Michael Peroutka’s Press Conference

peroutka-1

In my speech on “Southern Nationalism and the Media” at the 2014 League of the South national conference, I mentioned how most of the publicity the League had received between the 2012 and 2013 national conferences was due to the mainstream media “playing the associations game” with Michael Peroutka, a former League board member and Maryland attorney who was the Constitution Party’s candidate for president in 2004.

By the time of the 2014 national conference on June 27-28, Peroutka had won a close race for the Republican nomination for a seat on the Anne Arundel County Council, and the Maryland media was starting to publicize his “links” to the League of the South. In July, the national leftwing media picked up the story and the League received an enormous amount of publicity from it.

Just the other day, Michael Peroutka responded to the “controversy” by holding a press conference in which he refused to denounce the League of the South:

”Supporters of the League of the South can debate all they want whether their organization is truly a neo-Confederate hate group, as the Southern Poverty Law Center has classified them, but it would be much harder to argue that it isn’t an oddball extremist group with some hair-raising ideas. That they support Southern secession and rally behind all things Confederate pretty much defines the Alabama-based league.

These are not just some folks who spend their free hours dressing up in Civil War garb, whistling “Dixie” and recalling the good old days. No, they genuinely want to make the South independent and by their own admission “seek to protect the Anglo-Celtic core population and culture of the historic South.” The rest of the nation they see as mostly corrupt and insufficiently Christian. …”

So far, so good … we genuinely do want to make the South independent, and we genuinely do want to “protect the Anglo-Celtic core population and culture of the historic South,” and so much the better that The Baltimore Sun and The Capital Gazette are shouting it from every rooftop in Maryland. We want to attract the attention of people who sympathize with our views.

Flanked by two of his black supporters, Michael Peroutka fell into the trap of trying to “prove” he is not a “racist” to the media:

“At a press conference, flanked by two African-American supporters, Peroutka denied claims he’s racist.

“But I am an anti-racist. I have spoken publicly against racism. I’ve gone out of my way to repudiate racism, and If there are any racists in the League of the South, I repudiate them and I pray for them.” …

Adam Weinstein of Gawker had the most insightful comment on this whole controversy:

“Well, Peroutka’s kind of a missing link between Hill’s Dixie-loving sesesh and the Tea Party’s most insecure theocratic wing – the folks who, in lieu of expensive pearls, clutch pocket Constitutions every time they see someone to the left of Pat Buchanan on FOX News.”

Yes, it’s true that Michael Peroutka is a member of the League of the South, but he has been doing his own thing for years now. Last year, Warren Throckmorton drew attention to the fact that Peroutka’s Institute on the Constitution had made a video about Martin Luther King, Jr. and contrasted it with positions on the Civil Rights Movement taken in articles by Dr. Michael Hill on the League’s website.

Warren Throckmorton has drawn attention to all kinds of things that Michael Peroutka has done that have nothing to do with the League:

Peroutka also said in a recent press release:

“In both private and public policy, we must remember that God created only one race — the human race,” the campaign said in statement Friday. “Therefore, all elevation or denigration of individuals or groups based on skin color is immoral and shameful because it violates the Law of Nature and Nature’s God.”

The language Peroutka uses here is consistent with Ken Ham’s “Answers in Genesis” group, not the League of the South. Peroutka is clearly a Young Earth Creationist who denies that humans evolved from earlier species. He’s right when he says that he is not a “racist” because like Ken Ham he believes that all races were created of “one blood.”

Not that any of this matters … denying the charge of “racism,” although completely accurate, hasn’t done Michael Peroutka a bit of good. It didn’t work with Paula Deen, Donald Sterling, or Cliven Bundy. In a world of “trigger warnings” and “structural racism” and “white privilege” and “implicit bias” and “microaggressions,” there’s no escaping the charge of “racism” or its inquisitors.

“Racism” is a meaningless term that was popularized by the Left in the mid-1930s. Michael Peroutka would be wise to laugh it off in the future.

Note: SNN has covered Peroutka’s press conference.


About Hunter Wallace 9525 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

50 Comments

  1. I’m glad people like Peroutka are losing influence in the League. Accepting the most fundamental ideas of the Left will never be a good strategy to defeat the Left. At this point, I’d rather see Peroutka either lose his upcoming election or move away from the League. The main purpose of running League candidates should be to expose the public to the League’s message. The League’s message is not that white interests are sinful or that all races are identical except in skin tone or that a free South should be a ‘proposition nation’ just like the North is. Our target audience has had enough of these Leftist ideas. A prominent League member reinforcing essential ideas of the empire that we seek to overcome is more harmful than helpful.

    • I’ve never covered his various media waves here because he is making his own headlines. He’s doing various things on his own initiative, not the League. We’ve done all kinds of things over the past year and he hasn’t been a part of any collective effort.

      • You’re right. I shouldn’t have called him a ‘prominent’ League member. In fact, it wasn’t till the conference that I even knew he was a League member. Maybe a ‘League member who is in the spotlight’ would have been a better description of him.

        • I wish Peroutka had been aware of the true persona of Michael
          (real name) King. If he had known that King was a plagiarist,
          a communist, an adulterer and an abuser of women, I doubt
          he would have made that video. And as a preacher, I doubt,
          from what I’ve read, that his preaching was based upon the
          nicene creed.

          • No, but it is the word of God.

            Look, I don’t want to get into a religious debate, but I just want to point out that not all young Earth Creationists deny race. That debate Ham had with Nye was the first time I heard the argument that Evolutionists are “racists”. I thought it was ridiculous, and I think that debate made us all look really bad. However, believing in a young Earth doesn’t mean you agree with Ham entirely. He didn’t convince me to be a young Earth Creationist, the Bible did.

          • Years ago, I was an atheist. I attribute it to three things:

            1.) First, I was running a debate forum where I was exposed to Ken Ham and “Answers in Genesis” who made Christianity sound unbelievably stupid.

            2.) Second, I was raised as a Methodist and was alienated by their liberal politics and maudlin sentimentalism.

            3.) Third, I was treating the Bible as a literal scientific document.

          • Mr. Smith, I too, don’t want to enter into a religious debate on this issue, but YEC types are the ‘willing goyim’ of the race-mixers, in that they actually believe ALL hominids are derived from Adam, and/or Noah- and thus, give RELIGIOUS cred to the fallacy that ‘There is no race, but the human race.’ This is historically, chromosomally, and genetically impossible. Historically, because at the time of the ‘Flood’ extant ancient civilizations already were… well, extant! And they continued on, without break, while the ‘whole world’ was destroyed. cf. Weisman’s debate with (now) disqualified Doug Wilson, at http://www.seek-info.com/debate.htm

            Now, I believe the Bible implicitly, but we cannot say the ‘Whole world’ was destroyed, when… it wasn’t. So, if the Bible is true, then our conclusions… are false. Not the other way around.

            Genetically, also this (YEC/Noah as father of all hominids) is impossible, because the time frames of genetic mutation (I’ll even say, degredation in the first instance ) of: Hamites into Negroes, Shemites into [sic] Semites, and Japhethites into Caucasians, are just not long enough, without admitting a miraculous ‘curse’ or some other ‘deus ex machina’ event (not, BTW, recorded in Scripture). That’s just the tip of the iceberg, but at least it lays bare the fallacy of YEC, esp. from a ‘White Racialist’ pov.

          • You more than likely were never an atheist in the way that many people perceive atheism. I’ve read your rants and opinions throughout the years and you seemed to be more of a Deist. I’ve called myself an atheist for as long as I can remember; but this term was/is only a reflection of my disdain and disgust for the fruitcakes who use “faith” as a substitute for facts, reason and the analytical sciences.

            Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and countless other practical geniuses were often labeled as atheists, but they were Deists. In today’s world, they could still be labeled as Deists or atheists or agnostics depending on the crowd they found themselves being compared to.

            People called National Socialists atheists, but their ideas and applications could be more accurately categorized as being Deist.

            Being called an atheist is almost like the “racist” label, because it was initially used as a way to stigmatize those who used reason and logic to come to their own conclusions rather than blindly following the outlandish nonsense that they were instructed to follow. Most people still don’t have the lateral thinking abilities to comprehend how a man can simultaneously not believe in a biblical God and still believe in a Creator.

          • 1). Ken Ham’s presentation could be better (his allegiance to Luther and anti-Catholic attitudes are most harmful), but I believe some of the scientific arguments are good. Not as good as the Kolbe Center (http://www.kolbecenter.org/), but it has a deeper understanding of philosophy and theology.
            2). Hey, I was a former Methodist myself. e let due to their liberalism as well (one regional head wouldn’t even say that Christ was God when asked point blank).
            3). Again, it takes a certain amount of faith to accept YEC. But it does with all miracles. And to rely on the pronouncements of scientists who make it a goal to promote the death of Christianity takes a great degree of faith as well.

            2 Macc. 7:28 – “I beseech you, my child, to look at the heaven and the
            earth and see everything that is in them, and recognize that God did not
            make them out of things that existed. Thus also mankind comes into
            being.”
            I would go into Church Fathers, etc, but yourself being Protestant (denom unknown), I don’t know how you see them.

          • I’m a Christian man, but I also have an academic background in Archaeology. These were hard positions to reconcile, and it led me away from the faith from many years. Once I began to read about Intelligent Design, it was as if a great weight was lifted from my shoulders. I didn’t have to turn my brain off to be a Christian.

          • You just ain’t whistling Dixie. The attitude of the Protestant Reformers was that the Old Testament wasn’t to be taken seriously, unless if taught a moral lesson.

          • Scripture does not give the exact date, although Christian Tradition does (some Eastern Rites calculated the year by the date since Creation, and not Anno Domini). Scripture does not mention the Trinity directly either, but its is still a tenant of Christianity. John Salza (great man) writes: “if the Scriptures are interpreted literally, they
            teach that the earth is only about 6170 years old (the
            precise date will depend upon which translation one uses:
            the Masoretic, the Septuagint, or the Samaritan
            Pentateuch),” due to the lineages included.

    • Hunter, just a thought here – I wonder if it would make things easier to have it set up so that posts from trusted regulars don’t end up in the moderation pile. (I don’t know how Disqus works, so maybe that’s not even doable.)

  2. I agree. I would never trust anyone who calls himself ‘anti-racist’. Anti-racist = anti-white. In the MLK video, he has made it clear that he sides with black interests over white interests. It is impossible to be politically Southern and support MLK’s vision for the South.

    On top of that, he looks pathetically weak strutting out his two black friends to prove how ‘anti-racist’ he is.

  3. Well, Brad, I’m a young earther, and I believe in different ethnic groups, kindreds, tribes, and tongues.

    There are also many others who believe in a younger earth, who still believe that God allowed peoples to develop completely differently in different parts of the world. Some folks downplay the Biblical language of “kindreds, tribes, and tongues” to their detriment.

      • Hunter, I’m a YEC myself. However, I read creationist stuff from the Kolbe Center, not AIG. I won’t read stuff from Ham, because he’s not pushing creation science alone, he’s pushing a political agenda. I read his “One Blood” book several years ago, and I was shocked to see he was pushing a race mixing agenda. I wasn’t the race realist that I am today, but even then I was angry that he was trying to sneak in something that had nothing to do with the supposed goal of his organization.
        I don’t believe creationism gives carte blanc to race mixing. Since Genesis says living creatures are “kinds” i.e. species, it makes sense that human beings reproduce their own kind as well. Also, throughout the Old Covenant, warnings were given not to intermarry with certain groups such as the Canaanites, The Moabites, Ammonites, and the Amalekites. And I see no push for interracial marriage in the new Covenant either, in spite of that most misused scripture passage Acts 17:26, that he made us from one, Adam, he also said he, God, determined the appointed times and limits of their habitations. And throughout Christian history, I’ve never seen anything that pushed interracial marriages until recently. The missionaries of the past were into saving souls, not trying to encourage race mixing.

  4. Thanks to the rabbis of the Soviet Union we have the Arch Sin racism. Thankfully genetics post 2010 has affirmed that africans and non africans have been distinct for at least 40k years, and that the two groups do not come from one blood but 3 or 4 that we know of.

  5. “Therefore, all elevation or denigration of individuals or groups based on skin color is immoral and shameful because it violates the Law of Nature and Nature’s God.”

    Too many people believe his statement to be true.

    Therefore, blacks will NEVER be held accountable for their destructive behavior.

    They be God’s chilluns.

    Just love em, turn the other cheek and watch our cities devolve into jungles right before our eyes.

    Peroutka is an imbecile.

    • CC, this man has combined Eastern Orthodoxy with the fantasy of British-Israelism/Christian Identity. He has no understanding of ancient history, especially Biblical history, so that’s why he makes no sense. His claim that The Flood didn’t wipe out all life on earth , but left other Non-Adamic races untouched, is modernistic malarkey. No Church Father, Greek or Latin, ever made such a claim. I suspect Fr. John+ has never been a member of any Orthodox Synod, because they wouldn’t tolerate his heretical foolishness for one minute.

      • No Stephen, again, you lie. [ John 8:44]I have ‘combined’ nothing.

        CC, I am pointing out something the West does not understand. There was a rupture- a SCHISM from the rest of Christendom/Europe, when Rome DEFECTED from her own Catholic Faith, in the 1100’s. Runciman’s book on Byzantium, Ware’s book on Orthodoxy, Dr. Farrell’s book, ‘God, History and Dialectic’ all illumine the ABERRANT path that the West has taken, since 1100A.D. Dalton, ever the ‘faithful cultist,’ denies that fact, but it’s there. As a former R.C., I had to finally admit the error and grave sins that the Papacy indulged in with Cardinal Humbert, the insertion of the filioque in the Creed (which Scripture scholars, all agree does not comport with the Biblical record- cf. John 15:26, and everything that she has done since then- Thomistic philosophy, the various monastic ‘orders’ the Rise of Rationalism, the Caesaro-papal government of the ‘catholic nations,’ the encouragement of miscegenation in ALL the Catholic ‘colonies,’ etc.. The Reformers were right- Rome is the Harlot on the Beast.

        Now, as to my ‘mixing’ British-Israelism, I merely gave that branch of Protestantism my serious study some decades ago, when I found Rome wanting, and I found that many, MANY wise men have many things correct about ‘Who are the REAL Jews?’ Other Orthodox (and Catholics, Dalton!) often quote the Protestants, including Luther and Calvin, and no one gives them flack- well, Luther was an [sic] ‘Anti-Semite’ but that’s only because he spoke truly of the “Jews and their lies’ (Just like Dalton, who is reverting to ethnic type, no matter how many times he denies it).

        The Modern world is mired in TWO major HERESIES- one, the Rationalism, and Atomistic Protestant mindset, due to Rome’s being (as an Orthodox father said) ‘The First Protestant.” That mindset is , in this century (vide Slezkine’s “The Jewish Century”) a decidedly JEWISH one, in that it finds irony, and condescending doubt to be the watchword of it’s spurious ‘faith;’ it’s a rare Anglo who is not jaded in his faith in everything he once held dear, and that, too, is a mark of a Jewish mind.

        The second HERESY is taking the Deicides at their word, EVER- ANY ONE OF THEM. They are ALL Liars, they are not the Chosen People, they do not have a ‘right to exist’ and they don’t ‘own’ Palestine- their butchery and murder of innocent children has raised the ire of the entire WORD- they are liars all, and deceivers. As I said in an article from my now-defunct blog:

        “This is why my entire analysis of the problem [That Ungrateful Christendom- my 1200-page book] centered around one simple fact- “Are the Jews the people of God, or is Christendom?” My conclusion. The Church is Israel now… Forever. Conversely, Judaism/Talmudism/JEWS as a race/religion/people/philosophy have had their ‘candle removed’- forever.

        And the ‘people’ that are mentioned in Rom. 9-11 as the ‘all Israel’ shall be saved, are the “Lost tribes”- comprised of the men/tribes/nations/tongues of Europe ONLY, clearly corroborated by:? a) Christ never rescinding his statement
        of Matt. 15:24; ?b) the H.S. turning the Apostles BACK from Asia in the expansion of the Church, in the book of Acts [Acts. 16:6] to preach ONLY to EUROPE the “Good News.”?(b- sub-point #1)- Historical Ecumenical (following the Ecumenical Councils) Christianity remaining/retaining that Roman Empire boundary for over 1000 years!? c) the use of two words- and ONLY two [Strong’s #1484, 1672] in the N.T. to denote who the ‘two branches’ [Heb. 8:8 ff.] ALONE [Amos 3:2] that were to be the recipients of the Gospel.

        These two words, written by the Holy Spirit through the hands of European Men [II Tim 3:16] corresponded to both 1) racial and 2) exact GEOGRAPHICAL areas of the then ‘known world’ – Ioudaios (Judea, not JEW) and Ethne/Hellen [Hellene – i.e., Greco-Roman, not ‘all nations of the globe’].? d) Finally, the calling of the entire Church, as if it were the ‘two branches of the House of Judah [Judea] and Israel [Gentiles/Hellenes] as one’ in Jas. 1:1 and I Pet. 1:1 utterly mitigates against the fallacy of later post-papal schism claims for ‘universal salvation/jurisdiction.

        http://www.missiontoisrael.org/mystery-of gentiles/ chapter5.php

        The reason I quote CI authors is – as Cambria has noted, because, ‘If you tell me that the Nations of Europe are the Israel of God, it’s because only two peoples have EVER DONE God’s will in History- the O.T. Jews, and the White Nations of Christendom.’

        I find NO OTHER RACE WORTHY OF THE ‘calling and election’=- especially the ‘faithless Jew.’

        That Christendom is the ‘Israel of God’ [Gal. 6:16] has long been held- by both the Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, Orthodox, and Calvinists of Europe, until only the last century.

        And that is why ‘The Church is Israel Now’- coincidentally the title of a small book by [ Reformed author] Chas. Provan. ?http://emptytombbooks.com/products/The-Church-is-Israel-Now.html

        And why I quote CI authors willingly, because I believe they are right, and the modern Marxist Missiology of Mammon in the post- vatican Ewww ‘synagogue of Satan’ is DEMONIC.

        Until and unless Rome (for one) removes the added ‘scripture’ to the modernist Bible/Libel- ‘The Holocaust really happened,’ and restore the one verse it has excised, ‘His blood be upon us and upon our children,’ [Matt. 27:25]- we will FOREVER be at the mercy of the Christ-killers.

        <<>>

        Dalton thinks’ he is doing God Service’ [John 16:2] by worshiping the Whore on the Beast- [primarily, i now realize, because he is a Mischling, like his mother, Rome. Sorry to be blunt, but as a White Man who says he’s a catholic, you should realize that the Novus Ordo Gay Priest molesting your son/nephew, and the Lesbian nun preaching heresy and acting as ‘Eucharistic Minister,’ the ‘who am I to judge a faggot’ Pope y’all are suffering under, is a cult so far removed from the Pre-Vatican “Ewww” Church, that only a Judaizer like Dalton could stay in it, and be happy, worshiping an idol of his own making.

        • Fr. John claims to be an authority figure. But is he really?
          He claims to be an Orthodox priest. Where’s the proof? He has never shown us any ordination papers. He has never told us the name of the people who ordained him. He has never told us what Orthodox church he belongs to or what parish he pastors. He probably belongs to a non-canonical church, like the ones mentioned in this article, that’s not recognized by the canonical ones. http://aggren.net/other_orthodox/other.html BTW, I did a web search of Orthodox Churches in the Mpls-St. Paul area where he claims to be from from, and I saw no clergyman that was remotely a Fr. John.
          When I looked at the statements of beliefs these Mpls-St. Paul churches profess, I found nothing about British-Israelism/Christian Identity in their statements. This is an indicator that Fr. John is non-canonical.
          He’s a historical illiterate about the origins of the European people. Our ancestors were not Semites or Israelites. Both the Bible and secular Greek, Roman, Hebrew, German, and Norse historians show our ancestors were the descendants of Japheth, not Shem. See these sites for accurate information about our European origins. http://en.wikipedia.org/wikiSons_of_Noah#Tableof_nations and http://www.imninalu.net/imninalu.htm When our pagan European ancestors became Christian, it wasn’t because of any Israelite genetics, it was the working of God’s grace in their heathen hearts. Rom 9-11 makes it plain these people were not genetic Israelites. They were Gentiles, descendants of Japheth.

          • Ah, yes. Thanks, Jewdalton, for descending to the nadir of the ‘sons of Satan” -the “ad hominem’ argument, that holds as much water as the ‘I know you are, but what am I?’ rhetoric of a 10-year old.

            Stephen, have I ever asked YOU your address, your birth certificate (to ascertain proof of non-illegitimate birth) your SSN, or your boss at your job? No, because I at least respect your claim to humanity that much, that I would not engage in such Bolshevik tactics. You use (as is typical with your race) a ‘double standard.’ You want me to claim my patrimony, ecclesiastically speaking, while you tell the world you are a Catholic Christian, when all you are a is a Novus Ordo, Fag-friendly Papist! As far from Catholicism, as your spurious ‘pope’ is from a Bishop of Christendom.

            Take your febrile faith, your supremacist attitude, and crawl back to the shtetl where you belong, jew.

          • Fr. John+,like me, you’re a public figure. If either of us makes claims about ourselves, the public has a right to examine, and ask questions about them. You’ve made the claim you’re an Orthodox priest. If you’re canonical, you should be able to prove it without any rancor. Instead, you lash out at me with an ad hominem attack, the very thing you accuse me of. That doesn’t give me much reason to believe you’re a canonically ordained priest in the Mpls-St. Paul area. If you are rightfully, canonically ordained, just give us the names, emails, and phone numbeers of the priests and bishop(s) who ordained you. That will end the controversy.

          • Actually Dalton, we are NOT public figures. Only those with blogs that charge, or personalities that are in the news, are such. That is why Joe the Plumber was a nobody until he came to stand for something different than Obama. Unlike you and your ilk, I prefer to do my jobs as father, priest, and teacher without a spotlight. I’m content to point out the Truth of a matter, and let others with better minds draw their own conclusions. So, again, your point is moot.

          • When you post anything in public, you become a public figure, whether you use your real name or not.

          • Oh, and unlike your “Rabbi Frankl,” I only hate those whom God has said we are to hate. [ Ps. 139:22] Thus, my disgust at your person, and your creed. I have, over the last half-century, been consistent in my faith, and later, in my ordination vows, while myriads around me have capitulated- first among my classmates in Seminary in Rome, and now more and more within Orthodoxy. Men like myself are not the willing damned, whose theology changes with the vaccillating whims of the Deicides. And we don’t need to prove ourselves, our faith is as a rock- much like Peter’s, in fact. [Matt. 16:17-19] You are like sinking sand…for your race [John 8:44] is double-tongued, and unstable in all its ways. [ Jas. 1:8]

            http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2014/08/if-youre-minority-group-that-jews-hate.html

          • Fr. John+, I do not practice Judaism, or do I identify with the Jewish race. I did not know I had Jewish ancestry till very late in life. My physical “Jewishness”, other than for genealogical research, isn’t important. My Scot-Irish and Saami ancestry is far more important to me because that’s what I grew up with, and identify with today. My faith is not in the whims of liberalism but in the Nicene,the primary creed of the faith. And again, I notice you resort to ad hominem, instead of real logic. Sad.

          • Dalton, you are cursed with the racial mamzerism of the Deicide, for the anti-miscegenation clauses REQUIRE 10 generations- or about 400 years to purify the blood. That is in teh Law of God, and the ‘scriptures cannot be broken.’ As to your [sic] faith? You hold to the accursed Papist ‘filioque’ perversion of the Creed, and not the Creed of Christendom. You are still outside the gates, and without the pnevma.

          • Fr. John+, you have no understanding of the Old Covenant, let alone the new. Get back to me when you achieve it, okay?

          • The mamzer law you are referring to is part of the Old Covenant. That covenant was abolished in 33 AD. It only applied to eunuchs, people born of incestuous and other forbidden unions, the Ammonites and the Moabites. Eunuchs can be members of the Church, (Acts 8:26-40), as well as people born of irregular unions, and Moabites and Ammonites. And since there are no Moabites and Ammonites living today, this law is a dead letter, like the rest of the Law of Moses.
            Your ranting about the filioque is a matter of semantics. Christ himself said he would ask the Father to send another Paraclete (Jno. 14:16) and the Father would send it in his name.( Jno. 14:26) So, as far as I’m concerned, it appears both the Father and the Son are involved in sending the Holy Spirit to us. Your ranting is just an example of sectarian majoring in the minors.

          • HW, pardon me. But Stephen raised the issues.

            The Covenant was abolished? Then why do your ‘Roman’ priests still offer ‘sacrifices’, if there is no more a priestly caste, as there was in the O.T? How schizophrenic is that, of a purported RC poster on this forum?

            You conflate your Novus Ordo Protestantism with your ill-learned CI aberrancies, then come on claiming to be a Catholic, and don’t even see the dichotomy your mixed-up worldview engenders! That the priesthood REMAINS, witnessing Heb. 13:10, the Didache, and all subsequent Orthodox and Catholic history, which merely corroborates that fact!

            The covenant has been changed, yes; even ENLARGED, but not abolished. [Ps. 89:34, cf. Heb. 7:12) For, if it were (abolished), there would be no rational reason to be an RC, but rather, it would be best to be a baptist egalitarian, preaching that every man in his own home is a priest, and can confect the Eucharist. But the covenant still DOES exist, and, therefore, per the CR’s, the Theonomists, the Kinists, and the Biblical Law codes, so, too, do the racial exclusion clauses, because the LAW OF SACRIFICE FOR SIN still exists- or would you deny the Crucifixion, as well in your Novus Ordo cult? The unchanging words of Matt 5:17 and Christ’s own words in many other places of the Gospels, show you to be a liar, as well as a LOUSY exegete.

            And my ‘ranting’ about the Filioque has behind it, twenty centuries of Orthodox AND Catholic holy men, who called it the heresy it is! You wanna take up with this ‘semantics’? Talk to everyone except Augustine, then! You’re a crappy example of a marrano convert, if ever there was one- you pretend to have converted, but don’t know the first rudiments of the catholic Faith. You pretend to be a valid RC, but deny the Priesthood, the Sacrifice and the Mass, if push came to shove!

            I wonder if you find Franky the Last’s ‘chuminess’ with the Deicides, more up your alley, than that of the reality of Jude 1:3, and the holy Sacrifice of Christ- whether on Good Friday, or at a valid altar!? Frankly, you continue to exhibit yet another case of ‘Is it good for THIS Jew?’ rather than, ‘Is is good for Christendom?’

  6. Sam, claims to be an Orthodox priest. As an Orthodox priest, he’s only supposed to teach the doctrines and dogmas of the Orthodox faith. He’s also supposed to be ordained by licit bishops and priests. I found no evidence he’s actually a legitimate priest in any Orthodox Church in Mpls-St. Paul, Minnesota. If he’s teaching the doctrines and dogmas of the church, his life wouldn’t be ruined. But if he’s teaching stuff the Orthodox faith disavows, then he would be in trouble. But I don’t believe he’s a licitly ordained priest, because I can’t find a Fr. John in any Orthodox Church in Mpls-St. Paul. He’s probably a Lone Ranger type with no connection to any canonical church in Orthodoxy.

  7. ‘Whoever does not confess with heart and mouth that (…) the Holy Spirit proceeds out of only the Father, essentially and hypostatically, as Christ says in the Gospel, shall be outside of our Church and shall be anathematized (…) Whoever does not confess that at the Mystery of the Holy Communion the laity must also partake of both kinds, of the Precious Body and Blood, but instead says that he will partake only of the body, and that that is sufficient because therein is both flesh and blood, when as a matter of fact Christ died and administered each seperately, and they who fail to keep such customs, let all such persons be anathematized (…) Whoever says that our Lord Jesus Christ at the Mystic Supper had unleavened bread (made without yeast), like that of the Jews, and not leavened bread, that is to say, bread raised with yeast, let him depart far away from us and let him be anathema as one having Jewish views and those of Apollinarios and bringing dogmas of the Armenians into the Church, on which account let him be doubly anathema (…) Whoever says that our Christ and God, when he comes to judge us, does not come to judge souls together with bodies, or embodied souls, but instead comes to sentance only bodies, let him be anathema (…) Whoever says that the souls of Christians who repented while in the world but failed to perform their penance go to a purgatory of fire when they die, where there is flame and punishment, and are purified, which is simply an ancient Greek myth, and those who, like Origen, think that hell is not everlasting, and thereby afford or offer the liberty or incentive to sin, let him and all such persons be anathema (…) Whoever says that the Pope is the head of the Church, and not Christ, and that he has authority to admit persons to Paradise with his letters of indulgence or other passports, and can fogive sins as many as a person may commit if such person pay money to receive from him indulgences, i.e. licences to sin, let every such person be anathema (…) Whoever does not follow the customs of the Church as the Seven Holy Ecumenical Councils decreed, and Holy Pascha, and the Menologion with which they did well in making it a law that we should follow it, and wishes to follow the newly-invented Paschalion and the New Menologion of the atheist astronomers of the Pope, and opposes all those things and wishes to overthrow and destroy the dogmas and customs of the Church which have been handed down by our fathers, let him suffer anathema and be put out of the Church of Christ and out of the Congregation of the Faithful (…) Ye pious and Orthodox Christians, remain faithful in what ye have been taught and have been born and brought up in, and when the time calls for it and there be need, that your very blood be shed in order to safeguard the Faith handed down by our Fathers’ — key passage from the link in my previous comment.

Comments are closed.