Hell Hath No Fury

One of the best lines in the movie Gladiator is at the beginning when Russel Crow, playing General Maximus, is about to release the full might of his Roman troops on a bunch of barbarians. “At my signal, unleash hell.”

Today, a bishop in the Catholic Church, did something similar. He pronounced that he was excommunicating House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. As a result of this pronouncement, she is now banned from Holy Communion. I will get into this more in a minute but let’s look this news story. First the pronouncement of the bishop.

San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone announced Friday that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is barred from receiving Holy Communion due to her pro-abortion stance — marking an escalation in a decades-long tension between the Roman Catholic Church and liberal Democratic politicians on abortion.

Cordileone has written to the California Democrat, informing her that she should not present herself for Holy Communion at Mass, and that priests will not distribute communion to her if she does present herself.

“A Catholic legislator who supports procured abortion, after knowing the teaching of the Church, commits a manifestly grave sin which is a cause of most serious scandal to others.  Therefore, universal Church law provides that such persons ‘are not to be admitted to Holy Communion,'” he says in the letter.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is unambiguous on the question of abortion, both in procuring one and assisting in the practice: “Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion,” the catechism says. “This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable.”

“Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law,” it says, before calling abortion and infanticide “abominable crimes.”

It also declares that “Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life.”

San Francisco archbishop bars Pelosi from receiving Holy Communion due to abortion support
Bishop Cordileone

So, there you have it, Nancy Pelosi, and by extension, anyone claiming to be a Christian that participates in or promotes abortion, has violated God’s Law and helped commit “abominable crimes” and such a person is to be excommunicated.

Folks, this is a really big deal. Nancy has been declared an impenitent sinner and in the eyes of the Church, she has literally been turned over to Satan.

Excommunication is the Church’s most severe penalty imposed for particularly grave sins.  Through baptism, a person is incorporated into the body of the Church through which there is a “communication” of spiritual goods.  By committing a particularly grave sin and engaging in activities which cause grave scandal and fracture the body of the Church, that communication ceases, and the person is deprived of receiving the sacraments and other privileges.

The practice of excommunication arose in the early Church.  In his First Letter to the Corinthians, St. Paul castigated that community for tolerating the practice of incest–  “a man living with his father’s wife” (I Corinthians 5:1).  He admonished the Corinthians for not removing the offender from their midst.  St. Paul said, “I hand him over to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord” (5:5).  St. Paul further warned against associating with anyone who bears the title “brother” (indicating being a believer and part of the Church) but who is immoral, covetous, an idolater, an abusive person, a drunkard, or a thief.  He then closed the passage by quoting from the Torah, “Expel the wicked man from your midst” (Deuteronomy 6:13).

What is excommunication?

Did you get that in the above paragraph? “I hand him over to Satan …”

Part of excommunication is that no one that identifies themselves as a Christian is to associate with her. Nancy is cutoff from God, and any fellowship with other Christians. She is to be shunned.

“Shun the unbeliever.”

An excommunicated person also cannot be received into a public association of the Christian faithful.

To allow Nancy to claim to be a Christian in good standing is wrong. By allowing her to remain in the Church she is leading others into error. This must end.

A bishop may directly impose the penalty of excommunication, but only for the most serious offenses and after giving due warning (#1318).  Following the same rationale of the early Church, this severe penalty intends to correct the individual and to foster better church discipline (#1317).  As the shepherd of his diocese, a bishop must protect both the souls of the faithful from the infection of error and sin, and of those who are jeopardizing their salvation.

Excommunication is a warning that Nancy Pelosi is going straight to hell unless she genuinely repents.

We must keep in mind that the purpose of excommunication is to shock the sinner into repentance and conversion.  Excommunication is a powerful way of making a person realize his immortal soul is in jeopardy.  Excommunication does not “lock the door” of the Church to the person forever, but hopes to bring the person back into communion with the whole Church.  Moreover, this penalty awakens all of the faithful to the severity of these sins and deters them from the commission of these sins.  This line of thought is highlighted in the Catechism when it speaks of the automatic excommunication for abortion:  “The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy.  Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society”

Oh, one little nugget in the Fox News story to add some context, Bishop Cordileone sent the warning letter to Speaker Pelosi BEFORE the draft of the Supreme Court decision was leaked to the public.

Cordileone says in his letter that he wrote to her on April 7, informing her that “should you not publicly repudiate your advocacy for abortion ‘rights’ or else refrain from referring to your Catholic faith in public and receiving Holy Communion, I would have no choice but to make a declaration, in keeping with canon 915, that you are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.” He says that since that time, she has not done so.

San Francisco archbishop bars Pelosi from receiving Holy Communion due to abortion support

The Bishop sent his letter April 7th and the Draft of the Supreme Court decision was published by Politico May 2, 2022.

Ok, get in Nancy’s shoes for a second. Your spiritual shepherd has told you that you need to repent for your sin of promoting, encouraging, and funding abortion, a grave moral sin, and then the nine in black robes agree with your bishop. What should you do?

Repent or double-down on your sin?

Let’s see what happened.

Nancy encourages the mob to get even with her fellow Catholics on the Court and makes sure anyone on her side of the aisle has their home address to insure maximum impact of these protests. Oh, by the way this is enabling a violation of Federal law which says judge’s homes are off limits.

She also doubles-down on trying to overturn the Court’s decision before its even announced.

Then she triples-down by trying to fast-track a law to make abortion legal for all nine months of the pregnancy in all 50-states.

Meanwhile other Catholic politicians in her Party are trying to protect abortion as it is under Roe and take it even further by making euthanasia legal from conception thru at least the first year of life.

Given all this, can any reasonable person think that the Bishop had any option but to throw her out? Nope.

Nancy is hellbent on killing and killing and more killing. She is the very definition of unrepentant.

Hey Bishop, who’s got your back?

We here at the blog are grateful that the Bishop did this; however, the Catholic Church has many weasels in it and it remains to be seen if the Church has his back in a good way or like Brutus did for Julius Caesar.

When the Boughs Break

When I was kid, I recall many clergy saying from the pulpit that if we didn’t repent that God was going to judge us. A few argued that it was already too late, and we were under God’s judgment. 45 years later, what do you think?

To anybody willing to look at the evidence for more than a few seconds, clearly, we are well down the road of that judgment. To me the irony is that the clergy are silent on the subject that a nation can ever sin enough to be held to account. For that matter, ditto for individual actions. Steve Taylor’s question again appears in my writings, “Whatever happened to sin?”

As a different proof, look at the hostility toward churches, especially in states ruled by Democrats. Folks when strip clubs have more rights than your church, people should be alarmed. Strip clubs essential, churches non-essential anyone? However, for the most part the reaction of so-called Christian leaders was a collective yawn. In fact, as I’ve pointed out before, when Pope Fauci or Newsom or whoever is the socialist leader in your area claiming Lordship over the flocks of Jesus Christ told churches to quit meeting, almost to a man, all the clergy capitulated.

Another topic that I have commented on in the past is the amount of young people forsaking the faith of their fathers and falling headlong into the abyss of Satan. At least Esau traded his birthright for a bowl of soup, today’s young people forsake their birthright for nothing; for them their faith has no value. In their world, slavery is freedom.

On days like today, when I celebrate our nation’s Independence Day, I call things like the above to my remembrance. I wasn’t going to blog at all today on this or any other subject but when I read today’s installment of Days of Praise then I felt the need to share it with my readers. Before I continue, I need to explain what Days of Praise is.

Days of Praise is a daily devotional from the Institute for Creation Research (ICR). ICR was originally based in the San Diego area, but like so much else in California, it moved to Texas. Days of Praise is a daily dive into a topic of theology or faith delivered right to your email box. The one today was a real zinger.

July 4, 2021

When the Boughs Break

When the boughs thereof are withered, they shall be broken off: the women come, and set them on fire: for it is a people of no understanding: therefore he that made them will not have mercy on them, and he that formed them will shew them no favor.” (Isaiah 27:11)

Like a mighty tree towering over the forest, God raises up a mighty nation from time to time, with a great leader, to accomplish some purpose in the divine plan. He “hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation” (Acts 17:26).

But when that nation and its leaders become proud, and its people become lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God, it becomes like a tree whose branches wither and whose core becomes riddled with insect-caused decay. Finally, the boughs break, the kingdom will fall, and down will come that nation, its leaders and all!

That happened even to God’s chosen nation, Israel, though only for a time, since God’s promises cannot fail. One after another, the mighty nations that God used to chastise His wayward people—Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Rome, etc.—have in turn been judged for their own rebellion against the God who “made them” and “formed them.” God has warned that “the wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God” (Psalm 9:17).

Is that about to happen to our beloved USA as well? The signs of self-seeking power and pride among our leaders and moral decay and spiritual rebellion among our people are widespread and growing worse. Our prayer should be that of the ancient prophet. “O LORD, revive thy work in the midst of the years,…in wrath remember mercy” (Habakkuk 3:2). “Wilt thou not revive us again: that thy people may rejoice in thee?” (Psalm 85:6). HMM

Since we’re on the topic of judgment, I need to refer you to Deuteronomy Chapter 28. Start with verse 15 and keep reading.

One of God’s judgments is drought.

And thy heaven that is over thy head shall be brass, and the earth that is under thee shall be iron. The LORD shall make the rain of thy land powder and dust: from heaven shall it come down upon thee, until thou be destroyed. (v 23 & 24).

Please note that the cause is not climate change or global warming but the immoral behavior of evil men.

Oh, cable TV and 90-Day Guy are there too:

The LORD shall smite thee with madness, and blindness, and astonishment of heart: And thou shalt grope at noonday, as the blind gropeth in darkness, and thou shalt not prosper in thy ways: and thou shalt be only oppressed and spoiled evermore, and no man shall save thee. (v 28 & 29).

This explains Covid-19 better than Dr. Fauci can.

Oh, once you’ve read about all the plagues in this chapter, I have a sobering article about how the Covid vaccine is going to bite you in the butt in about 15 years. This article goes right along with both topics. Don’t get the vaccine. More on why in a future post. However, if you think you can inject an experimental serum derived from the corpses of freshly murdered children into your body without moral, ethical, or physical repercussions then it’s already too late for you.

Churches slowly circle the drain

How many times have you heard the phrase “separation of powers” or “separation of church and state” or “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof?”  If you haven’t heard it before, maybe study up on the laws and rules of this country they didn’t teach you in public school.  In short, it means the church is a separate body, not to be governed by any state or government entity. 

Occasionally, the Church and State enter into conflicts. An example of this would be in Houston, a few years ago, the mayor and council demanded to sign-off in advance on any sermon at weekly services to make sure it is worthy; this was struck down. The church often talks a great game, then Covid-19 hit, and they let all Hell break-out.

In particular, the Catholic Church has been bleeding members for quite some time; basically, in a given year, about 30 members would join the Catholic faith at our church.  On average, we lost at least that many due to death in an average month.  The numbers do not add up.  When the shutdowns started, the church (via the bishop, the controlling entity for the Diocese) said it was ok simply watching Mass on TV or the Internet or listening on the radio, and not participating in the Eucharist (Holy Communion) was ok.  Even though the Catholic faith says you must participate in the Eucharist weekly, the church bowed to the State. 

Virtual Church: Where the church takes the union out of Communion

While the church did eventually open up outdoor services, it was very limited, and sparsely attended.  We started a live stream, but again folks didn’t attend.  The church made it comfy for folks to watch Mass in their pajamas while sipping coffee.  A few weeks turned into months, which turned into a year plus now.  While churches have re-opened, it was to smaller crowds; 100 folks max.  They made it easy to opt out as the bishop continued the “you don’t have to attend in person, it still counts” decree. 

My point here is a habit is formed over time, and it takes discipline to really form a habit.  You have to hold yourself accountable.  In the case of the church, folks broke habit.  After missing for a couple weeks, it became months, then a year plus.  These folks are not likely to return.  This is similar to a workout regime at the gym. It takes a while to form a habit, but it can be broken, and once broken, it’s hard to get started again.  It’s easy for folks to wake up and turn on the TV. Lord knows, as Americans, we consume enough of that already!

Sunday worship at home

  A new habit has been formed, and not a good one for the local parish. 

Speaking of the local parishes, let me again use my parish as an example.  We have 5 masses each weekend, and weekly collection (AKA the offering) ran about $17K a week prior to Covid.  Now it runs about 5K, and I feel that is drastically overstated.  Our priest gave a long diatribe about how we are required to give 10% of our annual income to the church.  Keep in mind, I have never heard that amount before, and in the Catholic faith, the word “tithing” was always used to describe the Mormon religion, one the Catholics view as a cult.  Our priest used his entire sermon to speak about money and finances, lacking any self-awareness that the church shut down for about a year. During that time, many folks hearing his words were out of work or otherwise adversely impacted.  

My father remarked that he was surprised that most of the congregation “regulars” at the early Mass had yet to return, speculating they may not have been vaccinated yet.  While this thinking is all well and good, the demographics at that Mass are almost exclusively 70 plus in age.  These folks have had about 6 months of time to get the shot, and by now, its likely most have received it; however, they just aren’t going to attend service anymore.  Think about it, the excuse was “the church is closed” “I will return when I get the shot,” now it’s, “I will return when the numbers go down.” These folks ain’t coming back in large numbers.

The church bent over for the Governor and the state government.  It, like any other organization, showed its true colors. They talk a good game, but …  The consequence of their action is that most watch EWTN or some other form of online church and have no intention of returning.  They are spinless and they showed it.  The folks holding out hope for a mass return to the church will be vastly disappointed, its hollow words as far as I am concerned.  Nowadays, there is no separation of Church and State and the bishop here proved it to be true.  Now the church is concerned about money…yeah that’s rich.

Jake the Snake

Conservatives Ruin Easter

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.

I will be commenting on three different articles, the first of which is: Constantine’s shocking letter on Passover dating and the Jews

Claim, First Schism in the church

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.

Constantine’s Easter Controversy with the Quartodecimen

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.


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


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.

Reaction to Op-Ed Demanding Virgin Mary be Proclaimed Co-Redemptrix

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.

What the Catholic Church Teaches About Mary

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.

Immaculate Conception and Assumption

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.

What the Catholic Church Teaches About Mary

Catholic Op-Ed Rebuking the Pope

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.

The quotations below are from Why I find Pope Francis’s contempt for the title of Co-Redemptrix so offensive.

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.”

How Can Catholics Understand Mary as Co-Redemprix, Mediatrix of All Graces and Advocate?
“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.

How Can Catholics Understand Mary as Co-Redemprix, Mediatrix of All Graces and Advocate?

Jesus is our redeemer not Mary.

A redeemer pays a ransom or atones for another.

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)


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.

On Racism and Cancelling Charles Darwin

After I posted my brief response to the Wired Op-Ed, I started going thru some old mail when I came across an article on the subject of racism. It posed an interesting question, why does cancel culture never consider cancelling Charles Darwin? While Darwin didn’t create racism, he is singlehandedly responsible for advancing the scientific basis that some races are more fit than others. His beliefs have been the basis of eugenics and genocide for tyrants all over the world. Millions have perished and millions more have been subjugated because of the impact of Darwin’s racist ideas. Yet, Darwin is given a free pass.

The following is printed in Answers, a publication of Answers in Genesis. The article that is quoted below is Should We Cancel Darwin by Mark Looy.

Modern views about human origins are built on a toxic error. Unless these opinions change, racism will keep raising its ugly head. Any serious desire to solve racism must inspire the question, “What about the influence of Charles Darwin’s racist views? Should they be banned (or ‘canceled,’ in popular jargon) from the culture?

In a sequel to the better-known On the Origin of Species, Darwin’s The Descent of Man argued that humans, having descended from apelike creatures, were continuing to evolve and produce various races. Darwin posited that some races were more developed than others. Throughout Descent, Darwin labeled different people groups other than his European race as “low” and “degraded,” including Africans. Darwin argued that the “highest races and the lowest savages” clearly differed in their “moral disposition” (Darwin, 445).1 These “savages,” he further claimed, possessed “insufficient” powers of reasoning (Darwin, 489). At the end of Descent, Darwin declared he would prefer to be descended from a “little monkey” or an “old baboon” as opposed to an Indian “savage” from South America (Darwin, 919).

Darwin’s racism and belief in white supremacy were an outgrowth of his ideas regarding natural selection (a view popularized later by others as “survival of the fittest”). Accordingly, he excused aggressive colonial imperialism with the comment, “The civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world” (Darwin, 521). Although he may not have explicitly endorsed such imperialism, Darwin saw the elimination of nonwhite races as the natural result of white Europeans, who “stand at the summit of civilisation” (Darwin, 507), being the superior race.

Such reasoning, even before Darwin laid it out, was essentially the same rationale used by European, Muslim, and American slave traders, who viewed the Africans as less than human and deserving of enslavement.

If they were consistent, cancel-culture advocates would ban Darwin from society. But most won’t touch him, for he is like a prophet for their worldview. Even if they condemn racism, they blindly still want to commemorate Darwin. From him, they have a supposed scientific justification for rejecting the Creator and living as they please with regards to abortion, sex, and so on.

Answers in Genesis proclaims that there is only one race of men. Toward the end of his article, Looy writes:

The Bible’s history is crucial to a true understanding of “race.” God’s Word reveals that all humans are descended from Adam and Eve. At the tower of Babel, God separated the rebellious people by both geography and language. The population broke up into sub-groups, and as people married within their own group, certain genetic features (like skin shade and eye shape) became more prominent. Some people groups ended up with light skin and others with dark skin. All people today are actually shades of brown, depending on the amount of melanin, the main pigment, in our skin (and some other minor factors). There are no truly black or white people.

Funny how, no matter how you look at the Scriptural position, it really is about the content of your character and not the color of your skin.

When God is Nonessential

Folks, its not that we haven’t addressed the topic of the complete capitulation of virtually all the churches in this country in the face of the Covid nonsense at times in the past; however, it seems to be getting worse. Clearly those claiming the name of Christ fear microbes more that God. The shepherds of the faithful have chosen to scatter their flocks to the four winds to be thrashed by the Evil One while they hide their lamps under the bushel basket cringing in fear and looking to government for salvation.

I took this photo on my way to work this morning.

Oh, on a side note, California taxpayers, thanks for the full paycheck this month when I have spent less than five hours in the office all month. This is the “new normal” for government employment in case you missed that. Yet another story you won’t know if you only watch cable news.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand. Its one thing when our Governor calls churches nonessential but it’s a whole ‘nother level of stupid when the churches agree with the proposition and call themselves “nonessential” as in the photo above.

The truth is that the offering plate at your local house of worship is really empty these days. Many places of worship—especially in high-cost areas such as here in California—will never recover either the money or the members that they had prior to the Covid collapse. In fact, Jake the Snake said that his parish-which had 1.5 million cash in the bank before Covid-just applied to get a government loan to keep the church’s payroll afloat. This bothered both of us. We talked that such bailouts would come with strings and we wondered aloud if churches would soon lose their tax-exempt status under the Harris/Biden administration.

Folks there’s even worse news for churches than all the above. Last Thursday, I was at the men’s gathering at the local Speak Easy and learned that the men of my congregation are perfectly OK with complying with all the Covid restrictions and see no difference between church on YouTube and worship in person. In fact, they want to hand over more money to Facebook and Twitter to advertise the fact that either way to attend church is equally valid. Oh, when I brought up the historic and biblical model of church being in person and there is no such thing as virtual Sacraments, I was told that watching YouTube services by yourself was not good but if you invoked the “whenever two or three are gathered in my name” that such virtual worship with the family was just fine. (I let it slide that the application of this verse to worship is completely out of context with the passage.) Oh, YouTube is also great because why just watch our service on YouTube when you can watch all them other guys too?

In a congregation that once numbered between 800 and a thousand, three services once a week with a one-hundred-person limit is fine with these guys. In my opinion, its congregational suicide.

Oh, Jake and I also agree that our congregations have buried way more folks than they have either baptized or confirmed since Covid started. The trend line is indisputably in the wrong direction.

Lastly, as I’ve pointed out before, there is a cause-and-effect relationship between closing churches and the rise of socialism in our nation. If your pastor neglects to fill the spiritual vacuum in our society with Christianity, then people will fill it with other stuff to sooth their itching ears. Trust me that there’s much more stuff like that on YouTube than anything with spiritual substance to it. If your church has ceased or restricted in person worship, then your church is part of the problem and not offering solutions.

Markie Ellett’s I Hate Trump Rant on Facebook

Folks, as I have previously stated, Facebook has become a hostile place for Conservatives; especially, of the Christian variety. One refuge from all the turmoil was a group that I belonged to on Facebook. It has tight membership rules and even a list of forbidden topics. The list was designed—in the eyes of the group admins—to foster unity by emphasizing what we agreed on and leave some of our differences at the door.

The general topic of the group is Christian music from the 1960’s and ‘70’s.

Here’s a few choice parts from their document “A MUST_READ For Members”:

02) No personal attacks against members or others will be allowed. Any accusatory or judgmental posturing toward others is forbidden.

09) Additional topics that are not allowed on this list are all subjects revolving around controversial issues which sometimes stir arguments. Experience has shown they can quickly spiral into conversations which are unproductive, judgmental, negative, or destructive. IF IN DOUBT, ERR ON THE SIDE OF MERCY AND REFER TO THE PRIMARY FOCUS OF THIS GROUP

Examples of such topics may include, but are not limited to the following:

a.) Marsha Stevens and her declaration of being Christian and her personal lifestyle

b.) Negativity about Amy Grant’s move to secular music and her divorce

c.) Any arguing over the band U2

d.) Inflammatory discussions on Larry Norman & his family regarding his son and/or film “Fallen Angel”  

e.) Anything that is attacking a political party or celebrity; no political posturing or endorsements allowed

f.) Inflammatory remarks concerning any allegations about Mike Warnke, Ray Boltz, and Jennifer Knapp

While some of the names referenced above may be viewed by our readers as “inside baseball” because you are not familiar with them point e) is rather plain, no politics—attacking or endorsing.

Ok, so who do I go to when the group admin is the one interjecting hate, politics, and quick judgement on members of their group. Please understand that nobody—as far as I can tell-ever violated these terms. As stated elsewhere in the document quoted above, if they did, the admins would delete the post and probably delete the offending member from the group.

Given the above, I was shocked, horrified, and disgusted to read the following from the group’s admin. I am quoting his post in full so I cannot be accused of taking anything out of context. My comments on the post will follow.


I am so saddened to have to say that it has reached a critical point within the group where it is felt that a clear commitment must be made, and publicly stated.

This group is now reviewing members’ profiles and culling from the group any members who support or endorse the hate, cruelty, and demonic injustice promoted by Trumpism.

Trump continues to fan the flames of an evil straight from the pits of Hell. He has easily proven that he desires to be a dictator.

This group has never required a member to profess to be Christian, a subscriber to any particular political ideology, etc… only that they be interested in the Jesus Movement, its history, Jesus Music and its artists from that era.

By welcoming readers of every faith (or no faith at all), it has always been a hope that songs, lyrics, and teachings from the JM era might somehow be used to impact readers and encourage them in a closer walk with Jesus.

Regrettably, experience has displayed to us that most Trump acolytes seem to prefer arguing why their manner of thinking is not evil or unkind at all, rather than earnest consideration of a fellow believer’s exhortations… or confessing to what they have mistakenly allowed themselves to become.

Succinctly… they are most often defiant, and averse to any change. They defend their self-righteousness.

It has been noted, for some time, that Trumpism (and its adherents) seeks to promote only a perversion of the examples and spiritual principles set by our kind, loving Savior Jesus, and His true, sincere disciples.

To be clear: this newly-announced devoir doesn’t apply to those who only may hold conservative views, nor any random degree of right-wing philosophy.

Trumpism is not traditional Republicanism (though, sadly, a substantial amount seem to promote that idea, and embrace it.) Most of us here have lived long enough to sufficiently recognize what the majority of tenets were for the GOP-of-old. To be sure, there was a transitory distinction between the most-popular political ideologies.

Trumpism is something entirely different, though its evil has most certainly taken some sort of root within conservative circles… and, horrifically, sometimes welcomed into certain allegedly “evangelical” realms… or into the arms of some who claim to be servants of Christ.

This cannot possibly be. Trumpism is the demonic antithesis of what Scripture outlines for servants to Jesus. We can only surmise that many of these advocates have sadly lost their way, becoming believers of propaganda designed to dilute clearly-illustrated precepts and doctrine.

We lift them up in fervent prayer. But we are unable to welcome the spread of this insidiousness into our group, even in the indirect way of their membership linking to a personal profile that promotes this evil.

The goal, and intent, of Trumpism is wicked, vile, heinous. It is profane in the eyes of God. It is an abomination… akin to the diabolical attitudes, aims, and actions of Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Hugo Chavez, Putin, Bull Connor, Jim Jones, and David Koresh.

It is an affront to true justice. It is an attack on democracy and equality.

It is simply… evil.

There comes a time, in various moments in history, when one is forced to choose between good and evil. There is no place for convenient fence-sitting. There sometimes arrives at our doorsteps a proposal that we find we must not take in, but spew it out… far away from us.

It has arrived. That time, and place, is now.

To save time and energy, please voluntarily remove yourself from this group if you find you cannot stomach these parameters.

I have turned off commenting for this post. Contact me privately, if you wish, to pursue questions and/or concerns.

I wish for you the peace and love of Jesus.

That has always been a primary aim of this group.

Markie Ellett 01-07-2021 Admin for Facebook Group Jesus Music 1969-‘79

What I thought I was getting with this group was an embodiment of the apostle Paul’s words, “For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.” I Cor 2: 2

Just for background, over the past 20 years, I have periodically been affiliated with the people that run this group and its former website, One-Way.org; although I doubt that they would remember me. Last time I checked, One-way was still live on the internet but it is not what it once was. At one time, One-Way kept up to date email and/or web locations of the various artists that it followed. It also used to allow downloads of various LP’s and maybe a few CD’s too—all were out of print. Their purpose was promotion of the music, not profit. (the downloads were free.) Anyway, I stumbled across their group on Facebook many years ago and they graciously agreed to let me join.

I know that politically, I would not agree with the views that some music artists believe which are the focus of this group. However, I thought that as long as we could agree on the core principles of the faith, that there was a basis for fellowship. I know that many people that that the group follows are liberal or lean that way but are none-the-less staunchly prolife (I’m thinking here of Phil Keaggy and Randy Stonehill). I like Barry McGuire—yep, the Eve of Destruction guy—but I’m sure we have differences on some secondary issues like politics. I’ve even seen Noel Paul Stookey—yep of Peter, Paul, and Mary fame—in concert before. I have never dissed any of these guys or cared too much about where or why I think they are wrong; I figure that’s God’s job not mine to play Holy Spirit.

But in the post above, I’m the villain because I support President Trump? Go figure. What happened to keeping politics out? What happened to prohibiting “Anything that is attacking a political party or celebrity; no political posturing or endorsements allowed”? What happened to “No personal attacks against members or others will be allowed. Any accusatory or judgmental posturing toward others is forbidden.

But oh, no. We are going to have a witch hunt—less a trial—and eliminate the corrupt infidels from our midst.

This group is now reviewing members’ profiles and culling from the group any members who support or endorse the hate, cruelty, and demonic injustice promoted by Trumpism.

Isn’t this the evil that Liberals always proclaim as McCarthy tactics—except there really were Communist infiltrators in the 1950’s.Now that the Communists are in office we just give them a pass. AOC was calling for something eerily similar to McCarthy hearings just today.

Trump is evil and demonic. OK, let’s look at this.

Trump promotes religious liberty, freedom, and life. Whereas the Obama/Biden crowd wants to kill the unborn thru all nine months of pregnancy, without parental involvement, or providing women with the information to make an informed decision. Oh, and they want to use the power of the sword to extract tax money from you and me to pay for it.

Trump believes in marriage—even if he has trouble staying married. He’s not using the sword of government to force a new definition of marriage onto people and threatening individuals, churches, and schools with punishment for daring to disagree because they believe the Bible—that marriage is between a man and a woman—and not the vain rants of raging humanists. Yep, Trump is really a spawn of hell for that.

Trump opposes the false religion of environmentalism and its globalist policies of expanded government and tyranny.

Trump continues to fan the flames of an evil straight from the pits of Hell.

OK, and all them other guys are saints? Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

This next paragraph is a doozy.

Regrettably, experience has displayed to us that most Trump acolytes seem to prefer arguing why their manner of thinking is not evil or unkind at all, rather than earnest consideration of a fellow believer’s exhortations

Please note, Scripture is not the standard to measure men, it’s the author claiming the right to judge men by his judgement. He clearly is in the camp that want to argue feelings (isn’t there a verse about the heart being wicked and deceitful) and not facts.

Markie, what in God’s name are you talking about?

Trump never advocated violence and he is not a dictator. Dude you are watching too much MSNBC or similar crap. Lower your blood pressure, cut the cable.

Another criticism that I have of this screed is that it can be argued that the author is using a classic logical fallacy of the strawman argument. He has erected something, a construct of his own imagination, and then proceeds to dismantle it. Trumpism is a made-up, make believe word. Also, one that he never defines. Apparently like the classic line about pornography, the author feels that I’ll know it when I see it.

Trumpism is something entirely different, though its evil has most certainly taken some sort of root within conservative circles… and, horrifically, sometimes welcomed into certain allegedly “evangelical” realms… or into the arms of some who claim to be servants of Christ.

Folks, now the author claims to know who is saved and who is damned. Again, I thought that was God’s turf, but why leave it to him when you can play Holy Spirit. Oh, and if you disagree with him then poof, he just deletes you from his little group.

This cannot possibly be. Trumpism is the demonic antithesis of what Scripture outlines for servants to Jesus. We can only surmise that many of these advocates have sadly lost their way, becoming believers of propaganda designed to dilute clearly-illustrated precepts and doctrine.

To some degree, Trump supports Biblical values, Biden et al. categorically opposes them. Markie, think of the last election this way, it was a choice between American values (Trump) and San Francisco values (Biden). Trump is not my pastor nor my savior. I think he is best compared to Constantine—a friend of believers but maybe not one of us.

The goal, and intent, of Trumpism is wicked, vile, heinous. It is profane in the eyes of God. It is an abomination… akin to the diabolical attitudes, aims, and actions of Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Hugo Chavez, Putin, Bull Connor, Jim Jones, and David Koresh.

OK, Trump believes in liberty, protecting the unborn, and opposes socialism. But somehow Trump is lumped in with a bunch of socialists and heretics? Whiskey Tango?

Don’t believe me? The political leaders in your list, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Hugo Chavez, were all socialists. They just differed as to the means of production and whether they were international socialists or national socialists. Bull Connor was a Democrat. Per Wikipedia, Jim Jones “was a voracious reader who studied Joseph Stalin, Karl Marx, Mao Zedong, Mahatma Gandhi, and Adolf Hitler.” David Koresh (I’m giving Koresh the benefit of doubt) is just a heretic. Markie’s claims about Trump fall flat. The views and beliefs of these men are in opposition to what Trump stands for or believes. Yet another logical fallacy put forth by the author. Again, no truth in the comparison.

There are some liberal buzz words that jump out at me as I read this. See if you agree.

…the hate, cruelty, and demonic injustice

… affront to true justice. It is an attack on democracy and equality.

These words are defined one way in the dictionary—at least the print copy that I own—and yet they seem to be defined differently by the author. To me “the hate cruelty, and demonic injustice” is the way Donald Trump has been treated since he announced his candidacy. The attacks “on democracy and equality” are again the attacks from the media, Big Tech, and the Democrats. In their apparent context, these are all buzzword of the Left.

Donald Trump is not perfect and doesn’t always do what I want, but he stands head and shoulders above the rest of the swamp rats inside the Beltway. He has done more for Christianity, religious liberty, and the unborn than any other living President.

Frankly, both the Democrats and Republicans squandered opportunities to get many things accomplished which would have benefitted and unified the country. In the end, Washington proved that politicians would rather have the issue to fundraise and campaign on than actually fix anything. That is the real takeaway from the Trump Presidency. Mr. Smith goes to Washington has been proven to be a myth as has the old axiom that anybody can be President.

Meanwhile, with two weeks left in the Trump administration, Markie decides its time to come gunning after his fellow believers.

There comes a time, in various moments in history, when one is forced to choose between good and evil. There is no place for convenient fence-sitting. There sometimes arrives at our doorsteps a proposal that we find we must not take in, but spew it out… far away from us.

It has arrived. That time, and place, is now.

Seems to me the time to oppose evil was when Biden was a candidate not after he and his supporters stole the election. Markie, hell and judgement are not coming, they are here now, and the church is about to be battered on the rocks in ways we’ve never seen in this country before. If your church was willing to shut down for Covid, then what makes you think your congregation has the spine to withstand the persecution that is coming? The idea that you are wanting to take a stand now is ridiculous. That ship sailed long ago, and you apparently never noticed. Like him or not, Donald Trump was your last, best hope.

To save time and energy, please voluntarily remove yourself from this group if you find you cannot stomach these parameters.

OK so which is it? Are you really coming to cull me from your Facebook group, or should I just decide you’re an irredeemable idiot and leave on my own?

Oh, lastly, after violating your membership rules by interjecting politics, attacking members personal beliefs, and judgmental posturing you wish me the peace and love of Jesus? You mean like all the love you just displayed to me and the 75 million Americans that proudly voted for Donald J Trump?

You remind me of the line from the Keith Green song,

‘Cause He brings people to you door
And you turn them away
As you smile and say
“God bless you, be at peace”

You are turning your brothers and sisters away because you lack the ability to love them as Jesus does and then say its our fault. That’s really rich. Why? When I’m charitable with you, is that just expected, but you don’t have to reciprocate?

Given the Facebook hostility to my beliefs as a Conservative and a Christian, there was only two reasons for me to stay on Facebook, one was your group and the other is my Navy veterans group. Guess I’ll be cancelling that Facebook account soon.

The Pope Wants Homosexuals in the Church

The editorial board was meeting at an undisclosed location when an urgent communication came across the live feed. The Pope of the Roman Catholic Church AKA the world’s richest man, aka social justice warrior, aka #notmypope decided same sex folks in a union (I guess we are still fighting the civil war) would be allowed in the church. Wait for it…. Wait for it……ok we wound him up, that’s Jake the Snake’s music …..time to turn him loose.

Pope Bergoglio

Seriously what Bible does this clown read from….I would say the Gospel of Marx AKA the heretic’s Bible! Literally, this social justice warrior wannabe feels the need to channel his inner Aaron Park spewing his stink all over everyone. Seriously I listened to this “pope” Francis AKA Bergoglio talk about needing to grow the church and that we are all God’s children……..ummm ok. I haven’t seen a constant flow of sewage like this since I drank the water in Mexico.

Maybe “Pope” Bergoglio should visit one of his churches, literally in the vestibule (for all you heathens, that’s the common area when you walk in the front door of the church) there are a couple brochures saying and I quote “Homosexuality is a mortal sin” which means you will not be granted eternal life in heaven. Yet this jackhole says all are welcome? HUH? It’s a mortal sin, but that’s ok?

Perhaps we should discuss the Pope’s handling of a local priest in this area, Fr Jeremy Leatherby. For many decades, the Leatherby family has donated both time and treasure to support the Catholic Church, as well as Prop 8, banning gay “marriage” in this state. Their “family business” something you will know nothing about running by the way, was vandalized in the midst of standing with the Church and its teaching, not a word from you or any of your ilk. Where were you when I heard several sermons about needing to vote for Prop 8 for the sanctity of marriage? And you pay back Fr Leatherby by having Bishop Jaime Soto defrock him? Well thank God we now know what it takes to get a member of clergy defrocked, have sex with a young child is ok, dare step out and not recognize the Pope’s authority for making socialist proclamations in the Name of Christ…..and he’s gone!

In closing, if you get a chance to get up close to this very reclusive Pope maybe ask him; why do you go against God’s teachings about homosexuality? Why do you discuss climate change when it is conveniently not found in any Bible I have read? Are you actually really Catholic? When did you become so out of touch with the Catholic Faith? Does your okaying of homosexuality release the priests who committed this alleged “moral sin” or is that why you have stopped the investigation child sexual abuse every step of the way? Sorry “Pope” but this won’t absolve the sins of those you have covered up for.

Pope Bergoglio you are a jerk! You tell us common folk to do your bidding, in regard to charity, giving, tithing and more, yet you won’t even police your own flock. You are the worst kind of person. Keep focusing on homosexuality you bozo, whilst ignoring the fastest growing segments of Catholicism are; Blacks, Hispanics, and Filipinos. And not to educate you, but those groups are among the most hostile to homosexual “marriage.” So, what is next, abortion is ok, only if you didn’t mean to get pregnant?

Pope Benedict

Maybe do us all a favor, speak to Pope Benedict and ask him, maybe if these are ok? Actually, never mind. Screw it, keep peddling your half truths about poverty, climate change, and homosexual marriage. Too bad you don’t have any time to proclaim the Gospel, I think the world needs that a lot more than another idiot with a collar extolling the virtues of Karl Marx. Even the Pope can’t sever two masters.

Jake the Snake

Editor’s Note: For those doubting Jake’s position on this topic, I wanted to bring up the following passage which states that some in Corinth were homosexual until they believed. Paul makes it clear that you can’t be a believer and an cling to your sin.

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, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you,
1 Corinthians 6: 9-11a