So they were held, but the state party committee does not want to be penalized, so they will ignore the results. They could not ask the state to hold another primary (it would cost at least $5 million) so instead they will hold caucuses in late March, on their own dime.

The Polycarp Research Institute (TPRI). According to their website, “The Polycarp Research Institute is a non-profit organization (501 C3) dedicated to the promotion and dissemination of high-quality research designed to enhance the physical, psychological and spiritual condition of mankind.” Its website is sub-par, to say the least, but let’s not judge a book by its cover. TPRI is one of the few scientific research organizations that has acknowledged the link between abortion and breast cancer (the “ABC link”). Also, TPRI will not promote methods or intentions that are inconsistent with the ethical and moral guidelines of the Catholic Church.

Another worthwhile organization is the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute. According to their website, “The Breast Cancer Prevention Institute is a non-profit, 501(c)(3) corporation, which educates healthcare professionals and the general public through research publications, lectures, and the internet, on ways to reduce breast cancer incidence.” It’s founder, Dr. Joel Brind, is the leading expert on the ABC link.

Finally, the National Breast Cancer Foundation is an option. According to their website, “The National Breast Cancer Foundation mission is to save lives through early detection and to provide mammograms for those in need. Our mission includes increasing awareness through education, providing diagnostic breast care services for those in need, and providing nurturing support services.” They are listed by the Bioethics Defense Fund as an alternative to the Susan G. Komen Foundation.

Before you donate to any breast cancer research organization, ask them:

• Do you acknowledge the ABC link?
• Do you donate to Planned Parenthood, or to any other organizations that perform or refer women for abortions?
• Do you promote embryonic stem cell research?

I know this might seem tedious, but we have to make sure that we are donating our hard-earned money to organizations that have objectives that are consistent with what we believe as Catholics. Furthermore, any organization devoted to finding a cure for breast cancer that denies the negative effects of abortion is doing a disservice to women. The evidence is clear: 27 of the 33 studies on the ABC link showed definite increased risk. Women who had at least one abortion were on average, 50% more likely to develop breast cancer. One can’t help but wonder if the wholesale denial of this evidence is ideologically driven. Let’s have our money fuel the pursuit of truth. Only then will a cure be found.

Elizabeth Scalia the managing Editor of the Catholic Portal at Patheos explains it well:

Let’s spell this out; let’s clarify this vague, euphemistic line, for the sake of transparency, shall we? Because this dual-mouthed president is all about transparency — he even won an award for it, which he received without press — the fulfillment of our daughter’s dreams lie in the freedom and ease with which a sucking hose or a scraping curette may introduce violence and slaughter within their wombs, at the very core of their beings, in order to shred their children to pieces. For this 100% NARAL-approved president who passed up every opportunity to show even a scintilla of mercy for a baby born alive during an attempted abortion, our daughter’s dreams depend on their being able to find someone who will burn their baby in utero, or shove a pair of scissors into the partially-delivered child’s skull, or to close the lid on the garbage pail until the bothersome crying ends.

In Obama’s world, our daughter’s happiness depends upon having these options at their disposal, literally and figuratively. Because love, and the sneaky way it has of showing up whenever a baby is born and then complicating everything, (because it is meaningful and real) is an insufficient vehicle for the fulfillment of women, and their self-actualization.

Arise, daughters of America, and build your dreams upon the slaughter of your progeny; some say the fullness of our humanity was built upon the flesh and blood of one woman who said “yes” to a daunting and difficult proposal, but I say your fulfillment, your dreams and your future are better built upon the garbage heaps of “no” we’ve encouraged you to form out of your own flesh-and-blood in the empty landfills of government compassion, hope and change.

Because “yes we can,” is all about the hope and change that’s built on our emphatic “noes”. No, to life. No, to conscience. No, to compassion that is not mandated. No, to assistance given by any but government. No, to any power greater than ourselves and our glorious government.

“I don’t want them punished with a baby”

Moloch couldn’t have said it more cunningly.

Today I feel great sadness and compassion for all of the women who have bought into this at some point in their lives and aborted their children, and who have suffered — often for decades, often in deep loneliness — for their babies. The lie that abortion provides, at it’s core, some ultimate “good” is a lie that has stood too long.

I was staying at my Grandparents and Grandpa offered to take me to Kroger to get a movie to watch, Kroger being the optimal spot to rent movies in Bartonville.  Being the pre-teen stud I was, I chose one of the American Ninja movies and I don’t remember if it was the original or American Ninja 2, 3, or 4, but to answer the obvious questions, yes, I have seen all of them.  What boy didn’t want to be Michael Dudikoff, even the name sounds awesome.  Coming out of the store, we passed my great uncle, my grandpa’ brother in-law,  and stopped to talk.  Grandpa explained we came to rent a movie and my great uncle asked which one and Grandpa said “Something with ninjas.” To which my great uncle replied kind of confused, “Like cowboys and ninjas?”

Highway to Hell: The Bullpen Responds from Harvest Bible Chapel on Vimeo.

The abusive spiritual leaders of Jesus’ day loaded the common people down with multiple religious rules and regulations.  Universally, the dominant trait of oppressive religious and governmental systems is the multiplication of rules and regulations.  These serve to control behavior when kept and promote guilt when broken.

“Our load”- this is the idea that spiritual success is a do-it-yourself project: we must take care of our own sin and produce our own holiness.

Pharisees then and now are able to load us down with our sins because of the way they define sins-or the way they list sins.  Spiritually abusive systems define sin as external behaviors.  These behaviors are then written in lists.  In some circles these lists might define proper versus improper dress and manners.  In other circles the lists may focus on spiritual disciplines, attitudes and speech.

Defining sin strictly as external behavior is necessarily unfair and abusive.  It creates a performance-based class structure in which the strong succeed and weak fail.  The “saints” carry their sin burdens gracefully while the “strugglers” carry theirs disgracefully, for the “saints” are able to deny and hide their sins while the “strugglers” (or the honest) cannot.  Such a system gives the upper class an opportunity to boast and the lower class an occasion for shame.

According to the Bible, however, the sin that separates us from God is first not in our actions but in our hearts.  For Jesus, sin was first of all an inner state of being with external behaviors as symptoms. “What goes into a man’s mouth does not make him ‘unclean,’ but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him ‘unclean.’ ” (Mt 15:11)

Once the list of external behaviors is replaced by Jesus’ definition of sin, we all fall to the same level of absolute poverty.

“Their load”- the spiritual leaders’ load.  This is when the burden of making our leaders look or feel good falls on our shoulders.  Their load is the work we must do for their sake, to meet their needs.

The leader manipulates by guilt, social pressure and “prophetic words” to ensure that people serve them.

A congregation that builds its pastor an expensive home in an exclusive neighborhood.  The men in the congregation give up weekends and holidays to finish the work.  The pastor convinces the congregation that the Lord demanded this kind of service to their “delegated authority.”

A pastor that values corporate prayer meeting above any other church activity.  In order to look good, he believes he has to get his people out for the church’s numerous intercessory prayer meetings.  He gives status to those who regularly attend these meetings and denies status to those who do not.

In each of these cases, the church leader looked at those he was responsible to protect and serve, and decided to make them serve him instead.  Abusive shepherds tie up various heavy loads and lay them on people’s shoulders.  Good shepherds take off those loads.

The abusive spiritual leaders of Jesus’ day loaded the common people down with multiple religious rules and regulations.  Universally, the dominant trait of oppressive religious and governmental systems is the multiplication of rules and regulations.  These serve to control behavior when kept and promote guilt when broken.

• Much (but not all) of the revival preaching over the years is little other than manipulation to produce guilt.  When commanded to have a longer quiet time, we do (for a little while at least).  When money is demanded, we give.  As guilt feeling set in (because we have failed to measure up), spiritual abusers can have their way with us.

• “Guilt is an extremely powerful force; when we feel it, we become distracted, confused and incompetent…We become overly dependent on others to make decisions for us, and we begin to avoid necessary confrontations and independent actions. We become slaves.” – David Chilton.

• Religious loads.  “God’s load”- that is the law-keeping and the disciplines he supposedly demands of us in exchange for his approval and acceptance.  “Our load”- this is the idea that spiritual success is a do-it-yourself project: we must take care of our own sin and produce our own holiness.  “Their load”- the spiritual leaders’ load.  This is when the burden of making our leaders look or feel good falls on our shoulders.  Their load is the work we must do for their sake, to meet their needs.

• “God’s load”. The God of the Pharisees (then and now) is a cross between Santa Claus and a traffic cop.  He’s making a list and checking it twice, handling out fines to the naughty and rewards to the nice.

• The fundamental theological problem with this system is that the demands of God are not merely high-they are 100% perfection.  So if God’s acceptance of us is dependent on our keeping his laws, we are all equally lost which is why we all equally need a savior.

• According to Larry Crabb, the problem of presenting Christian discipleship as discovering God’s demands and working hard to fulfill them is that “our churches will eventually resemble first-century synagogues run by Pharisees…filled with either weary folks who know that their best efforts fall short, but are willing to try harder next week, or proud people who, like their teachers, so badly miss the point of God’s law that they think they are keeping it.”

• One of the reasons that spiritual leaders tend to think they are keeping up with God’s expectations is that they are the ones formulating those expectations.  Over the years, pastors have taught the church to value the very things for which they are trained and have time, such as prayer.  Because their time is their own, they can go to any number of prayer meetings.  A family with young children or a business executive who commutes two hours each day cannot.

• There is a kind of dehumanizing spiritual abuse that is actually worse than the misuse of God’s law.  It is expressed in the ill-defined calls to “enter into the deeper life,” to “lay it all on the altar,” to “surrender,” to “yield” and so on.  If these calls are not defined or explained, they are can never be put to rest in our conscience.  The question sensitive hearts perpetually ask is “Have I yielded or surrendered enough?”

• The law is much less abusive, because at least it has definition.  Reading the 10 Commandments, we can readily see which specific one we have broken.  But how do I know if I have ever surrendered all?

• Religious manipulation that produces guilt starts out holding the carrot of approval in front of us but always ends up beating us with the rod of condemnation.

• It is true that God demands much.  In fact, his demands are more than we can deliver.  The good news is that Jesus meets God’s demands fully for us.  We don’t know how to worship perfectly, but he does.  We don’t know how to pray perfectly, but he does.  We don’t know how to love perfectly, but he is love.

“Be careful,” Jesus said to them. “Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” Mt. 16:6

• Jesus examined the Pharisees’ performance and found it wanting.  As he did so, he surely had in mind the shepherds of Ezekiel’s day.

Woe to the shepherds of Israel who only take care of themselves! Should not shepherds take care of the flock³ You eat the curds, clothe yourselves with the wool and slaughter the choice animals, but you do not take care of the flock. ⁴ You have not strengthened the weak or healed the sick or bound up the injured. You have not brought back the strays or searched for the lost. You have ruled them harshly and brutally. ⁵ So they were scattered because there was no shepherd, and when they were scattered they became food for all the wild animals. (Ezek 34:2-5)

• Both Ezekiel and Jesus condemned one fundamental error in the shepherds: they used the sheep rather than served them.

• Yeast is the irresistible power of corruption.  It is the putrefaction of evil that permeates truth, changing it into a mixture of truth and lie.  This is, of course, far more dangerous than a pure lie, because that is easily spotted and rejected.  Lie hidden within truth tricks us into acceptance. The true danger is the high-sounding religious lie mixed into a body of truth spoken by a person of respect.

• Followers cooperate with this abusive regime because they are told that it is the way to please God and gain his favor.

• If we must reject the yeasty, legalistic teaching of the Pharisees, what then are we to make of Jesus’ words in Matthew 23:3: “So you must obey [the Pharisees] and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach”?  How do we square “Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees” (Mt 16:6) with “You must obey them”?  Commentary by R.V.G. Tasker explains, “Jesus recognizes the rightful claims of the scribes, the legal experts of the Pharisaical party, to the exponents of the law; and so long as they confine themselves to that task, their words, he insists, and are to be respected, even if the conduct of some of them is inconsistent with their teaching.”  That is to say, so long as these teachers teach Scripture and apply it rightly, we are to follow what they say-but we are to do so with a critical eye and a discerning heart.

• Despite Jesus’ apparent utter rejection of the Pharisees in Matthew 23, he does not want any valid biblical teaching to be lost.  Jesus wants us to respect church officeholders and to give them a fair hearing.  Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 23:1-3 calls us to maturity and the right kind of independence from religious authority.  From this point he goes on to expose abusive religious authorities and their practices.  Jesus finally calls us to reject these abusers and to overthrow their religious systems.

• Small but strategically placed obstructions can trap and kill the life of a church. Most often, these obstructions are defective leaders. In Jesus’ day the strategically misplaced leaders were the scribes and Pharisees.

• We get angry about the issues we care about. If like Jesus, we get angry at spiritual abusers, it may indicate our deep concern for their victims. As David Seamands explains, “A person who cannot feel anger at evil is a person who lacks enthusiasm for good. If you cannot hate the wrong, it is very questionable whether you really love righteousness.”

• Jesus begins his expose of the Pharisees by showing us how they had seized the power with which they controlled their followers. Their power base was the seat of Moses. He said, “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat’ (Mt 23:2). Moses’ seat was not a mere metaphor; it was an actual stone chair or throne placed in front of a synagogue. The Pharisee ascended this seat of authority to assume spiritual power over common people. The Pharisees took their position of power for themselves. They were neither appointed by God nor elected by the people. They sat themselves down in Moses’ seat and grabbed for themselves the authority to rule.

• Men (sometimes women) who take for themselves “seats of authority” often feel the need to embellish their offices, positions or titles with additional “special claims.” They may point to their “unique calling,” their singular abilities,” their “great experience” or their “prophetic revelation” to back up their office or their position. None of these special claims necessarily has anything to do with true spiritual authority.

• If by appealing to position, unique claims or special anointing leaders succeed in creating a hierarchy in the church, they can more easily control those beneath them. They can also defend themselves against any who might challenge them.

• Many leaders today have fashioned for themselves ecclesiastical hierarchies with themselves at the top. Out of this twisted image of the body of Christ comes the supporting idea of “spiritual covering,” which functions as yet another tool of control. Spiritual covering pictures a chain of command with authority flowing through the chain from top to bottom. Those lower on the chain are to see those above them as their “covering” and submit to them as they would to Christ himself.

• Not only is there little or no biblical basis for the idea of covering, but it flies in the face of numerous broad-based, biblical teachings to the contrary: the egalitarian nature of church fellowship (Mt 23:8-12), the fraternal nature of church discipline (Mt 18) and the parity among members of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:14-26).

• Jesus stated clearly that the only legitimate spiritual authority is servant authority. He said that although rulers in the world’s business and government lord it over their followers, “not so with you.”

• Positional authority carries with it the power to coerce, to compel. Servant authority, however, cheerfully forfeits this power, so that those who submit to it can only do so freely and voluntarily.

• Though Paul recognized the offices of apostle, prophet, evangelist and the like, he understood these to be gifts or resources for the body. There is no hint in Paul’s writing that these offices constitute a pyramidal power structure. Although Paul was the most apostolic-minded of all the apostles, he used no official or ecclesiastical power to defend his authority. “By the meekness and gentleness of Christ, I appeal to you” (2 Cor 10:1; see also Rom 10:1,2, 2 Cor 1:24; 8:8, 1 Thess 2:7; Philem 8-9).

• What about Hebrews 13:17? To begin with, this verse does not apply to any leader who does not function first of all as a servant “watching over” the followers. Second, the New Testament word here for “obey” (peithomai) does not refer to the obedience that may be demanded by right or imposed by decree. Rather, this kind of trust is given voluntarily to leaders in response to their character and power of their persuasion.

• “We must have the courage to follow Christ’s example and overturn the system, be it a marriage or an organization, if that system is wrong. Silent submission in the face of violence, dishonesty and abuse will only enable that abuse to be passed on to generations” Stephen Arterburn and Jack Felton.

Q. So our so-called ”leaders” are buying senior citizen and Baby Boomer votes by piling massive debt on future generations?

A. Exactly! It’s like going to a fancy restaurant and ordering everything on the menu, secure in the knowledge that, when the bill comes, you’ll be dead.

Q. But surely we-the baby boomers and senior citizens- are not going to selfishly steal the future from our kids, and generation yet unborn!

A. Of course not! We’re going to let the government steal it for us.

Q. Well, OK, then! It sure is a good thing young people and generations yet unborn do not, as a rule, read the newspaper.

A. I’ll say! If they ever found out about this, they’d be putting anthrax in the nation’s Metamucil supply!