The ramblings, rants, and observations of an Orthodox Reactionary. Feel free to look around!

Sunday, May 7, 2017

A Biblical Understanding of 'Queen Mother'.

All Kings of the line of David had a "Queen Mother", who held a position of honor in the Israelite court. Her position was especially important because the King often himself had many wives-- while the wife of the Hebrew King was one of many, and not always in favor, the queen mother had a special influence in the court, and had the ear of the king.
"Say to the king and the queen mother: 'Take a lowly seat, for your beautiful crown has come down from your head.'" (Jeremiah 13:18)
"(This was after King Jehoiachin and the queen mother, the court officials and the leaders of Judah and Jerusalem, the skilled workers and the artisans had gone into exile from Jerusalem.)" (Jeremiah 29:2)
"Nebuchadnezzar took Jehoiachin captive to Babylon. He also took from Jerusalem to Babylon the king’s mother, his wives, his officials and the prominent people of the land." (2 Kings 24:15)
"So Bathsheba went to King Solomon to speak to him on behalf of Adonijah. And the king rose to meet her and bowed down to her. Then he sat on his throne and had a seat brought for the king's mother, and she sat on his right. Then she said, “I have one small request to make of you; do not refuse me.” And the king said to her, “Make your request, my mother, for I will not refuse you.” She said, “Let Abishag the Shunammite be given to Adonijah your brother as his wife.” King Solomon answered his mother, “And why do you ask Abishag the Shunammite for Adonijah? Ask for him the kingdom also, for he is my older brother, and on his side are Abiathar the priest and Joab the son of Zeruiah.” (1 Kings 2:19-22)
The Bible, in a prophecy from the mouth of King David, says that the Messiah shall have a Queen mother at His right hand:
"Kings’ daughters were among Thy honourable women: upon Thy right hand did stand the queen in gold of Ophir." (Psalm 45:9)

Jesus Christ is of the line of David; as such He is the Davidic King 'par excellence'. He is the fulfillment, the 'true King of Israel', of whom the previous Kings were imperfect foreshadowings of.
Who is Christ's Queen Mother? The answer is Mary. St. Luke mines this 'Queen Mother' imagery in the earliest parts of his Gospel:
 "And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, and she exclaimed with a loud cry, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:42-43)

"Mother of my Lord", coming from the mouth of a Jewish woman, is an obvious reference to such Old Testament imagery. Recall also that the Jewish authorities took Christ's claim to be 'Son of David' as a claim to kingship and a threat to Caesar.

St. John is not outdone in his descriptions of the exaltedness of Mary. 
"And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: and she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered... And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne." (Revelation 12:1-2,5)

 As Christ is the 'Son of David', of the 'root of Jesse', so the Virgin Mary is the true 'Queen Mother', fulfilling the role for which God prepared her, for which she was raised, and that David prophesied. "Upon Thy right hand did stand the queen in gold of Ophir."

Sunday, February 28, 2016

Trump Derangement Syndrome.

'Sarah Palin was too redneck to be liked in the beltway anyhow.'
So far this election, I've seen Donald Trump compared to:

Trump is apparently the personification of evil, both real and fictional.

Anti-Trumpers are unhinged. For all the invective about how Trump supporters are 'brainwashed zombies', I've seen far more knee-jerk stupidity coming from the 'Anyone But Trump' camp.

Trump is not a lifelong Democrat. He is not pro-abortion, pro-war, pro-Obamacare, he has not mocked disabled people, he's not racist, he's not anti-woman. These have been debunked repeatedly, over and over, but loons like Matt Walsh and Glenn Beck keep saying it, in the hopes that people will believe it. (Based on the primary victories, the Grassroots see straight through the bullshit.)

The reasons for not supporting Trump change daily, as National Review, The Blaze, RedState, etc.,  dig up ever more teapot tempests and outright fabrications to throw at him. And the so-called 'intellectuals' and 'principled conservatives' slurp down the Kool-Aid gleefully, not considering that perhaps their fellow conservatives aren't 'traitors', but people who see in this outsider Republican a chance to wrest control of the Party from the machine which has hijacked it.

The anti-Trumpers condemn anyone who supports Trump as a 'false conservative' or a sellout, as the list of staunch conservatives lining up behind him grows. Pat Buchanan. Sarah Palin. Jeff Sessions. Chris Christie. Jan Brewer. Duncan Hunter. Joe Arpaio. The Anti-Trump bots are immune to reason or persuasion- rather than wonder why these principled conservatives are endorsing Trump and taking a second look at The Don, they assume these people 'weren't real conservatives to begin with' or 'were bought out', with no evidence to that effect.

'Trump Derangement Syndrome' is real, folks.

Monday, October 5, 2015


I met someone today. I don't know his name. He came into the store, shoulders slumped. He needed his battery tested. While I was testing his battery he described some 'jerking' during driving his car was doing. He hoped that his battery (which had some problems starting) was also causing the car's other issues. I told him that was unlikely. He slumped a little more.

Then my computer came back 'replace battery'. I told him, and he said, so quietly it was almost a whisper: 'I have no money'.

I took him inside to price a battery. I was hoping as I walked in with him we had a cheap battery; I didn't want to give him any more bad news.

The least expensive battery I had in stock for that car was in the $120 range. As I talked to him, I saw his eyes filling up with tears. At first I thought I was imagining it, but by the time I had told him that sometimes batteries are discounted when bought online, tears had started to make their way down his cheeks. He left, and I don't know if I will ever see him again.

I saw a lady with a breathing tube in the car, and a baby in the back seat. I have no clue what that man is going through in life, but finding out he'd have to spend what I waste per paycheck on fast food and books was enough to break him in front of another grown man.

Pray for him. Please. And pray for a fat, lazy slob who forgets how good he has it-- who could have done something about the situation if he wasn't so self-centered.

Lord, save us.

Friday, June 15, 2012

"Fallen America": Gay Pride Month in Military

Been trying to increase the amount of posting on my blog. I figured I might start documenting news stories that demonstrate to me how sick and depraved America has become. We'll kick off with this one:

"Pentagon holds first-ever gay pride event."

Nine months after the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the Defense Department is openly celebrating perversion and deviancy.

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

America and Russia Switch Places

Kinda brings it home, doesn't it?

Monday, June 4, 2012

Sola Fide in Augustine... or lack thereof.

Sola Fide, or "Justification by Faith Alone", is pretty much the linchpin doctrine for most forms of Protestant Christian.
The doctrine finds its origin in the thought of Martin Luther, the German monk who kicked off the "schism-from-the-schism" known as the Protestant Reformation. Sola Fide says, essentially, that through faith-- which seems to be defined as intellectual assent to Christ's crucifixion and resurrection-- Jesus Christ's righteousness is credited to the Christian. Jesus earns righteousness, God the Father pretends the Christian is now righteous. Often, Blessed Augustine of Hippo is used as a pre-Reformation reference point by advocates of Sola Fide. He is quite important, because the Saint is often the only person that Protestants can point ot as supporting their doctrines. If one can prove Blessed Augustine didn't believe or teach Sola Fide, the post-Reformation viewpoint is adrift outside the consensus of the Fathers.
But when it comes to the nature of justification, Blessed Augustine is one with the rest of the Church Fathers, east and west.
"When you shall have been baptized, keep to a good life in the commandments of God so that you may preserve your baptism to the very end. I do not tell you that you will live here without sin, but they are venial sins which this life is never without. Baptism was instituted for all sins. For light sins, without which we cannot live, prayer was instituted. . . . But do not commit those sins on account of which you would have to be separated from the body of Christ. Perish the thought! For those whom you see doing penance have committed crimes, either adultery or some other enormities. That is why they are doing penance. If their sins were light, daily prayer would suffice to blot them out. . . . In the Church, therefore, there are three ways in which sins are forgiven: in baptisms, in prayer, and in the greater humility of penance."
(St. Augustine, Sermon to Catechumens on the Creed 7:15, 8:16)

Unintelligent persons, however, with regard to the apostle's statement: "We conclude that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law," have thought him to mean that faith suffices to a man, even if he lead a bad life, and has no good works. Impossible is it that such a character should be deemed "a vessel of election" by the apostle, who, after declaring that "in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision," adds at once, "but faith which worketh by love." It is such faith which severs God's faithful from unclean demons,--for even these "believe and tremble," as the Apostle James says; but they do not do well. Therefore they possess not the faith by which the just man lives,--the faith which works by love in such wise, that God recompenses it according to its works with eternal life. But inasmuch as we have even our good works from God, from whom likewise comes our faith and our love, therefore the selfsame great teacher of the Gentiles has designated "eternal life" itself as His gracious "gift."
And hence there arises no small question, which must be solved by the Lord's gift. If eternal life is rendered to good works, as the Scripture most openly declares: "Then He shall reward every man according to his works:" how can eternal life be a matter of grace, seeing that grace is not rendered to works, but is given gratuitously, as the apostle himself tells us: "To him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt;" and again: "There is a remnant saved according to the election of grace;" with these words immediately subjoined: "And if of grace, then is it no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace"? How, then, is eternal life by grace, when it is received from works? Does the apostle perchance not say that eternal life is a grace? Nay, he has so called it, with a clearness which none can possibly gainsay. It requires no acute intellect, but only an attentive reader, to discover this. For after saying, "The wages of sin is death," he at once added, "The grace of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."
This question, then, seems to me to be by no means capable of solution, unless we understand that even those good works of ours, which are recompensed with eternal life, belong to the grace of God, because of what is said by the Lord Jesus: "Without me ye can do nothing." And the apostle himself, after saying, "By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast;" saw, of course, the possibility that men would think from this statement that good works are not necessary to those who believe, but that faith alone suffices for them; and again, the possibility of men's boasting of their good works, as if they were of themselves capable of performing them. To meet, therefore, these opinions on both sides, he immediately added, "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." What is the purport of his saying, "Not of works, lest any man should boast," while commending the grace of God? And then why does he afterwards, when giving a reason for using such words, say, "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works"? Why, therefore, does it run, "Not of works, lest any man should boast"? Now, hear and understand. "Not of works" is spoken of the works which you suppose have their origin in yourself alone; but you have to think of works for which God has moulded (that is, has formed and created) you. For of these he says, "We are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works." Now he does not here speak of that creation which made us human beings, but of that in reference to which one said who was already in full manhood, "Create in me a clean heart, O God;" concerning which also the apostle says, "Therefore, if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. And all things are of God." We are framed, therefore, that is, formed and created, "in the good works which" we have not ourselves prepared, but "God hath before ordained that we should walk in them."
It follows, then, dearly beloved, beyond all doubt, that as your good life is nothing else than God's grace, so also the eternal life which is the recompense of a good life is the grace of God; moreover it is given gratuitously, even as that is given gratuitously to which it is given. But that to which it is given is solely and simply grace; this therefore is also that which is given to it, because it is its reward;--grace is for grace, as if remuneration for righteousness; in order that it may be true, because it is true, that God "shall reward every man according to his works."
(A Treatise on Grace and Free Will)
Now, if the wicked man were to be saved by fire on account of his faith only, and if this is the way the statement of the blessed Paul should be understood--"But he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire"--then faith without works would be sufficient to salvation. But then what the apostle James said would be false. And also false would be another statement of the same Paul himself: "Do not err," he says; "neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the unmanly, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the Kingdom of God."
(Enchiridion, Chapter XVIII, paragraph 3).

Blessed Augustine of Hippo, pray unto God for us!

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

On Fasting

"By fasting it is possible both to be delivered from future evils and to enjoy the good things to come. We fell into disease through sin; let us receive healing through repentance, which is not fruitful without fasting." --St. Basil the Great

"And Jesus said to them, 'Can the friends of the bridegroom mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them? But the days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast.'" --Matthew 9:15

"And let not your fastings be with the hypocrites, for they fast on the second and the fifth day of the week; but do ye keep your fast on the fourth (Wednesday) and on the preparation (the sixth, i.e, Friday) day." --Didache 8:1-2


Fasting is something that is mentioned, but largely unpracticed by modern American Christians. Indeed, fasting-- self-denial-- seems to run at odds with our entire indulgent, consumer culture. But Jesus clearly says that Christians are to fast. "But the days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast."

He cannot be speaking of any period other than the Church age; that is, between the first and the second advent. Christians are called to fast now. So why do modern Christians not fast, and when they do, infrequently and inconsistently?