activist
noun

1. one who is politically active in the role of a citizen; especially, one who campaigns for change

“One who takes an active part, usually as a volunteer, in a political party or interest group. Because activism is costly, activists are unusual people. Either they enjoy political activity for its own sake, or they have off-median views which give them an incentive to pull the party or interest group towards the position they favour, rather than the position it would take to maximize its vote or influence.

source:  Political Dictionary: “activist”

DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A CHRISTIAN?  An active Christian?

“If you were accused of being a Christian, would there be enough evidence to convict you?”

CHRISTIANS ARE SOCIAL (THE KINGDOM OF GOD) AND POLITICAL (JESUS IS LORD) ACTIVISTS BY DEFINITION.

If you are neither, then maybe … (insert quiet reflection here)

If you, rather, are an unusual person seeking change, one who the ruling elite dubs dangerous, or idiosyncratic, or a misfit, or even evil, well then, you might just fit this bill of fare:

But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.  Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul;  Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.

I Peter 2 (KJV)

(Written to a generation accused of treason against the gods and empire due to their refusal to “go with the flow.”)

This is mere foreshadowing, stay tuned for follow-up …

Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius is about as close to excommunicated as any Catholic politician can be.   (Like Speaker Pelosi in almost every way) 

I (Bryan) was working for Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline and was asked to help set up a meeting with him and Kansas City-Topeka Bishop Joseph Naumann, a fine and courageous Church leader.

One of the Bishop’s right hand fellas was an old friend who has since gone to his great reward (RIP).  He told me that Bishop Naumann had spoken to Governor Sebelius in the most direct fashion about her Faith and the threat her allegiance to George Tiller represented to her standing as a Catholic.

That was six years ago.  She had aborted her faith for years then.

She just aborted it once again.

Here is a recent news report on that dialogue, which has followed Kathleen to DC.

and more here

As regular readers know, Sebelius is up for a cabinet level post in the Obama Administration — overseeing our nation’s health care delivery system.  With “socialized medicine” on the bill of fare and all that entails, including the relationship  between Catholic hospitals and the federal government, one would think that Obama would reign in Sebelius while confirmation is pending.

Evidently not.  Which is scary in and of itself.  Is it a message to the Church?  Sounds that way to me .

The “Queen of Kansas” just vetoed some very good legislation that Bishop Naumann was supporting.

Here is the link to that story in the Kansas media:  http://cjonline.com/at_home/2009-04-23/sebelius_vetoes_abortion_bill

What now, good Bishop?

What now, statesmen in Congress?

What now, Senators Sam Brownback and Pat Roberts of Kansas?  (Both have played politics and supported Sebelius for this very powerful post, from which she could force abortion on hospitals and med interns.)

We live in interesting times, that much is certain.

We have repeatedly documented our brand new President’s fascination with hard core culture warriors of the leftist variety. To quote a beloved president of days gone by, “there he goes again.”

This time it is a Hoosier leftist that President Obama is pushing forward. Two of them, actually. One for the judiciary and one for the legal arm of the Executive Branch. (Click to read articles on each)

We will report further on the judiciary at a later date. We had already reported on the Hoosier up for a West Wing job at this post.

As we previously opined, President Obama’s cabinet need not have a positive record on paying taxes, but sure must have a strong record of advocating for leftist causes.

Click here and here for more proof of the above. (Sebelius and Ogden, among many — make that most — others.)

Saint Michael the ArchAngel, defend us in battle. For battle is surely on the way, of the most Saul Alinsky kind. (Click here for more on that topic.

And then here for even more.

Read ‘em and pray. Culture war is coming.  Nigh, it is upon us.

David Souter was the ultimate in bait and switch Supreme Court justices.  George Bush the Elder put him on the High Court with the help of powerful NE influences, including Warren Rudman and John Sununu.  Traditionalists were assured he would be more conservative than he turned out to be.

We were betrayed, and now we have been betrayed again.

Without Souter on the High Court — If Bush the elder had instead put on someone of the caliber of Sam Alito, for example, things would have been much different for our nation.

Here is some interesting background from this source:

Governor John Sununu promoted Souter to the New Hampshire Supreme Court in 1983. Souter quickly established himself as a knowledgeable jurist and an independent thinker. President Bush appointed Souter to the U.S. Court of Appeals in 1990. Justice William J. Brennan retired five months later, however, and Bush decided to move Souter up again. Although Sununu and Rudman denied involvement in Souter’s nomination, Souter’s friendship with both no doubt helped his cause. The ever-unassuming Souter had to be reassured by Rudman that, in light of all the qualified candidates available, an interview with Bush was really necessary. Souter’s nomination passed nearly unopposed through the Senate.

Souter’s first year on the Court was undistinguished. He wrote few opinions and did not display many hints of his judicial predisposition. Since then, he has appeared more comfortable on the Court. He has settled into the moderate camp of the Court as evidenced by his unprecedented 24 similar votes with the centrist Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. Together with O’Connor and Kennedy, Souter has formed a moderate bloc in the Court that prevents domination from the conservative wing.

Souter has maintained his simple, bachelor lifestyle. He brings his own lunch, consisting of apples and yogurt, to work everyday and lives in an undecorated apartment. He still returns home to Weare during the summer breaks where he climbs the local mountains and visits his mother.

Now he leaves us, off to spend his retirement climbing mountains with mom, no doubt. Guess it just did not make sense to him in 2006 or 2008 or any other pre-Obama age.

Nice payback, David. We were betrayed, and now have been  betrayed once again.

Look for Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and John Paul Stevens (assuming he is not a ghoul who can ride out another century on the High Court) to follow suit in 2009 so that President Barack Obama is granted the rare opportunity to remake the United States Supreme Court in his own image and likeness well ahead of the fall 2010 elections.

Change America?  You voted for change?  How about Susan Estrich and Hillary Clinton and Janet Napolitano for the High Court?

Moving from the Postmodernist court to the Imperial Senate, note that Senator Arlen Specter surprised no one and finally switched rather than fight on as one of the most liberal Republicans in the Senate.  Aren’t we all glad that term limits never passed so that serial insiders like Specter can haunt us for our entire lives?

Thank the Bush family for that one as well.  They worked hard to keep Specter in the Senate, giving him the rope to hang what was left of any resistance to Emporer Obama.

We were betrayed at the time Senator Specter was re-elected, and now we have been betrayed once again.

With the Senate fully in Emporer Obama’s hands he does not need to worry over pro-lifers whining about the justices he is planning to force on America for the next 30 years or so.

Don’t get me wrong, they will still whine.  Fine fundraising letters will fly off the presses.  But those letters will merely allow a failed leadership to retire in some relative comfort.  The Right’s forward momentum in the political realm has ground to a halt until the 2010 elections -  assuming those are held.

As an attonrey once said to me in a similar (albeit less dire) situation: ”You are going to have to learn to negotiate from a position of weakness.”

This sure is looking like checkmate for the pro-life forces as they have been defined since the 1970’s. Click here for thoughts on a necessary new direction and here for the only known antidote to leftist power plays.

Thanks to the GOP and Bush family for leading us into this box canyon.

We have been betrayed too often in the past, let us agree that we will NOT make it easy to betray us ever again.

Oh, and may the Lord’s Will be done through the coming maelstrom.

 Bryan J. Brown reporting from Topeka, Kansas ….

I attended the Topeka tea party last night along with about 1500 fine Americans.  Thousands gathered elsewhere in Kansas at the same time. 

CNN, NBC and the main stream media wishes to dismiss this “movement” as nothing more than a tempest in a  teapot,  an amen chorus of the Christian Right that will soon fall silent.

That is not what I observed last night.   I know most of the “usual suspects” among the Kansas Christian Right.  They were not running the show in Topeka last night.  From what I gather few, if any, of the Tea Parties were the creation of the usual suspects among the Christian Right.

This is new wine in new wineskins.

How refreshing!!!

I witnessed long hair bikers protesting Big Brother’s policies.  One biker carried a sign that read “Trillions of debt = checkmate” while holding a little dog  with a sign around his neck that barked out “taxed to the bone.” 

I witnesses Ron Paul libertarians, I witnessed those protesting taxes, protesting the disarmament of the citizenry, protesting corporate political puppets, protesting runaway debt, and protesting the expulsion of God from the public sphere by the shock troops of the political correctness movement.

But most of all those present seemed to share in a collective angst about where our nation is now being taken by the radical leftists manning Ship Obama. 

The Topeka rally was heavy, too heavy, with elected officials.  It was more a political rally than anything else, although it did include a fair amount of calling upon the Name of the Lord.  (It is Kansas, after all.)   I hear that a tea party in Missouri disallowed any elected official from speaking.  While that might be an overreaction, it does strike me as better than allowing a bunch of “me too” johhny-come-lately GOPpers to get more mic time than they deserve.  Much more — for the GOP sold out as to constitutional principles long, long ago.

Any elected officials who have not already shown themselves to be statesmen or stateswomen should stand in the crowd, not at the podium.  Having failed to lead, they should follow or get out of the way.

Senator Sam Brownback batted last at the Topeka rally.  I heard more than a few grumblings from the crowd due to Sam’s failure to firmly oppose Governor Kathleen Sebelius’ nomination to President Obama’s cabinet. 

Sam used a few of his minutes on stage to introduce and yield to a local celebrity.  Kerry Livgren, former front man for the rock band Kansas, was with us.  Kerry’s most famous work is Dust in the Wind.  Kerry committed his life to Christ a few years after releasing that nihilistic anthem (click here for more on Kerry).

Kerry noted that he was never one to “protest” but came to the tea party because he has a son in the armed forces and grave concerns about the future of our nation.  He voiced his dissent.  Dissent in the wind.  Dissent that now makes him suspect according to the head of the federal Department of Homeland Security.   

Livgren said that he represented many other Americans, formerly silent majority Americans, who were now concerned enough about about the future of the nation to stand up and call the wayward sons back to the ancient foundations.  (Or something like that.)

It is all just a tempest in a teapot?  Or does the Office of Homeland Security really have a growing problem to monitor and, if the political will exists, crush?

Only time will tell.  A important Hoosier window opens at 12 noon on Saturday, April 18.

The question lingering at this time is what will become of this rare grassroots “uprising”?  Will leadership emerge to keep the flames of dissent burning?  Will these Tea Parties kick off something that will crest into massive outpourings of American dissent over the long, hot summer ahead?

Like the long hot summer of 1989 — twenty years ago?

Those reading this blog within driving distance of Fort Wayne have two opportunities to show the main stream media and Big Brother lovers that this is a viable movement with potential staying power.

Opportunity number one is Fort Wayne’s own belated tea party!  It will take place in downtown Fort Wayne, at the old county courthouse, this Saturday, April 18, at noon.  Alan Keyes will speak, which should challenge some stereotypes about the tea party movement.

Why not send this link to all of your friends withing driving distance of the Fort, asking them to join you at Fort Wayne’s tea party this Saturday?  CNN, NBC and the Department of Homeland Security wants you to stay home and dissent in private, if you must dissent at all.

The Instititue urges you to rather give public voice to your grave concerns, much like Kerry Livgren.  Much like the constitution protects — from the likes of departments of homeland (or Fatherland) security.

The second opportunity is coming on Saturday, April 25.  Letters have gone out inviting friends of the Institute to a very special meeting on that day.  If you did not get the letter but want to attend the annual briefing on the progress of the Institute (with some exciting announcments) then come to 827 Webster Street at 2:30 p.m. on Saturday, April 25 to be invited to this by-invitation-only meeting.

At the risk of stealing thunder, the ArchAngel Institute was throwing tea overboard well before the Tea Parties started.  Read this two year old post for the long version of the Institute’s very reason to exist and note it is grounded in the throught of our Fathers — Church and state.

Here are a few more posts demonstrating the ArchAngel Institute’s zeal for this new direction among America’s patriots.

http://www.archangelinstitute.org/honoring-alexander-solzhenitsyn-post-5/  (Academic bias)http://www.archangelinstitute.org/honoring-alexander-solzhenitsyn-post-9/  (Media bias)

http://www.archangelinstitute.org/the-church-and-the-right-to-resist/  (taking the stand)

http://www.archangelinstitute.org/a-congressman-from-texas-on-the-question-at-hand/  (Ron Paul)

http://www.archangelinstitute.org/executive-directors-post-july-4th-post-4/  (Francis Schaeffer)

We welcome the dissent that is now blowing in the wind.   If it can be fanned into a Jesus-first, family-second and nation-third Second American Revolution then we just might save our nation from dissolution into a Big Brother-first (and second, and third) superstate. 

All along the watchtower the hour is late.   It it time to call forth minute men and women for Jesus.

The ArchAngel Institute is mustered and ready. 

Join us!!!

p.s.  Here is a proper introduction to the Institute for first time visitors and Homeland Security kommissars.

This post is another re-run preparing the reader for the recent front page story about the judge who ordered that Baby Doe not be saved from a death by dehydration.   I (Bryan) wrote a paper on this case while studying sociology at Indiana University, and have long considered it a watershed in Indiana law, and more so, social reality. 

I will soon present the recent story on the powerful Indiana judge at the center of this quater century old controversy and his recent statements on the case in the media.

But first more background is in order . . .

One of the ongoing discussions among those marching to decry the dehydration of Baby Doe was this question: “Would it be “wrong” to enter the hospital and take Baby Doe to a safe place where he could be given water, food and the simple operation needed to allow him to eat?”

This is a philosophical question dealing with the nature of human laws.

It would have been illegal. Kidnapping at a minimum. Just to enter the hospital after being told that protesters must keep their distance would have been trespass.

We neither trespassed nor “napped” the kid marked for state-approved dehydration.

We marched, we sang, we chanted, we protested.

He died.

But the discussion he started proved much more viable than his young body. Similar to John Brown of old, Baby Doe’s body laid “a moulderin’ in the grave” but his soul fired up a discussion that continued for many years to come.

Would it have been wrong to have broken the law to save Baby Doe from his painful, cruel and unusual fate?

If you say “Yes, it would have been morally wrong to break the law” then you might have elevated man’s law to divine status. If you say “thou shalt never break man’s law” then you are, knowingly or not, a legal positivist.

If you say “no, it would not have been wrong under the right circumstances,” if you believe that it would have been morally acceptable behaviour to kidnap that baby to save his life if it could be done in an orderly fashion, if you believe that it can be right to break man’s law to achieve a higher purpose than the law serves, then you are struggling with issues that may render you unfit to be a licensed professional in the State of Indiana. You are struggling with issues that caused the ancient Romans to hunt down and kill the early Christians. You are struggling with a Higher Laws paradigm, which all tyrants hate — for such teachings hold that the tyrant’s law is not the highest law.

So if you are such a person please consider, as an agent working for the government recently advised me, being “ever-so-careful” about how you are perceived.  You may make a career choice if you take the claims of the Christian faith too seriously.

It happened to our Russian cousins all the time when they lived under communism.

Back to Baby Doe:

It is doubtful that anyone who had acted to save Baby Doe would have ended up doing much time, but they would have been marked as an extremist for the rest of their natural life. Countless doors would have been slammed in their face for good.

Baby Doe, on the other hand, would have celebrated his 26th birthday this last Spring.

Would the “crime” have been worth “the time?”

Maybe we should ask “Brian,” the Down’s Syndrome “sufferer” pictured on the right?

More on this subject in the next post.

postscript:

Legal positivism is a conceptual theory emphasizing the conventional nature of law. … As an historical matter, positivism arose in opposition to classical natural law theory, according to which there are necessary moral constraints on the content of law. The word “positivism” was probably first used to draw attention to the idea that law is “positive” or “posited,” as opposed to being “natural” in the sense of being derived from natural law or morality.

http://www.iep.utm.edu/l/legalpos.htm

The Internet is buzzing with news from Catholic University of America, where Cardinal James Stafford today called President-elect Barack Obama “aggressive, disruptive and apocalyptic,“ and said he campaigned on an “extremist anti-life platform.”

“Because man is a sacred element of secular life,” Stafford remarked, “man should not be held to a supreme power of state, and a person’s life cannot ultimately be controlled by government.”

“For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden,” Stafford said, comparing America’s future with Obama as president to Jesus’ agony in the garden. “On November 4, 2008, America suffered a cultural earthquake.”

Cardinal Stafford said Catholics must deal with the “hot, angry tears of betrayal” by beginning a new sentiment where one is “with Jesus, sick because of love.”

***

Stafford also spoke about the decline of a respect for human life and the need for Catholics to return to the original values of marriage and human dignity.

“If 1968 was the year of America’s ‘suicide attempt,’ 2008 is the year of America’s exhaustion,” said Stafford, an American Cardinal and Major Penitentiary of the Apostolic Penitentiary for the Tribunal of the Holy See. “In the intervening 40 years since Humanae Vitae, the United States has been thrown upon ruins.”

This destruction and America’s decline is largely in part due to the Supreme Court’s decisions in the life-issue cases of 1973, specifically Roe v. Wade. Stafford asserted these cases undermined respect for human life in the United States.

“Its scrupulous meanness has had catastrophic effects upon the unity and integrity of the American republic,” said Stafford.

Humanae Vitae (“On Human Life”) reaffirms traditional Catholic teachings regarding abortion, contraception and other human life issues. Pope Benedict XVI said in May it is “so controversial, yet so crucial for humanity’s future…What was true yesterday is true also today.”

For all of the above article (in green) hit this hyperlink.

The good Cardinal sounds much like this great dissident (hit this link for the transfer to our series on a great Russian dissident) Here is another installment from that series. Click on great dissidents at the right and scroll down to read all fourteen installments on Alexander Solzhenitsyn — a truly prophetic voice. Like Cardinal Stafford!

Thank you, Jesus!

When the State assumes military powers inside its own borders it is called martial law.

When that State is apostate that martial law can quickly become a persecution of the Christian church.

Click here for a possible foreshadowing. (parental warning: links to profane language in comment section)

Click here for a more nuanced explanation of this seeming call for an internal military force. (It could be that Senator Obama did not intend to sound like a German Chancellor from the 1930’s.)

Even if the above example is not a good one, it remains true that when the Church refuses to obey its Lord, and instead chooses to obey Mammon, then the goose stepping soldiers are at the door.

Some have said, “Its the Economy, Stupid.”

Wrong!

Its the Culture, Pilgrims.

And if the culture goes bad, well then ….

Matthew 5:13

13 “You are the salt of the earth; but if salt has lost its taste, how can its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything, but is thrown out and trampled under foot.

Wise words from one of the Founders of our Republic seem most appropriate in this dire hour …

All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.
Thomas Jefferson

I own that I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.

Thomas Jefferson

My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
Thomas Jefferson

A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.

Thomas Jefferson

Our country is now taking so steady a course as to show by what road it will pass to destruction, to wit: by consolidation of power first, and then corruption, its necessary consequence.
Thomas Jefferson

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.

Thomas Jefferson
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
Thomas Jefferson

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson

Kevin Leininger’s recent article on statewide efforts to protect women from the abortion industry was quite welcome news. Kudos to Cathie (pictured standing) and to others who are working to ensure that abortionists must have the ability to admit their wounded patients to local hospitals.

Click here to read that article.

Such common sense changes in the law are clearly intended to protect women from life threatening damage already happening. Everyone should support such a public health advancing law. Anyone who will not support such a law is pushing ideology far ahead of human life — a common happening among those dedicated to the Culture of Death, be it Stalin, Margaret Sanger or her spawn, Planned Parenthood.

This post was authored from a former abortion clinic. A former clinic that was found in an abysmal state of disrepair after the abortion industry moved out. It certainly appeared to have been operated in such a condition. Leaks in the roof, no functional heating system, “procedure room” sinks that were anything but sanitary in design (they were actually residential type sinks, circa 1970), windows far from airtight, filthy floors, filthy air ducts, filthy walls and filthy ceilings.

Many noted that they would not want a vet “fixing” cats in such an environment.

It is no wonder that women left this place sick from their invasive surgery. Indeed, we know of at least one who left here to die. It is likely that at least one of the women that Dr. Cly aided (as in helped overcome an unsanitary abortion) had her abortion right here at 827 Webster street.

Here are some past stories by the Institute that compliment the Kevin Leinacher’s recent news:

Dr. Cly’s testimony: Click here and click here

Background on 827 Webster Street: click here

Background on why the former residents left the building: click here

Now, there is someone who should have been featured in the Leininger story who escaped mention.

Someone just as responsible as Ulrich Klopfer for the wounding of women at 827 Webster Street.

Someone who claims to advance women’s rights, but who has instead made millions of dollars putting women at grave risk.

That someone exited stage left (at least in Fort Wayne) a few years ago and so was not named in Leininger’s article.

That oversite will be remedied on this website tomorrow.

So far we have discussed Refusal and Resistance in a Christian, Natural law framework. If you thought that was too controversial then you should probably skip this post and come back later this week when I change channels and start talking about Indiana’s idea of a good education.

Civil disobedience arises out of a Higher Law framework of political theory. That same framework that starts with a right to refuse does not end with the right to resist. It goes all the way.

Pagans just cannot get it, just did not get it historically. Man’s law was to be brutally enforced, no “civil disobedience” allowed. As one of paganism’s best leaders said,

If you must break the law, do it to seize power: in all other cases observe it.
Julius Caesar

Sounds much like Samuel Johnson’s quip, later embellished upon by Bob Dylan , that goes like this:

“They say that patriotism is the last refuge to which a scoundrel clings; Steal a little and they throw you in jail; Steal a lot and they make you king.”
- Bob Dylan (from “Infidels” album, the cut “Sweetheart like you.”)

Christian jurisprudence believes that good government can exist, and holds government to high standards for that very reason. We acknowledge Dylan’s cynicism, but believe that imperfect men can govern ethically through the Light of Reason and Revelation.

But what happens when good government goes bad. Very bad. As in rejects the Truth and advances many lies.

Here are the ancient and accepted steps that the Christian Church has developed for addressing such apostacy among those who rule over us:

401. The Church’s social doctrine indicates the criteria for exercising the right to resistance: “Armed resistance to oppression by political authority is not legitimate, unless all the following conditions are met: 1) there is certain, grave and prolonged violation of fundamental rights, 2) all other means of redress have been exhausted, 3) such resistance will not provoke worse disorders, 4) there is well-founded hope of success; and 5) it is impossible reasonably to foresee any better solution”.[824] Recourse to arms is seen as an extreme remedy for putting an end to a “manifest, long-standing tyranny which would do great damage to fundamental personal rights and dangerous harm to the common good of the country”.[825] The gravity of the danger that recourse to violence entails today makes it preferable in any case that passive resistance be practised, which is “a way more conformable to moral principles and having no less prospects for success”.[826]

*** End of citation to the Compendium.

Some will find this ironic: The above quote was published by the PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE. It would appear that the Vatican supports your right to bear arms, at least under certain circumstances.

If you find the idea of justice and peace difficult to reconcile with armed resistance and the overthrow of oppressive regimes then may the Institute suggest that it could be that you lack a sense of history. America’s Founders had no problem with it. They sought peace and justice through rebellion, after having listed their grievances in a document, the Declaration of Independence, that passes review under the framework set forth above.

It is interesting to ponder whether the British Monarchy’s break with Rome under King Henry VIII tracked with the above teaching. That set off such a firestorm of controversy and convulsions that shook Christendom to its very core. Did the initial break follow or reject longstanding Christian teaching?

Not all rebellion is Godly rebellion. But there is such a thing as Godly rebellion. See II Kings 9 as but one fine example.

If the eschatology most common in the Church is correct then the Church ends up in a situation in which all of the above criteria will be met.

In that case Godly rebellion should be discussed and studied, even if quite controversial.

We serve a Risen King. Let the governments of Earth take notice. See Psalm 2.