Prophecy

The following is not my invention, but an observation made by a fellow believer three years ago, which struck me then as it still does, as prophetic.

Why hasn't God judged America?

If this seems a strange question to you; if you do not see how sorely America deserves God's judgment, then read no further; you are clueless. But if you have asked this question yourself, consider the following:

God has not yet judged America because of the promise made in Gen.12:3. When the Almighty called Abram to become the father of faith, he said, "I will bless those who bless thee, and I will curse those who curse thee." This promise was transmitted to Abraham and also to his offspring - but only to the offspring of the promise, to Isaac, Jacob, and to the chosen race, the Jewish people. As Jesus said in Jn.4:22, "...salvation is from the Jews", and as Pope Pius XI affirmed, "We are all spiritual semites."

It is a fact of history that those nations, kingdoms, and empires that have been a blessing to the Jewish people have prospered, while those that have persecuted God's chosen race have not done so well. America has generally been good to the Jews and has furthermore been a strong ally of the nation of Israel. So America has enjoyed God's blessing of prosperity, despite the great travesties and moral corruption of which she is guilty. The first clause of the promise applies to America: "I will bless those who bless thee." But should America turn her back on the chosen race, the second clause will take effect: "I will curse those who curse thee."

The prophecy is this: Barak Obama will lose the 2012 election. The Republicans will regain the White House, and quite possibly regain several seats in Congress as well. Conservatives in general and Pro-Lifers in particular will be dancing in the streets and will proclaim with characteristic optimism that the tide has turned, and that America is headed for true reform.

But there are 75 days between Election Day and Inauguration Day. With nothing to lose politically, Obama will use those 75 days to deliberately pick a fight with Israel over some pretended grievance. He will then break diplomatic ties with Israel, and in so doing will finally call down God's righteous curse.

Remember as well - - Inauguration Day 2013 falls within a couple days of the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. 40 years is the Scriptural limit of God's patience (e.g. Ps.95:10).

The least of these

The threefold Lenten discipline of prayer, fasting, and giving can and should have a purifying and clarifying effect. Prayer and fasting lead the soul to generous giving. Fasting and giving lead the soul to reflective prayer. The following is a personal story, covering the past 36 years or so.

I was a young man in 1973 when Roe v. Wade shocked the American culture. From the very beginning, I knew that was wrong, and must be reversed. But within a fairly short span, I let myself be cowed by more liberal thinkers into a broader way of viewing things. Restoring legal status to the unborn, while important, was just one of many equally important issues. We must not become too narrow-minded; we must not be single-issue voters and thinkers. That much was axiomatic.

I believe it was through prayer and fasting that I eventually came to consider more thoughtfully the essence of giving to the poor. The Gospel passage that grabbed me at some point was Mt.25:31-46. This well-known story tells of the return of the King at the end, how he separates the sheep from the goats, judges them on the basis of how they gave to the poor and needy, and issues this divine judgement: "...as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me." (Mt.25:40b RSV)

And who, I pondered, are the very least of my brethren? Who are the poorest of the poor? To whom should I be especially generous, so as to be found giving to the Lord Himself?

There are poor people right here, even in my home town. I must give to them, and so I shall. But - are they the very least? Well, those in third-world countries are certainly poorer. Are they the least? What about those who actually die in war or in natural disasters? Loss of life is certainly more serious than mere poverty. Are these the least?

You already know where this leads. I was eventually forced to see that there was no greater poverty than that suffered by those who were wholly innocent and also wholly defenseless. These little ones could not even raise their voices in a plaintive cry for help. These were the very least. Giving to these would be giving to Jesus.

With renewed clarity of vision, I was cowed no longer. Although often unfaithful, and frequently forgetful, I have since endeavored to make this a major focus of my life, liberal goats notwithstanding.

Strike Three!

The opprobrious travesty, the howling illogic, and the tragic injustice of Roe v. Wade was perpetrated 34 years ago, arguably the greatest crime ever committed by a supposed tribunal of law. Unless they repent, there surely is an especially deep pit in Hell awaiting the black-robed thugs who, in doing this, bear the blood of the innocent on their foolish and darkened souls.

Along with many others, my initial and sincere belief was that this abortion of justice could be corrected through reasoned and democratic means, which is what we sought. Year after year we followed the usual within-the-system approach of writing letters, urging legislative action, public protests, etc. Meanwhile, the legalization of abortion was becoming ever more entrenched and accepted as the norm, leading both to greater complacency and to the expansion of the culture of death to include euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, trafficking in embryonic body parts, and the sanctioning and propagating of it all in conventional medicine, UN programs, and policies of foreign aid and government entitlements. These last elements were especially galling because they meant i was being forced to subsidize the holocaust with my tax dollars.

Eventually, in the early 1990's, i started to admit that the mild approach was simply not working, and never would. I began to share this conviction with fellow pro-lifers, and soon wrote to Judie Brown of the American Life League, urging her to join with other pro-life leaders in calling for and organizing something more radical, like an all-out strike. My idea was soundly rebuffed. Some years later, i tried again, this time writing to Dr. James Dobson, who wrote back and, in a kind manner, also demurred. So i began to seek ways to keep my own counsel, which is basically why for the past 8 years i have been living in the north woods, paying only local taxes, and more or less trying not to partake of the orgy of economic and political activity that comes with such a bloody price tag. I am, in effect, on strike. I know, i know - conventional wisdom dictates that we not seek 'an idyllic retreat' but bravely stay in the fray and resist the evil while still maintaining our lives in the world. Sounds fine. Is that approach effective? Honestly now, is it??

Through the teaching of John-Paul II, i also came to realize that consumerism, along with materialism and hedonism, has been fueling the culture of death and its growth all along. So a secondary motivation for me has been to reject the dogma of consumerism, and to try to live in a way that is as sustainable and non-consumeristic as possible. It really isn't all that difficult, once you start ignoring the cultural expectations that militate against such non-conformity. I may expand upon this theme in a later post some time. Meanwhile, alas, time passes, Jerry DePyper ages, and i grow weary of the various vexations of living this way alone. So, Lord willing, i am slowly preparing to enter a new chapter of life soon, as described also in an earlier post. But i digress. I said all the above so i could say this:

Recently, in the July-August newsletter of Life Decisions International, (search: 'Jerry DePyper'), i have made a third public appeal for an all-out pro-life strike. I suppose you could consider this little blog post an extension of that appeal. Here is the full appeal:

Even more effective than boycotts, strikes have historically been well employed to achieve political, social, and economic ends when less extreme measures have failed. Well, i say that the pro-life movement's tactics have to date been altogether too mild and timid, and it's high time for something much more serious (and, i admit, risky).

In fact, i have called for this very thing since the early 1990's, pleading for it from such pro-life leaders as Judie Brown and James Dobson, but have had no takers. I have since followed my own counsel, and have been 'on strike' since the late 1990's, living a virtually tax-free and income-free life of subsistence on a 10-acre homestead.

The existence of such enterprises as mine would be a critical part of any strike. Indeed, i could see pro-life Christians developing an entirely independent economy of our own, doing business with each other, while refusing to pay any taxes or to take part in the economy of the mainstream culture until very specific demands are met:

1. Legal protection restored to all human beings, from the moment of conception until natural death. This need not be a Constitutional amendment, but might be a simple federal law or Supreme Court decision recognizing all humans as 'persons', thus effectively reversing Roe v. Wade.,

2. Repeal all entitlement and funding programs using tax dollars for abortion, fetal tissue research, etc.

3. Stop public funding of Planned Parenthood, and other 'non-profits' advocating or performing abortion, euthanasia, etc.

I could also add

4. A non-revocable nation-wide declaration recognizing that marriage is by its nature monogamous and heterosexual, and only such can ever be accorded the rights and duties proper to marriage.

even though this is not a strictly pro-life issue.

I could also tolerate a scaled-back version of the above, consisting not of a full-blown general strike, but a mere taxpayer revolt whereby pro-lifers would continue to work and conduct business, but all taxes would be withheld until the above demands are met. In my opinion, though, we've already been pulling our punches way too much. An all-out strike, and leave the results to God!

Any takers?

I applaud and admire the diligent efforts of Judie Brown, Dr. Dobson, and others, but i truly can't see how anything will improve unless we are willing to accompany these efforts with a more radical action that will demand much of us, and will thereby break through the cultural and political stupor and force the issues to be definitively addressed.

I suppose the desired solution could come about despite the inadequacy of our actions, namely, through direct divine intervention. Indeed, our faith assures us that someday all wrongs will be made right by the One Righteous Judge, before whom those others will shrivel in shame. But that hope does not excuse complacency, does it? Nor does it undo the spiritual and physical carnage being wrought while we morally slumber. Moreover, God's solutions often turn out to be quite painful in their purgative effects. Is it prudent to passively await God's righteous anger, which could well mean a calamitous implosion of our culture? I still believe it would be better to gird our collective loins and take the bull by the horns and perhaps deflect the greater part of God's judgment. Anybody?