Similar to the Gospels of Advent that prepare us for the Incarnation of Our Lord, the Gospels for the next four Sundays prepare us for Whitsunday, and the coming of the Holy Ghost. They are taken from Our Lord’s Discourse at the Last Supper as recorded by S. John.
We might recall certain themes that run through this discourse given on the night Our Lord instituted the Eucharist and the priesthood; a certain sadness mingled with the promise of joy to come, the expression of farewells followed by the assurance of a future reunion. Our Lord’s teaching is pointing to that time the Apostles would assume His own mission but empowered with the Holy Ghost.
The Epistle for this Sunday (from S. Peter’s first General Epistle) reminds us that we are “strangers and pilgrims” in this part of life as we journey to the heavenly kingdom. As such, our citizenship resides in the Kingdom of God and we are to live as such. When we travel to foreign countries, we always represent to some degree the United States of America. We may be not be always conscious of the fact, but we are ambassadors of the values and the principles associated with America. The concept of the “ugly American” suggests there are too often occasions when we do not put our best foot forward in a foreign land. And too often we as Christians do not represent the values and principles articulate by Our Lord, for example in His Sermon on the Mount.
Firstly, S. Peter exhorts us to “abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul.” There is a battle raging over our soul and we cannot remain passive. We are to actively fight against the vices that rise so easily from our baser passions and we are to work towards growth in the virtues, both cardinal (prudence, temperance, fortitude, and justice) and theological (faith, hope, and charity).
Secondly, we are to “submit [y]ourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake.” That is, we are to embrace an attitude of loyalty to the established public authority (recognizing at the same time that we have a greater loyalty to the authority of God’s Word, especially as articulated in the Church’s teaching – witness the current conflict between the teachings of the Church on contraception and the courts in New York State). We are not to misuse the freedom given to us in Christ, as this may become an occasion of scandal to those critical to Christianity. The point S. Peter makes is that by becoming a “slave of God” we are freed from becoming enslaved to sinful behavior, and this is to be reflected in our daily life as being “in the world but not of the world.”
Thirdly, we are to “honor all men.” We are to understand that every person bears the dignity of being created in the Imago Dei. This is not always an easy task to fulfill but we have only to look at the example of Our Blessed Lord in this regard!
Whether we are aware of it or not, people are silently critiquing Christians, seeing if we live up to what we profess. During this Easter season, we celebrate in particular Our Lord’s victory over sin and death. As we seek to live out our Christianity with consistency and integrity, we should also exhibit the joy of this victory in our lives. S. Peter reminds us of basic principles that will aid us in our vocation to be “witnesses of the Resurrection.” May we incorporate these into our lives and become more like the One we profess to follow.
____________________________________________________________________
The Gospel According to Democrats
BY: Amy Curtis
I was told that James Talarico, the pro-gay marriage, trans-kid-loving, pro-abortion Democrat “reverend” running for the Senate in Texas, was the ideal example of Christianity.
Never mind the fact that Talarico thinks Mary’s Immaculate Conception is proof the Bible is “pro-choice,” and ignore the fact that Talarico wants an abortion clinic on every parcel of federal land, or that a massive welfare state is how Jesus will judge us.
He opposes Donald Trump and, for some, that’s enough (looking at you, David French).
But not content to have already politicized the Bible, Democrat activist and UCC Bishop Yvette Flunder has decided that the New Testament — the summation of the Christian faith — isn’t really the word of God.
They are proposing a new New Testament, the Third Testament, that does away with all that Christian stuff they call “problematic” and “bad theology.”
“This is a very dangerous thing that I’m about to say now but since I … I’m of the opinion that we need a Third Testament,” Flunder said. “Because the Bible has become problematic. ‘Slaves, obey your masters, as you do the Lord.’ It’s a text. ‘Let the women keep silent in the churches and if they have any questions, let them ask their husbands at home.’ I’m a believer. My whole heart, I trust God with my whole heart.”
No, you don’t. Not if you don’t believe the Bible is the complete and inerrant word of God.
Earlier, I told you how Hakeem Jeffries used 2 Corinthians as the basis for disenfranchising millions of Virginia voters, equating it to the struggles of the Apostle Paul’s persecution.
And Cory Booker gave a sermon-like speech at the Michigan Democratic Convention.
At the same time, Democrats acted very indignant and offended on behalf of Catholics after President Trump had some harsh, but accurate, words for Pope Leo and the Bishops. They can stuff that indignation where the sun doesn’t shine, because Democrats are the same people who spent a decade dragging the Little Sisters of the Poor through the courts in an effort to force them to pay for birth control and are about to do the same to the Dominican Sisters of Hawthorne in New York, who tried to break the Seal of the Confessional in Washington, and who weaponized the DOJ against pro-life Catholics in an effort to throw them in prison for years under the FACE Act.
To Democrats, everything is political. Even the Bible. Because politics is their religion. Unlike Christianity, however, there is no grace or forgiveness. Sin is determined not by your behavior, but by your skin color and your gender, and you are never able to absolve yourself of those immutable traits. The sins of your forebears are an eternal albatross around your neck. Failing to obey the Left’s ever-changing commandments (“Thou shall not use the wrong pronouns!” “Thou shall not have any other god than the State!”) is grounds for lifelong persecution and atonement.
It’s the modern-day version of public flogging.
And that’s why not a single Democrat, who believed Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s tattoos were a symbol of impending Christian nationalism, doesn’t utter a word about the separation of church and state when it’s progressives like Talarico or Flunder advocating for a Leftist version of Christian nationalism. It’s also why none of them call for a revision of the Quran, which has far more problematic verses and ones the adherents of Islam live out on a daily basis.
That, of course, is (D)ifferent.
____________________________________________________________________
Woke right as clueless about Bible as woke left
Claims of hatred in Deuteronomy fail as Christ’s words reinforce its truth
BY: Everett Piper, The Washington Times (April 19, 2026).
Last week in this column, I criticized Tucker Carlson for his recent comments about the biblical Book of Esther.
More specifically, I challenged his shocking ignorance of and seeming knee-jerk disregard for the Old Testament. In conclusion, I suggested that Mr. Carlson’s constant twisting and manipulation of Scripture is evidence of either terrible confusion or intentional deceit and that people would be wise to stop listening to his antisemitic/pro-Islamic tropes.
In response to all this, one of my woke-right critics took me to task and claimed that my defense of the Old Testament was evidence of an affinity for the “raw hatred” embodied in the book of Deuteronomy as opposed to the teachings of Jesus.
Perhaps you will find my rejoinder interesting and, hopefully, instructional. Here are my challenger’s exact words along with my subsequent response.
Critic: “You know, and I know that the raw hatred embodied in Deuteronomy is diametrically opposed to the message of Christ, yet you prefer the former. Why is that?”
My response: By “raw hatred,” what do you mean?
Perhaps you mean the “raw hatred” that Jesus quoted no less than three times in his battle against Satan’s temptations in the wilderness? You know, when he responded to the Devil’s schemes by saying, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God (Deuteronomy 8:3), and “You shall not put the Lord your God to the test (Deuteronomy 6:16), and “You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve (Deuteronomy 6:13).
Or maybe you mean the “raw hatred” of Christ, when he quoted Deuteronomy 6:5 and said, “The greatest commandment is this: Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength,” and then concluded by adding Leviticus 19:18, “and love your neighbor as yourself.”
Or maybe you mean the “raw hatred” of the Sermon on the Mount when Jesus preached against adultery (Deuteronomy 5:18), murder (Deuteronomy 11:17), as well as lying and breaking your word (Deuteronomy 23:21).
Is this the “raw hatred” you’re talking about?
Or maybe you mean the “raw hatred” of our Founding Fathers — you know, such as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and Alexander Hamilton, who quoted the book of Deuteronomy more than they referenced Hobbes, Locke, Hume, Plato, Cicero and Montesquieu combined.
Is this what you mean by “raw hatred?”
Or maybe it was the “raw hatred” of Ezra Stiles, president of Yale, who in 1760 urged all Americans to find inspiration and courage in the story of Deuteronomy 26:6-9, where “The Lord freed us from Egypt by a might hand, by an outstretched arm and by awesome power and by signs and portents, he brought us to this place and gave us this land.”
Perhaps it’s the “raw hatred” of Samuel Langdon, president of Harvard, who in 1775 said America should adopt the form of government that God handed down to Moses on Sinai and recorded in Deuteronomy because “the Jewish government was a perfect republic.”
Or maybe it was the “raw hatred” of Thomas Paine, who many argue was the most nonreligious of all the Founding Fathers yet used the Old Testament examples of David, Samuel and Gideon repeatedly in his book “Common Sense” to condemn the “hardened and sullen temper” of “Pharaoh,” (i.e., King George) and the usurpation of human freedom.
Maybe it was the “raw hatred” of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., who implicitly referenced Deuteronomy as he famously shouted, “Let freedom ring!”
Are all these examples of “the raw hatred embodied in Deuteronomy” that you contend is so “diametrically opposed to the message of Christ?”
If you still think so, may I suggest you do a little more reading? I’d recommend you start with the Gospel of Matthew, 5:18.
“I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore, whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” ~ Jesus (also known as the Second Person of the Triune God, and therefore just as much the author and inspiration of Deuteronomy and all the Old Testament as he is the New).
GFK
Observations From The Fifth Estate 