to others. The most recent recipient was Tom Hudson. Hudson presided over CRA as the membership shrank to less than 1,000 souls scatted throughout the state.
Hudson is best known for his ferocious defense of CRA when the Just Us Brothers shredded the records of the organization—including its membership records—and deleted or withheld much of the financial ones as well.Hudson and his fellow CRA attorney, Craig Alexander, prosecuted George and Aaron to the fullest extent of the law. As a result, the Park Brother left California in disgrace and moved to Nevada.
Oops, Tom promised to do all that stuff and more to the Just Us Brothers but after filibustering for over a year eventually did nothing. However, the Park Brothers really did leave California for the Silver State.
Riley on Deck?
In the wake of his recent recognition for leadership by the Sacramento Chapter of CRA, Jorge Riley, seems on track to gain the Freedom Fighter award in a matter of weeks. Riley brought much needed attention to CRA as a result of his penetration of security at the Nation’s Capitol. By one act, Riley has done more on social media to publicize CRA than all his predecessors during the last two decades of the organization’s history. Who knew there were any Republicans left in California? Thankfully, Riley set the record straight and finally got the media talking about what a difference that one man can make. (Riley’s job on the statewide CRA Board was to boost the CRA on social media.)
So why else are we so confident that Riley will be so honored?
Look at the CRA support that Jorge Riley has received.
Riley is supported by Bill Cardoza. Bill has been in, under, and around, those controlling the levers of power in CRA since Barbara Alby and Greg Hardcastle took over the organization in the late 1980s and early ‘90s. Bill then followed this group as they then took over the California Republican Party. Word is that he bought the plane ticket so Riley could pay his respects to Speaker Pelosi on January 6th.
Riley is supported by the aforementioned Tom Hudson. As a CRA Board officer, Hudson is uniquely qualified to recognize raw talent when he sees it on CNN.
Sue Blake helped guide the Sacramento Republican Party into obscurity by selling-out her values for an opportunity to hangout with political consultants and cigar smoking armchair quarterbacks.
Riley also has the backing of both current and former rank-and-file members of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Any Republican that can gain such support without compromising his values, is worthy of another look; especially, here in California.
Jorge Riley Facebook page 03/11/2021
I could go on, but as they say, “A picture is worth a thousand words.” Pictured above, Angela Azevedo, Tom Hudson, Bill Cardoza, Jorge Riley, Russell Gray, Justin Hardcastle, Sue Blake, and Todd Freeman.
Disclaimer: Folks I try to be as ecumenical as possible —as long as we can agree on the Historic Creeds—but sometimes you just gotta chime-in. I was once a Roman Catholic but became a Protestant during my teenaged years. In my experience, nothing divides otherwise orthodox Christians as much as the doctrines surrounding Mary. Truthfully, I think this divide concerning Mary is a bigger obstacle to reuniting the Western Church than the Papacy!Oh, I’ve been working on this post for several days, that fact that it’s going live on Good Friday is not by design.
In Roman theology, beliefs about Mary have continued to evolve over the years.
Per Rome:
Mary lived a sinless life,
Mary was a perpetual virgin,
She ascended into Heaven,
She is Queen of Heaven,
She and various saints are routinely prayed to,
And now she is being further elevated to Co-Redemptrix.
Mary in the Roman Church
Here is more info on Mary from Roman Catholic sources.
The Catholic Church relies heavily on sacred tradition, as passed down from the apostles, and manifested in the teaching authority of the Church. The assumption of Mary is one doctrine of the Church that has emerged from apostolic tradition, rather than directly from scripture. It is not officially declared whether or not Mary underwent human death. However, what the Church does officially pronounce is that after the course of her earthly life, Mary was assumed body and soul into heaven by the power of God. The Church’s belief that Mary’s soul was perfectly sinless gives us confidence that she went directly to God. At the same time, her body was not subject to corruption, as our human bodies typically are.
The Immaculate Conception means that Mary, whose conception was brought about the normal way, was conceived without original sin or its stain—that’s what “immaculate” means: without stain. The essence of original sin consists in the deprivation of sanctifying grace, and its stain is a corrupt nature. Mary was preserved from these defects by God’s grace; from the first instant of her existence she was in the state of sanctifying grace and was free from the corrupt nature original sin brings.
In fact, Catholics hold, it extended over the whole of her life, from conception onward. She was in a state of sanctifying grace from the first moment of her existence.
The doctrine of the Assumption says that at the end of her life on earth Mary was assumed, body and soul, into heaven, just as Enoch, Elijah, and perhaps others had been before her. Some people think Catholics believe Mary “ascended” into heaven. That’s not correct. Christ, by his own power, ascended into heaven. Mary was assumed or taken up into heaven by God. She didn’t do it under her own power.
The Church has never formally defined whether she died or not, and the integrity of the doctrine of the Assumption would not be impaired if she did not in fact die, but the almost universal consensus is that she did die.
Mary’s body has been glorified in heaven and she has been given an important role near her Son as Queen of Heaven and Earth. Mary is entitled “queen” because she is the Mother of Jesus, who is truly a King of kings. With the queenship Mary has been given by her Son, Mary offers abiding mercy and compassion, interceding for all of God’s children. In the book of Revelation 12:1, Mary’s status as queen is reflected, “and a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.” The feast of Mary’s queenship is celebrated on August 22nd of each year.
The Op-Ed that I wish to comment on finds me somewhat on the same side as the Pope; a position that puts me at odds with the author of this article, published on Life Site News.
It is a sad state of affairs in the Church when a simple child of God, devoted to Our Lady, hears words shocking to pious ears coming from the Vicar of Christ himself and feels the need to cry out in protest, from the depths of a heart consecrated to the Immaculate Heart, in order to defend Our Lady’s honor, against anyone — even the Holy Father — who would appear, through apparently casual and careless remarks, to very nearly deny Her the just veneration due to Her as Mother of God who participated, through her Compassion, in Her Son’s salvific mission from His Conception to Calvary. However, such is the sorry state of Holy Mother Church today.
…Pope Francis had qualified the idea of Mary being given the title of Co-Redemptrix as being mere “foolishness”.
[the Pope] has reiterated his hostility to this title: “The mother who covers everyone under her mantle as a mother, Jesus entrusted us to her as a mother, not as a goddess, not as a co-redemptrix, as a mother.”
Part of the rebuttal to the Pope put forward by the author reads as follows:
Indeed, this theologian [Father Frederick William Faber] explains beautifully in what sense Our Lady cooperated with our Lord in the redemption of the world by showing the necessary link between the Divine Maternity and Our Lady’s Coredemption, and so between Mary as Mother of God and as Co-Redemptrix:
“Her free consent was necessary to the Incarnation … She gave Him the pure blood, out of which the Holy Ghost fashioned His Flesh and bone and Blood. She bore Him in her womb for nine months, feeding Him with her own substance. Of her was He born, and to her He owed all those maternal offices which, according to common laws, were necessary for the preservation of His inestimable life. She exercised over Him the plenitude of parental jurisdiction. She consented to His Passion; and if she could not in reality have withheld her consent, because it was already involved in her original consent to the Incarnation, nevertheless she did not in fact withhold it, and so He went to Calvary as her free-will offering to the Father … the cooperation of the Divine Maternity was indispensable. Without it our Lord would not have been born when and as He was; He would not have had that Body to suffer in … It was through the free will and blissful consent of Mary that they flowed as God would have them flow. Bethlehem, and Nazareth, and Calvary, came out of her consent, a consent which God did in no wise constrain.”
A few paragraphs later, the author put forward this to buttress his thesis.
The martyr-saint Maximilian Maria Kolbe links the promise of a Co-Redemptrix at the dawn of time with Her essential role in the triumph of the end times: “From the moment of the Fall, God promised a Redeemer and a Co-Redemptrix, saying ‘I will place enmities between thee and the Woman, and thy seed and her Seed: She shall crush thy head.’” And, quoting Pope Leo XIII, Saint Maximilian calls for prayers to Our Mother to hasten the solemn dogmatic proclamation of Our Lady’s role as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix of All Graces: “We have recourse to the Immaculata and we are instruments in Her hands, because She distributes all the graces of conversion and sanctification to the inhabitants of this valley of tears … Every grace passes through Her hands from the Sweetest Heart of the pure Jesus to us … In his encyclical on the Rosary (September 22, 1891), Pope Leo XIII says: ‘It can be affirmed in all truth that according to the divine will nothing of the immense treasury of grace can be communicated to us except through Mary.’ Let us pray, therefore, that our Holy Mother may expedite the solemn proclamation of this Her privilege, so that all humanity may run to Her feet with complete trust, since today we are in great need of Her protection.”
Mary as Co-Redemptrix
For Protestants readers, the above is mind-blowingly heretical. This is a good example why some Protestants have no place in their theology for Church Tradition. I think Tradition in the Church has a place but when it becomes more important than the Scriptures then it’s out of balance.
I’d like to point-out a few problems with the arguments being advanced about Mary; however, my intent is not to scorch the earth as I do so. I think Protestants tend to totally discount the role of Mary while the Roman Catholics err in the opposite direction.
I’ve tried to get my head around this Co-redemptix idea, and it seems to hinge on a rather novel concept, Jesus died with Mary’s consent and permission. Thus, Mary was an active participate in the passion of her son.
The Second Vatican Ecumenical Council (1962-1965), in its Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium) of November 21, 1964, painted this picture of Our Blessed Lady’s collaboration with the Almighty, which included her heroic surrender to Christ’s ignominious death.“
Thus the Blessed Virgin advanced in her pilgrimage of faith, and faithfully persevered in her union with her Son unto the cross, where she stood, in keeping with the divine plan, enduring with her only begotten Son the intensity of his suffering, associated herself with his sacrifice in her mother’s heart, and lovingly consenting to the immolation of this victim which was born of her.”
Deacon Miravalle spells out precisely what Mary did next to her dying Son.
“Mary uniquely participated in the sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary and in the acquisition of the graces of Redemption for humanity (theologically referred to as “objective redemption”). Mary offered her Son and her maternal rights in relation to her Son to the Heavenly Father in perfect obedience to God’s will and in atonement for the sins of the world. Mary’s offering of her own Son on Calvary, along with her own motherly compassion, rights and suffering, offered in union with her Son for the salvation of the human family, merited more graces than any other created person. As Pope Pius XII confirmed in his encyclical On the Mystical Body, Mary “offered Him on Golgotha to the Eternal Father, together with the holocaust of her maternal rights and her motherly love, like a New Eve for all children of Adam.”
“Well, I guess you could call it Hail Mary. You throw it up and pray” Roger Staubach 1975
My Brief Rebuttal
Folks Mary observed the life of her son and pondered these things in her heart (Luke 2:19) but the claims above are nowhere found in the Bible.
The suffering of Jesus was twofold, the physical pain and the spiritual pain. The beating, torture, and humiliation of Jesus are better understood than the spiritual pain of bearing the cup of God’s wrath for the sins of the world; this was clearly the difficult part of his crucifixion. (Matthew 26:39) God the Father turned his back on the Son—sin separates—when Jesus became sin for us. This is why Jesus, while on the cross said, “My God, my God, why has thou forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46)
All four Gospels are silent to the idea that Mary “collaborated” in the sacrifice of Christ or “lovingly consenting to the immolation of this victim which was born of her.”There is zero biblical evidence affirming the claim of “Mary’s offering of her own Son on Calvary”.
The gospels say that “…the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” (Mark 10:45)
Jesus gave his life not Mary.
“Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.” (John 10:17)
“For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” (Mark 10:45)
The idea that Jesus needed Mary’s consent, cooperation, or permission to be sacrificed is anathema to Holy Scripture.
Claims that “Mary ‘offered Him on Golgotha…’” are without any biblical foundation.
Roman Catholicism attributes to Mary things which are solely those titles belonging to Jesus.
Throughout the last two decades, there has been an increasing interest in three words used to honor Our Blessed Mother and describe her role in our regard: Co-redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate.
Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. (Matthew 20:28)
For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. (Mark 10:45)
Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. (I Timothy 2:6)
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. (John 3:16-17)
Jesus is our Mediator.
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; (I Timothy 2:5)
But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. (Hebrews 8:6)
And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. (Hebrews 9:15)
And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel. (Hebrews 12:24)
Jesus is our Advocate.
My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: (I John 2:1)
Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. (Romans 8:34)
Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. (Hebrews 7:25)
Conclusion
Biblically there is no warrant to claim that Mary is Redeemer, Mediator, or Advocate. All three titles are clearly those of Christ Jesus. Thus, there is no biblical basis for us to pray that Mary intercedes on our behalf before God. Only Jesus can rightfully be prayed to. Only He makes intercession on our behalf with the Father. John reminded believers that “…if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:” (1 John 2:1)
And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. (John 14:13)
Brief as this blog post may be, I think I have pointed-out that the Roman Catholic beliefs about Mary are as much or more problematic to Protestants than maybe even the Papacy. That I’m agreeing with the Pope-especially this one—about anything is THE definition of “irony”. Heck, if you give this a few more centuries then Mary might be inducted as the fourth person of the Holy Trinity. From an orthodox Protestant viewpoint, that seems to be the trajectory of Marian theology.
