Authority: Usurped And Subverted

Chaitanya Jyothi Museum Opening, 2000

In the Name of The Father, and of The Son and of The Holy Spirit, Amen.



In the same way that Ayatollahs, Mullahs and Imams, in their mosques and madrassahs, usurp the authority of God and subvert the authority of the Koran, Pastors, Professors and Professionals, in their sanctuaries and schools, usurp the authority of God and subvert the authority of the Bible.

Evidence of the former’s evil doing abounds in their devotees’ mass, unspeakable destruction of lives and properties.  Evidence of the latter’s evil doing is more subtle.  It is in their declarations of civil and religious jurisdictions as sanctuaries for lawlessness and in their eagerness to present the Bible as the First Communist Manifesto.

A millennium ago, ecclesial lawyers argued that the church is the state.  Today, secular lawyers argue that the state is the church.  That is the implication of arguing that a city, county, state or nation is a sanctuary for lawlessness.  There is but one sanctuary: the inside of an ecclesial edifice devoted to worship of God.  The part that is called the Sanctuary.  And such never has been and never will be a sanctuary for lawlessness.  Its raison d’être is to be a sanctuary from lawlessness.

Notably, civil jurisdictions have the same raison d’être though they are not the same kind of sanctuary.

The Church is a sanctuary from lawlessness,
not a sanctuary for lawlessness.
Ditto civil society.

Yet, to argue that the state is the church rather brings the Progressive Communist mission and logic full circle, from abominating the church as opposed to the state to identifying the state as being the church.  This makes a certain kind of pernicious sense, especially when churchmen are doing all in their power to support the argument with eisegetical readings of the Bible, especially the Parable of the Good Samaritan.

The state as the ultimate Good Samaritan?  Sure, we see that truism in all times and climes.  Not.

Were as much natural, from-the-people, by-the-people, for-the-people self-governance — such as this Warlock Hunt — applied naturally by the people to Jihad Islam outrages and/or Progressive Communist outrages, those outrages would be driven and thrown into the deeps in short order.  And very thoroughly drowned therein.

Government can do nothing to guarantee civil peace and order as much as the people themselves can do, on their own.  Claire Berlinski’s The Warlock Hunt is evidence of that truth.

My comment at Berlinski’s The Warlock Hunt:

In relation to Donald Trump, I think said women’s hysteria is because they sense his innate goodness and thus feel safe, finally, to call out the males who have gotten away with so much at them.  In other words, they think POTUS Trump IS Daddy and feel safe in consequence to come forward finally with what has been occurring.  Claire, you are right to be not hysterical but upside-down regarding this particular hysteria’s occasion.  Like yourself, women do not need to come forward with their experiences — and most will not for the reasons you do not — but let those who do do.  Take the advice of Gamaliel.

The soi-disant USA foreign policy establishment generates policies foreign to the USA and policies inimical to the USA.  It is not a USA foreign policy establishment, therefore.  It is a Progressive Communist global governance advocacy establishment … as far as anything that wacky ever can be established, in fact.

Jill St. John
Jill St. John

Church and state are necessary and compatible but incomparable authorities and activities.  They are not and cannot be identical authorities or activities.  The state is a secular community.  The Church is a spiritual community.  They are neither equal in authority nor separate in space and time.  Nor are they inimical or incompatible.  They participate, but not equally, in the very paradox that animates and is animated by the confluence of time and eternity we call universe and world.  The Church has a leg outside that paradox.  The state does not.  It is entirely inside that paradox.

Update 1: I suspect this whole business boils down to a court asked to accept evidence manufactured or suborned by a prosecutor working for a POTUS to demolish the candidacy or, in the worst case, incumbency of a good man and his good wife and family.  What said POTUS smirked cooking up stuff, as if s/he is cleared to do that with impunity.

Update 2: Byron York via Glenn Reynolds: Former top spy rethinks: Maybe we shouldn’t have attacked a new president.

Reynolds: That this obviously foreseeable consequence wasn’t foreseen demonstrates that these intelligence guys aren’t very good at what they’re supposed to be good at.  And it explains why their work product hasn’t been very good with regard to other countries, when they couldn’t even foresee an obvious result in their own.


Jill St. John
Jill St. John

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *