100 years ago--an anti-Christian spirit in China

The following article was published three months after the death of Sun Yat-sen, founder of the Republic of China and Premier of its governing party, the Kuomintang (KMT). China was ruled by the collective leadership of the Central Executive Committee of the Kuomintang from March 1925-May 1926, before Chiang Kai-shek won a power struggle for party and national leadership in 1927. The arguments used against Christianity in China in the 1920s sound like those used by the Communists in later years. As reported in an anonymous article pubished in the Border Cities Star, June 26, 1925 (bold in original):

Strong Anti-Christian Spirit is Big Factor in Chinese Situation

------------------------------

China's dislikes of foreigners is a stream gathered from many sources, but perhaps the most important of them is the strong anti-Christian spirit in China today. Naturally the Chinese have identified the foreign religion with the foreigners who first brought it to them and continued to preach it, and they believe it has been used as a cloak to conceal imperialist designs. But the sentiment is even wider than that. It is more than anti-Christian. it is anti-religious in the same sense as is the spirit among the leading Bolshevists. Probably the challenge of Christianity was responsible for the growth of anti-religious feeling. The Chinese were forced to think seriously upon religious matters because the question was pressed upon them by missionaries, and as a result, many of them came to the conclusion that all religious ideas were mistaken and immoral. The anit-religious movement is being carried on by the anti-Christian Federation among other similar agencies. They spring up like mushrooms and are manned largely by young and educated Chinese, many of them having been first trained in Christian missions.

AROUSED THE STUDENTS

Writing in The Nation, Stanley High, who is connected with the American Methodist Board of Foreign Missions, says that it is doubtful if even in Soviet Russia the literature of anti-religion has grown more rapidly in the past two years than it has in China. It was given impetus in 1922 by the eleventh conference of the World's Student Christian Federation in Pekin. Many distinguished representatives of organized Christianity addressed the student delegates from some 40 nations on the significance of the Christian world program. The publicity given the proceedings and some of the remarks of the speakers aroused hostility of the anti-religionists in Pekin, and shortly after the conference concluded there came into being the Student Anti-Religious movement, sponsored by several professors of national reputation. The anti-imperialist movement which began among students last year aided the drive against Christianity, and was followed by the Anti-Christian Federation organized by a prominent student leader who had been discharged from Shanghai College. He founded the paper, The Awakened, which is having a tremendous sale.

RELIGION IS OPPOSED

At the inauguration of the Federation a manifesto was issued declaring the purpose of the movement to "actively oppose Christianity and its various expressions with a nationalistic consciousness and a scientific spirit." In regard to religion in general opposition is declared because:

It is conservative and traditional and it does not make for intellectual progress.

It encourages denominational prejudice and hatred. It does not make for the unity and harmony of the human race.

It develops superstition (sic) in superhuman beings.

It does not make for scientific enlightenment.

It cultivates the attitude of dependence as over against the development of self-realization.

It suppresses individuality. It does not develop the human instincts.

CHRISTIANITY AND THE CHURCH

In regard to Christianity in particular, this opposition is especially pronounced because:

It is one form of religion.

It contains dogmatisms and monopolizes good teachings of the past.

It is the forerunner of imperialism and foreign exploitation.

Further, in regard to the Christian Church, hostility is expressed because:

It always allies itself with the influential class.

It draws people into its membership by material temptations.

It is alrady composed of eaters on religion (sic) as well as hypocrites.

It interferes with the civil and military affairs of China and other nations.

It sometimes meddles with personal affairs.

It substitutes God for gods and develops a servile attitude toward foreigners.

NOT OPPOSED TO CHRIST

Mr. High says that the movement is not fundamentally a result of Bolshevist propaganda though that has not been lacking. While foreign prestige in China has declined as a result of the war, the spirit of nationalism has constantly grown. It is believed that Western influence is the chief obstacle to a rediscovery of the basis of China's ancient civilization which is the aim of the young nationalists. It is particularly felt, says Mr. High, that Christian missionaries are too conservative to aid in China's progress. The books which are most reverenced in missionary circles are said to be of no interest whatever to many of the outstanding students. Ibsen, Kropotkin and Marx are mores esteemed even than Confucius, and they are at the centre of the intellectual ferment among the leading young Chinese. At the annual meeting of the National Federation of Provincial Educational Associations further anti-foreign sentiment was shown because education is being maintained in China by foreigners. This is held to kill the nationalistic spirit, and is an interference with the educational rights of a free people. Mr. High concludes by observing that though there is widespread hostility toward many Christian organizations there is very little hostility toward the person or teachings of Jesus Christ. He thinks it is possible that when the history of this period of western ascendancy is written, it may be recorded that its greatest achievement was not the advance of the organizations of Christianity, but the restoration of the person of Christ to the Orient.

90 years ago--Association of National German Jews urges support for Hitler

I should have posted this a few months ago on the actual anniversary, but better late than never...On August 19, 1934, 17 days after the death of President Paul von Hindenburg, a referendum was held in Germany on whether to merge the posts of Chancellor and President. 95.65% of registered voters went to the polls, with 89.93% voting "Yes" to the following:

The office of the national president is united with that of the national chancellor. In consequence, the former powers of the national president pass to the leader and national chancellor, Adolf Hitler. He appoints his deputy. Do you, German man, and you, German woman, approve of the arrangement made in this law?

The 10.07% "No" vote was reported in Western newspapers as a triumph for the opposition to Adolf Hitler, who had been Chancellor for less than 19 months. However, that view proved to be inaccurate, as combining the offices of head of government and head of state had the effect of allowing Mr. Hitler to take the title Führer und Reichskanzler (Führer and Reich Chancellor), consolidating his dictatorial power as leader of the Nazi regime.

While looking for contemporary newspaper accounts of the referendum, I came upon the following article, published as "Special Cable to the New York Times and Montreal Gazette," published in the Montreal Gazette, August 18, 1934 (bold, capitals in original):

GERMAN JEWS TOLD TO VOTE FOR HITLER

-----

Berlin League Says Suffering Necessary to Mend Harm Done

-----

Berlin, August 17--The League of National German Jews, a small Jewish organization in Berlin, issued today a summons to all German Jews to vote for Chancellor Hitler in the plebiscite Sunday. The league declared the Jews' suffering in Germany had been necessary in order to clear away the damage done by "un-German elements." The statement reads:

"We members of the League of National German Jews, founded in 1921, have always, in war or peace, placed the good of the German people and the German Fatherland above our own good. Accordingly, we greeted the national uprising of January, 1933, although it brought rigors for us, for we saw it as the only means to clear away the damage done in fourteen unhappy years by un-German elements.

"We agree fully with the political testament of Reich President and Field Marshal von Hindenburg, who called the accomplishment of Reich Chancellor Hitler and his movement a decisive step of major historical importance and stated that reconciliation which will include the whole German Fatherland must follow the national awakening and unification of the German people.

"To the German Fatherland belongs body and soul that portion of the Jews who, like ourselves, know no other fatherland than Germany. In the spirit of the dead Reich President's testament, we support the unification of the offices of Reich leader and Reich Chancellor.

"We urge all Jews who feel themselves Germans to vote "yes" on August 19."

Until coming across this article, I had never heaerd of the Verband nationaldeutscher Juden (Association of National German Jews aka League of National German Jews). It was founded by Max Naumann in 1921 and was anti-Zionist, while favouring assimilation of German Jews into the German Volksgemeinschaft (folk community). The Association regarded the anti-Semitism of the early months of the Nazi regime as merely an attempt to stir up the masses. As to the likely future for Jews in Germany as a result of their support for the "Yes" vote in the referendum, it might have become apparent immediately if the following was any indication, as reported by Associated Press, and published in The New York Times, August 20, 1934 (bold in original):

Mueller Hails Hitler's Victory Over Jews: Says Anti-Semitism Is Christian Campaign

Berlin, Aug. 19--Five thousand members of the German Christian Society celebrating Chancellor Hitler's victory tonight heard Reichbishop Ludwig Mueller call anti-Semitism a Christian campaign.

His words left no doubt in the minds of his hearers that the German Protestant church under his leadership will be a racial institution.

"Hitler's fight is a fight for Christendom against Jews, the most savage enemies of Christianity," the Bishop asserted. "The German people, united today, may go through bitterness and distress but will win this campaign for Christianity even if the Jews get together and determine to destroy the nation."

Drawing a parallel between Christ and Chancellor Hitler, the Reich Bishop said:

"As in the days of the old Christians, faith is equal to confidence. Jesus, preaching the gospel, pleaded for confidence. So did our leader when he put the plebiscite as a question of confidence to the nation. We as true Christians had to give him our 'ja,' as only our consent gives him the right to defend our religion."

Bishop Mueller said the election result was "the beginning of the whole nation's Christianity, since it had the courage to vote for and stand behind the leader in his fight against the Jews."

Walter Kinder, Nazi radical church leader, closed the meeting, held in the Friedrichshain Convention Hall, with the German Christian society slogan:

"With God, under the leadership of Hitler, we will march on."

Richard Steigmann-Gall, in his book The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945 (2003), refers to Reich Bishop Mueller as "a theological moderate among the German Christians" (p. 159).

How did the Association of National German Jews' policy of appeasement and assimilation work out for them? Not too well: the Association was declared illegal and was dissolved on November 18, 1935, and Mr. Naumann was arrested by the Gestapo the same day, and interned at Columbia concentration camp. He was released after a few weeks, and died of cancer on May 18, 1939 at the age of 64. Most other members of the Association were exterminated by the Nazis during the Holocaust in World War II.

The Verband nationaldeutscher Juden wasn't the only Jewish organization in Germany that supported the Nazis; Der deutsche Vortrupp. Gefolgschaft deutscher Juden (The German Vanguard: German Jewish Followers) was founded in February 1933--almost immediately after Mr. Hitler took office as Chancellor--by Hans-Joachim Schoeps, a professor of religions and religious history at the University of Erlangen. The German Vanguard was basically a youth movement of intellectuals, with a membership of 150 students, and regarded itself as a Jewish political movement within a resurgent German nationalism, while disdaining Eastern European Jews, Zionism, Marxism, and liberalism.

The German Vanguard was dissolved in December 1935, the month after the dissolution of the Association of National German Jews. Professor Schoeps, a monarchist, fled to exile in Sweden late in 1938, and spent World War II in that country, while his parents were deported to Theresienstadt concentration camp in June 1942, and his father died there six months later. Professor Schoeps returned to western Germany in the autumn of 1946, resuming his position at the University of Erlangen in 1950. He died on July 8, 1980 at the age of 71.

Small church in Las Vegas becomes a Covid-19 casualty

Online church services are better than nothing, but they're not an acceptable substitute for in-person services; as reported by John Przybys of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, February 15, 2021 (updated February 16, 2021) (links in original, inserted by blogger):

A church that opened last year with plans to conduct a live Easter service during the COVID pandemic is closing.

The Rev. Joseph Guy said Open Arms Community Church’s last service will be a virtual service on Feb. 28.

Guy last year announced plans to open the new church with a live Easter service attended by 35 to 50 members. At the time, state mandates prohibited gatherings of 10 or more people.

Guy, the church’s lead pastor, eventually canceled the live service. Instead, the Easter service was livestreamed, and Guy said the church never was able to recover from the live service’s cancellation.

While an established church may be able to more easily transition from live to virtual services, “when it’s a new church, you’ve got to make that personal connection with people,” he said, and not being able to do that “was just too much to overcome.”

Church members gathered for their first live service on Father’s Day, Guy said, but “we just couldn’t generate the crowd that we expected because it had been so long from Easter to June.”

Other services, mostly virtual, followed, but Guy said participation never exceeded 50.

The church’s final service will begin at 11 a.m. Feb. 28, and can be seen on Open Arms Community Church’s YouTube channel.

See also my post Covid-19 provides opportunities for police state persecution of Christians (May 7, 2020).

U.S. federal court of appeals rules against New York restrictions on houses of worship

It's not guaranteed, but if you dare to stand up for your rights, there's a chance you might win; of course, you won't win if you cravenly bow the knee to Caesar, as many churches have done. As reported by Shira Hanau of Jewish Telegraphic Agency, December 28, 2020 (link in original):

A federal court of appeals ruled that New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s capacity limits on houses of worship in areas with rising COVID-19 cases constituted a violation of religious liberty.

The ruling on Monday comes after a Supreme Court injunction last month blocking Cuomo from enforcing the rules until the lower court could reevaluate an earlier ruling that upheld state guidelines limiting synagogue attendance to 10 or 25 people.

The case, brought by the Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn and Agudath Israel of America, an advocacy organization representing haredi Orthodox Jews, was one of the first religious liberty cases to be decided by the court’s new conservative majority. The appeals court ruling was celebrated by Agudath Israel as confirmation that it had achieved a victory for religious liberty.

“The courts have clearly recognized that the restrictions imposed by New York State violate the constitutional rights of those seeking to attend religious worship services,” Rabbi Chaim Dovid Zwiebel, executive vice president of Agudath Israel of America, said in a statement Monday.

The court of appeals did not rule on the constitutionality of percentage capacity limits, which would have impacted smaller houses of worship. Houses of worship in zones with the highest rates of COVID-19, so-called red zones, were subjected to capacity limits of ten people or 25% of building capacity, whichever is fewer. In orange zones, the limit was 25 people or 33% of capacity, whichever is fewer.

The court ordered the district court to reevaluate its ruling on the percentage capacity limits imposed by Cuomo to determine if they discriminated against houses of worship.

Covid-19 provides opportunities for police state persecution of Christians

And as they spake unto the people, the priests, and the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees, came upon them,
Being grieved that they taught the people, and preached through Jesus the resurrection from the dead.
And they laid hands on them, and put them in hold unto the next day: for it was now eventide...
...But when they had commanded them to go aside out of the council, they conferred among themselves,
Saying, What shall we do to these men? for that indeed a notable miracle hath been done by them is manifest to all them that dwell in Jerusalem; and we cannot deny it.
But that it spread no further among the people, let us straitly threaten them, that they speak henceforth to no man in this name.
And they called them, and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus.
But Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye.
For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.
So when they had further threatened them, they let them go, finding nothing how they might punish them, because of the people: for all men glorified God for that which was done. Acts 4:1-3, 15-21

Freedom is everybody's business--your business, my business, the church's business--and the man who will not use his freedom to defend his freedom does not deserve his freedom. Carl McIntire

Any similarity between the subject of this post and the one immediately below, is of course, purely coincidental. ;) The Covid-19 crisis seems to be gradually winding down, but the harassment and persecution of Christians by politicians and police in the United States and Canada is continuing, and is unprecedented. Other blogs on my blog roll have reported on cases of Covid-19 persecution in the U.S.A., and the reader is invited to search those blogs for information. While churches in some areas are holding drive-in services with no problems, other parts of the country are less tolerant. I'll mention just a few examples from the United States of churches being prohibited from holding services that couldn't possibly be endangering health. First, this example from Tulsa, as reported by Michael Overall of the Tulsa World, March 29, 2020:

The mayor’s shelter-in-place orders scuttled plans for a Sunday morning drive-in church service at Tulsa’s iconic Admiral Twin theater.

The Tulsa Police Department informed the nondenominational Common Ground church Saturday afternoon that the service couldn’t happen, elder Brian Leonard said.

“We’re disappointed,” he said. “But we want to comply with the law of the land.”

Normally worshiping in a converted in-door movie theater near 51st Street and Memorial Road, the church had planned to use the drive-in theater to have services without violating Tulsa’s COVID-19 shutdown.

The Tulsa Health Department had approved the idea earlier in the week, including plans for Pastor Tom Dillingham to preach from the back of a flatbed truck while congregants stayed in their cars.

But Mayor G.T Bynum issued a safer-at-home order effective at 11:59 p.m. Saturday, banning “all public and private events or social gatherings outside of a family or living unit” until April 16.

After staying open Saturday night, the Admiral Twin will cancel movie showings Sunday night, owner Blake Smith told the Tulsa World.

He will seek clarification from the mayor’s office Monday on whether the drive-in could reopen under the new restrictions.

“If he wants us to stay closed, we’ll stay closed,” Smith said.

“We stay opened because we wanted to give people with cabin fever a place to go and still maintain social distancing. But if we need to close, we’ll close. Whatever it takes to get this all over with as soon as possible.”

This example from Las Vegas, as reported by John Przybys of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, April 9, 2020:

The pastor of a Las Vegas church who had been planning to conduct a live Easter service now says the church will only stream the service on YouTube.

The Rev. Joseph Guy, lead pastor of Open Arms Community Church, 2800 W. Sahara Ave., had been planning a live service for Sunday. On Wednesday, he announced plans to stream the service on the internet with just a handful of church staff members in the sanctuary, and offered the public the option of watching the service from their cars.

However, Gov. Steve Sisolak announced a few hours later that drive-in services, as well as religious gatherings of 10 or more people, now are prohibited in an effort to stem the spread of the novel coronavirus.

Guy said after Sisolak’s announcement that the church now only will livestream Sunday’s 6 p.m. service. Three to five church members will be in the sanctuary to handle the streaming, he said, and weekly services after Easter also will be livestreamed only.

“I think that’s probably the best option for us,” Guy said, although not being able to conduct a live Easter service to open the new church is “definitely a big disappointment for me.”

Guy said his goal was to “foster a sense of community on the biggest day in Church history.” He added that he holds “a deep respect for Governor Sisolak,” but called cancellation of the live service “a hard pill for me to swallow.”

One Las Vegas City Councillor has criticized the Governor's order, as reported by Blake Apgar of the Review-Journal, April 9, 2020 (link in original):

A Las Vegas City Council member and a group of religious leaders are speaking out against Gov. Steve Sisolak’s directive that bans gatherings of 10 or more people at places of worship.

Ward 2 Councilwoman Victoria Seaman gathered with faith leaders Thursday to speak to reporters about her opposition to the governor’s order.

“We all understand that these are trying times and that we need to make sacrifices to get through them,” Seaman said. “We do, however, disagree that those sacrifices need to include the free exercise of religion that this country was built on.”

Seaman’s public opposition comes one day after Sisolak announced the order, which includes a ban on pop-up and drive-in services. She said she considered the prohibition of drive-in services an overreach.

Pastor Paul Marc Goulet of the International Church of Las Vegas said his congregation wanted to hold Easter services in the church’s parking lot with people attending in their cars. Goulet, like Seaman, called the directive an overreach. He asked that Sisolak reconsider his decision.

“We’re asking politely, we’re asking you with all of our hearts, that this is something that’s both physical and emotional and relational,” Goulet said.

Seaman said late Thursday that City Attorney Brad Jerbic determined the International Church of Las Vegas will be able to hold its drive-in Easter service as long as no one leaves their cars and nothing is handed out.

“So we are elated that they can have their Easter drive-in service, and we think that it’s completely following all the guidelines of safety for the coronavirus,” she said.

A spokeswoman for Nevada’s coronavirus response effort declined to comment on the concerns Thursday, but Sisolak said Wednesday that the decision was not easy. A devout Catholic and frequent churchgoer himself, the governor said he prayed about his decision before announcing it.

Sisolak previously issued a general ban on gatherings of 10 or more people in March.

Pastor David Teis of Liberty Baptist Church also took issue with Sisolak’s directive.

“We do not believe that the governor has a right constitutionally to tell us what we can and cannot do,” Teis said.

Because the free exercise of religion is a fundamental constitutional right enshrined in the First Amendment, any restrictions must pass the highest level of legal scrutiny. Rules must be written narrowly to serve a compelling government interest — in this case, to prevent of the spread of disease.

Sisolak encouraged religious leaders to use alternatives to in-person services, such as online streaming. The International Church of Las Vegas website said services are only being held online until further notice.

“We are living in unique times. Science tells us that putting large numbers of people together during a pandemic for any reason … is an invitation for disease to do its work,” Sisolak said in announcing the order Wednesday.

As of Thursday night, the state had reported more than 80 deaths from the novel coronavirus...

What's disappointing to this blogger are the wimpy responses of some church leaders. The governing authorities are far exceeding their legitimate authority, and have no right to deny the freedom of these churches to hold services, especially since the services can't possibly be regarded by anyone with any wisdom of violating the spirit of social distancing. Those who are taking away the freedom of Christians and others can be trusted only to keep dredging up the same old lies to justify such behaviour, especially "These measures are only temporary" and "It's all for everybody's good." Pastor Dillingham in Tulsa used the phrase "comply with the law of the land," but he fails to recognize that these aren't laws that have been passed by legislative bodies, but are just decrees being issued by dictators. The churches mentioned in the above articles should have gone ahead and held services, anyway, as a challenge to the unconstitutional behaviour of the authorities.

Two churches in Kansas decided not to take the denial of their rights lying down; as reported by Jason Tidd of the Wichita Eagle, April 16, 2020 (updated April 17, 2020):

Two Kansas churches and their pastors are suing the governor over her executive order that bans mass religious gatherings due to the novel coronavirus pandemic.

The lawsuit was filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Wichita by Calvary Baptist Church in Junction City and pastor Aaron Harris and First Baptist Church in Dodge City and pastor Stephen Ormond. They are being represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom. Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly is the only defendant.

The federal lawsuit follows a narrow decision by the Kansas Supreme Court on Saturday that allowed Kelly’s mass gathering ban to prohibit religious services with more than 10 people. The ruling came before Easter Sunday worship services, and justices did not consider the constitutionality of the order relating to religious liberty.

The churches and their pastors are asking a federal judge to issue an injunction prohibiting Kelly’s executive order from being enforced, allowing churches to meet in-person with more than 10 people. The pastors also seek a declaration that the executive order violates the First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment, as well as the Kansas Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

The willingness of churches in Kansas to stand up for their rights brought a positive result, as reported by Anna Spoerre of the Wichita Eagle, April 19, 2020 (links in original):

The Rev. Scott Hanks said Sunday’s in-person service at Heritage Baptist Church in Lawrence didn’t look much different from last weekend’s.

Congregants still sat with a pew between them to follow social distancing guidelines. They didn’t shake hands. The offering plate wasn’t passed around, and communion wasn’t administered.

The biggest difference: more people showed up.

Heritage Baptist Church is one of at least three churches in Kansas to continue holding in-person services as a legal battle continues over whether churches should be excluded from Gov. Laura Kelly’s executive order limiting mass gatherings to 10 or fewer people.

Local, state and national public health officials have said people should avoid gathering in groups, as part of a strategy to slow the spread of the new coronavirus.

Earlier this month, a board of the state’s top legislators overrode Kelly’s order. Then, the Kansas Supreme Court struck down the override hours before Easter.

The latest development came Saturday when a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order against part of Kelly’s executive order. The ruling paved the way for in-person religious services without violating the law.

Hanks, the pastor at Heritage Baptist in Lawrence, declined to say exactly how many people attended Sunday.

“I’m sure I could, but I better not do that,” he said. “I guess I don’t want to stir up more problems by giving out numbers.

But Hanks said the crowd had grown from the week before and that it was “absolutely” more than 10 people, adding that he “definitely had a good crowd today.”

As state officials in recent weeks began encouraging social distancing and placing tighter restrictions on gatherings, many churches turned to the Internet to stream their services without the physical presence of their laity...

...Pastors of two other churches — Calvary Baptist Church in Junction City and First Baptist Church in Dodge City — filed a lawsuit against Gov. Laura Kelly on Thursday, saying her order violated the first amendment and the Kansas Preservation of Religious Freedom Act.

They are being represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian nonprofit.

On Saturday U.S. District Judge John Broomes issued a temporary restraining order against part of Kelly’s executive order.

“Plaintiffs have made a sufficient showing that a live controversy exists as to whether the Governor’s current restrictions on religious activity . . . violate Plaintiffs’ First Amendment right to freely exercise their religion,” Broomes wrote in the ruling.

“Defendant has not argued that mass gatherings at churches pose unique health risks that do not arise in mass gatherings at airports, offices, and production facilities. Yet the exemption for religious activities has been eliminated while it remains for a multitude of activities that appear comparable in terms of health risks.”

As part of the Broomes’s order, the plaintiffs’ churches have to abide by 24 protocols, including those Hanks observed his congregation following Sunday.

Many of the church’s elderly members have been staying home, Hanks said. His congregation includes about 300 members. Some in attendance wore gloves and masks.

He noted that Douglas County had 43 confirmed cases and zero deaths as of Sunday, according to Douglas County health officials. No church members or relatives of church members have tested positive, he said.

“I am concerned, and obviously other precautions might have to be taken if there was some way the virus was in the church or somebody who had it,” Hanks said. “But there’s none of that.”

Hanks added it’s not possible for his church to stream services. There are no fiber optics on the side of Interstate-70 where the church sits, he said.

He’s also heard of churches hosting drive-up services in their parking lots.

“But you can’t get around that the Bible says ‘not forsaking the assembling of yourselves together,’” he said, referencing a passage from the book of Hebrews.

“There was no internet when the Bible was written,” he continued. “God intended for people to get together for church, and so that’s why we’re doing it, because we believe that’s what God wants.”

Hanks said he’s not taking the coronavirus lightly, acknowledging there is a risk when gathering.

He plans to continue following outlined precautions and holding in-person services for the foreseeable future.

“I just like people to know that we’re not some crazy cult group or something that demands for people to come to church,” Hanks said. “All we’re trying to do is during this virus time, is to leave a way out for people to be able to come to church.

“I look at it this way: Out of all the times that we need God, it’s now, so why would we close church doors during a time of national virus?”

In a news release Saturday, Kelly said the ruling is only the first step, adding that her order wasn’t about religion, but rather a public health crisis.

”There is still a long way to go in this case, and we will continue to be proactive and err on the side of caution where Kansans’ health and safety is at stake,” she said.

“Courts across the country have recognized that during this pandemic emergency the law allows governments to prioritize proper public health and safety...”

Meanwhile, the same things are going on in Trudeaupia Canada. Here's an example from Saskatchewan, as reported by Stephanie Taylor of Canadian Press, April 14, 2020:

NIPAWIN, Sask. - Saskatchewan's premier wants an explanation for why an Easter drive-in church service was prohibited over the weekend.

Scott Moe's office said the Saskatchewan Health Authority has been asked to account for its decision, as drive-in events seem to maintain safe physical distancing.

"While we must remain vigilant in observing physical distancing, we should also encourage innovative and unique ideas that support the ability of Saskatchewan residents to pull together while staying apart," Moe's office said in a statement Tuesday.

Other churches across the country have held drive-in services.

Moe's office noted that hundreds of people were allowed to pay tribute Monday to the family of Edmonton Oilers hockey player Colby Cave, who died of a brain bleed in Toronto. Vehicles stretching several kilometres lined a highway as his family returned home to Battleford, northwest of Saskatoon.

Last month, the province issued a public health order limiting gatherings to no more than 10 people, one of several restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Jordan Gadsby, lead pastor of the Nipawin Apostolic Church, said people were invited to an arena parking lot where they could tune into an Easter Sunday church service from inside their vehicles.

“We thought it would be worthwhile to try and do something a little bit creative and a little bit different," he said.

Gadsby said people in the community were excited about the event, which would have met physical-distancing requirements because nobody needed to step outside a vehicle or roll down windows.

"It’s good for people to have something to look forward to, even if we're not really in the same space," he said.

"When everyone’s stuck at home for long periods of time, it takes a toll on our mental health and our spiritual health."

On Saturday, he said he was called by a public health official who explained that complaints had been made about the drive-in service.

"I believe the wording was that you’re strongly recommended not to do this and we consider this to be a mass gathering, which goes against the public health guidelines," Gadsby said.

He told the official that worshippers wouldn't have physical contact, but there was still concern people would leave their vehicles and visit with one another.

To avoid placing the church and anyone attending at risk of being fined, the church decided to cancel, Gadsby said.

"Having to cancel this event was one of the most disappointing and discouraging moments of leadership for us."

During a press conference Tuesday, health authority CEO Scott Livingstone said the church didn't have a plan for keeping people inside their vehicles during the service.

Livingstone said he would follow up with public health officials, but added he believes the drive-in service presented different circumstances than the vehicular rally for the Cave family.

"A spontaneous event that we're not aware of is quite different than an event that was planned, advertised and that we received public concerns about," he said.

The Calgary-based Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms said it has sent a letter to the health authority expressing concern about the drive-in service being declared a mass gathering.

Jay Cameron, a litigation manager with the justice centre, said he believes what happened to the church wasn't justified, because no health risk was posed by people staying inside their own vehicles.

"People are longing for a sense of community during the coronavirus outbreak and they still have a right of freedom of association and religion as protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms."

Cameron said charter rights should not be infringed on based upon hypothetical situations, such as people possibly leaving their vehicles.

He said he wants the health authority to admit it made a mistake and that it won't be repeated; otherwise, the centre will consider legal action.

It's interesting to note that the order issued in Saskatchewan came not from the province's highest elected official, but from a faceless bureaucracy--again, exceeding its legitimate authority.

In Calgary, police have shown themselves to be not representatives of God (as Romans 13 extremists like to promote them), but as bullies throwing their weight around. As reported by Keean Bexte of Rebel News, April 18, 2020:



This wasn't an isolated incident in Calgary, as reported by Mr. Bexte, April 29, 2020:



A similar incident occurred in Edmonton, as reported by Jeff Labine of the Edmonton Journal, April 24, 2020:

An Edmonton man who was handing out religious material in Old Strathcona last week is facing a $1,200 fine following complaints he wasn’t complying with physical distancing guidelines.

James Kitchen, a staff lawyer with the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, said on Thursday his client along with two other men were public speaking and distributing written material using a long stick with a claw at the end last Friday. Around 7 p.m. an Edmonton city police officer ticketed one of the three after initially warning them to leave.

Kitchen said the ticket was issued because his client wasn’t social distancing but he said cellphone footage taken by the three men shows that’s not the case.

“The fact that there is a pandemic doesn’t mean there’s no rule of law, doesn’t mean there is no Constitution,” he said. “In fact, I would argue that it is at that point those foundational principles on how our society operates is even more important.”

To minimize the spread of COVID-19, Alberta’s chief medical officer of health Dr. Deena Hinshaw mandated on March 27 that people gathering outdoors must be at least two metres apart.

Municipal and provincial officials have been granted additional powers to enforce public health orders and guidelines. Fines for violating a public health order start at $1,000...

...Cheryl Voordenhout, a media relations adviser with Edmonton Police Service, said in an email Thursday police received complaints about a small group in the area of 82 Avenue and 104 Street occupying the sidewalk, making it impossible for pedestrians to keep the two-metre distance.

“The group was asked to move one block north, where there is more room, and were given time to comply with the request,” she said. “After they did not comply, one member of the group was issued a ticket under the Public Health Act.”

Voordenhout said it is standard procedure to use the lowest intervention first before escalating to more stringent measures. She said after a verbal warning was not complied with, the next step was to issue a single ticket, rather than ticketing all of the members of the group.

Kitchen, who did not provide any additional details about his client over safety concerns, said the man has had run-ins with police before but didn’t elaborate. He said more details would be revealed if the ticket is challenged in court.

“They were staying put, they had their spot and they were just staying there,” Kitchen said. “According to what the officer said, the complaints were about people being annoyed about stepping around these guys because there’s the six-foot requirement. There were some accusations they weren’t maintaining that even though they were stationary the whole time.”

It's encouraging to see that one pastor in Ontario isn't giving in to police state bullying, as reported by Randy Richmond of the London Free Press, April 28, 2020 (link in original):

AYLMER — Police videotaped a drive-in church service but issued no tickets Sunday as a battle over the meaning of a provincewide emergency order reached new levels.

Church of God Pastor Henry Hildebrandt spoke for about a half-hour to members of his congregation, sitting in about 70 cars in the parking lot of the church, windows up and their radios tuned into the service.

Speaking from a covered platform outside the church, Hildebrandt gave a passionate defence of the need for churchgoers to meet on a Sunday morning.

“I am so glad, so glad we can do it like this. I can never be distant from you, never, I can never be distant from you,” Hildebrandt said. “We’re here this morning in order for you to cast your eyes on me . . . to come here so we can see one another.”

“So why don’t we just wave at each other and honk a little bit?” he said at one point, prompting one of several loud explosion of support from car horns.

“I was overwhelmed to see how many people did stop by to listen in and I also feel we did very well in social distancing,” Hildebrandt said after the service.

“This is not a gathering because people are staying in their vehicles. There was no crowd to be seen anywhere. When I preach, I use my hands, my arms, half of my preaching is by my actions. It’s very important to interact that way, As you saw we waved at each other and blinked the lights. It just makes all the difference.”

Aylmer police officers did not stop anyone entering the parking lot and helped with traffic after the service. They videotaped from the road and from the church driveway.

Watching and listening to the service was London lawyer Nick Cake, who is representing the church in any legal action brought by police.

“There were no laws being broken here. The spirit of the law is to keep people apart physically, not to keep cars apart in a parking lot. It’s to prevent public contact,” Cake said.

“The only ones out of their cars were you guys (about a dozen journalists) and the police.”

Cake said he hopes police witnessed the safety measures taking place.

“Hopefully they do see that everyone kept their windows up and this was just akin to a Costco parking lot. The right thing would be to continue to let people operate in this way.”

Hildebrandt said he understood police would be taking the videotaped recordings to the Crown’s office Monday to determine if charges should be laid.

Aylmer police Chief Zvonko Horvat said last week his officers would lay charges under an Ontario emergency order imposed to slow the spread of COVID-19 if the Church of God held the drive-in service, as it has done twice this month.

But The Alberta-based Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms says police don’t have the right to ban drive-in services.

“The Charter of Rights isn’t suspended just because we have an emergency facing our society. There are measures that are going to be justifiable that do restrict the freedoms we normally have,” Lisa Bildy of the justice centre said in an interview Sunday. “But there is a balancing act that has to happen and there always has to be a minimal impairment of those fundamental freedoms.”

The Church of God and other churches across Canada have come with solutions that allow congregations to worship together safely, said Bildy, a London lawyer.

“They’re not doing anything to jeopardize anybody’s health. I think there should be some accommodation from the authorities as well,” she said. “Parking lots all over the community are filled with people. If it’s in front of a store, it’s fine, but put it in front of a church and somehow it now becomes a problem.”

Bildy said she was waiting to see what Aylmer police would do before considering next steps.

Aylmer police were notified about both of the previous services and sent officers to monitor the gatherings, Hildebrandt said in an earlier interview.

A constable confirmed that officers witnessing the service last Sunday saw no violations, Hildebrandt said.

But a photograph of the church’s parking lot full of cars was posted on Facebook, generating negative comments to police, Hildebrandt said.

Individuals caught breaking Ontario’s emergency orders could get slapped with a $750 ticket. In more serious cases involving a court summons, convictions carry a maximum fine of $100,000 and up to one year in jail.

The fine increases to $500,000 for company directors and $10 million for corporations.

Hildebrandt said he has tried working with police, offering to pay officers to watch the service if that’s necessary to ensure safety measures are followed.

“I have tried every which way. But the chief, I would say he is on the wrong side of history. This morning this was the safest parking lot as far as COVID-19, this was the safest parking lot in town, by far.”

About 300 metres down the road from the church, people are allowed to park at the liquor store, get out and buy alcohol without any legal trouble, Hildebrandt said.

“We absolutely do not want to cause unnecessary disturbances in Aylmer. I don’t want to cause trouble. But I saw no way around it,” Hildebrandt said. “I know we were with God’s blessings this morning. We plan to be here next Sunday, the Lord willing.”

As reported by the London Free Press, April 26, 2020:



As reported by David Menzies of Rebel News, April 28, 2020:



Pastor Hildebrandt was interviewed by Andrew Lawton of True North, April 29, 2020:



Fortunately, Pastor Hildebrandt's determination to stand up to police bullying was rewarded, as reported by Mr. Menzies, May 2, 2020:



The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms issued the following press release on May 2, 2020 (links in original):

AYLMER: The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (jccf.ca) today announced that it will file a Charter challenge against the Ontario government, on behalf of the Church of God in Aylmer, Ontario, for its infringement of the church’s freedom of peaceful assembly. Ontario authorities have threatened to fine the church despite its use of strict “social distancing” measures that eliminate any discernible risk to public health during their “drive-in” church services where people stay inside parked vehicles.

The Church of God, like other congregations across the country, has been prevented from holding in-person services, but found a creative and safe way to bring parishioners back together for worship while ensuring member and public safety. A drive-in service was held for the last three Sundays in their church parking lot, with congregants remaining in their vehicles with the windows up, listening to the service on the radio. Only members of the worship team, no greater than five in number, are permitted outside of their vehicles, and they also follow strict physical distancing guidelines.

Despite successfully conducting two such services with the approval of police, complaints were made by people who saw a photo of the Aylmer Church of God parking lot, and mistakenly assumed that the congregants were inside the building. The Aylmer Police Chief then threatened, on April 20, that any further services would be considered a breach of the law and subject to stiff penalties. Penalties could include fines of $750 to $100,000 and up to one year in jail.

The church held its third drive-in service on April 26, again abiding by all social distancing and public health protection measures. Police attended on the church’s private property, videotaping all of the vehicles and maintaining an ominous presence.

Although the provincial Crown Attorney declined to proceed with charges on this occasion, the Aylmer Police Chief has declared that this was an opportunity to “educate” the congregation, and that police investigation could again follow if complaints are received.

The Province’s Order under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act prohibits gatherings of more than five people, including for the purposes of conducting religious services, rites or ceremonies. Despite the fact that many larger stores and businesses remain open, with varying degrees of success in limiting physical contact between customers, churches and other religious centres have been singled out and effectively closed.

The Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, like all laws in this country, must comply with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees citizens that the government will not infringe their freedoms of peaceful assembly and religion, among other fundamental freedoms. The onus is on government, not citizens, to show that the violation of Charter freedoms is “demonstrably justified.” Where there is a pressing and substantial concern, such as a declared public health emergency, reasonable restrictions may be imposed, but governments are required to violate Charter rights and freedoms as little as possible, only to the extent truly necessary to protect public health.

The Government of Ontario has had ample time to clarify its Order to ensure that it is not overly broad, and that it does not arbitrarily target religious groups. Recently, the Saskatchewan Public Health Authority reversed its ban on drive-in church services, after receiving a legal warning letter from the Justice Centre.

The Ontario government, copied on a letter from the Justice Centre to the Aylmer Police Chief last week, has failed to respond, leaving the church with no option but to commence legal proceedings.

“For many religious communities, coming together to worship is an important part of their faith, and while not perfect, solutions such as drive-in services allow them to exercise their fundamental freedoms of peaceful assembly and religion while still respecting the government’s orders to protect public health,” says Justice Centre lawyer Lisa Bildy.

“The measures taken by the Church provide much more safety to public health than long lineups of people waiting to get into the liquor store, or sitting in their vehicles bumper to bumper at the Tim Horton’s drive-thru – all permitted activities,” adds Bildy. “On Sunday mornings, the Church of God has the safest parking lot in town.”

“Citizens across the country are attempting, in a good-natured manner, to comply with the extraordinarily restrictive measures which have been imposed. The Covid-19 outbreak, however, does not suspend the exercise of the Charter. The restriction on religious gatherings, in which people exclusively occupy their personal vehicles on a parking lot while worshipping, is irrational, unnecessary, and not a minimal impairment of Charter rights,” concludes Bildy.

The Justice Centre is presently preparing court documents on behalf of the Church.

Pastor Hildebrandt's church held another drive-in service on May 3, 2020 without incident. As reported by Mr. Menzies, May 4, 2020:



I don't know if all those who showed up were regular attenders of that church, but I suspect that many were Christians from other churches who went to express solidarity with the church and pastor. The willingness of at least some Canadian Christians to stand up for their God-given rights and refuse to cave in to bullies is a positive development; let's pray that more Christians will have the courage to defend their freedom.

British Columbia Supreme Court rules that Indian cleansing ritual imposed on schoolchildren is "cultural," not "religious"

This blogger has long maintained that the judges in British Columbia are the most mentally and morally retarded in Trudeaupia Canada, and their latest outrage does nothing to alter my opinion. As reported by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, January 8, 2020 (link in original):

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (jccf.ca) is disappointed with the January 8, 2020 Supreme Court of BC decision that allows schools to require children to participate in religious or spiritual rituals, despite parental objections to the explicitly religious aspect of “cleansing” the spirits of children. In 2015, a Port Alberni school required children to participate in a smudging ceremony whereby smoke from burning sage was fanned over the classroom, furniture and space occupied by children ’s children. In a letter to parents, the school claimed that this ritual took place for the express purposes of cleansing the children’s spirits of negative energy. Later in the school year, a prayer was offered at a mandatory student assembly.

“We are reviewing the decision with an eye to next steps,” stated Jay Cameron, counsel for Candice Servatius and Litigation Manager at the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms. “This is a disappointing decision for citizens from any religion or cultural background, each of whom has a constitutional right to be free from state-compelled spirituality.”

The week-long case against School District 70 was heard in November 2019 in Nanaimo, B.C. The Justice Centre represented mother Candice Servatius, whose two children were subjected to a religious or spiritual ritual at John Howitt Elementary School without her knowledge or consent. Witnesses for the Attorney General of B.C. and the Nuu-chul-nuth Tribal Council, which intervened in the case, testified during cross-examinations that it is not consistent with First Nation’s practice to compel anyone to be smudged against their will, and that it is “unnecessary” to hold cleansing ceremonies in classrooms in order to teach about First Nations culture.

However, in September of 2015, Mrs. Servatius received a letter from the principal of John Howitt Elementary School (JHES) in Port Alberni, BC, where her two children attend. The letter informed parents that JHES would be hosting a “Traditional Nuu-chah-nulth Classroom/Student Cleansing” performed by a “Nuu-chah-nulth Member” in the school’s classrooms. The letter did not provide a date for when these cleansing rituals would take place. The term Nuu-chah-nulth is used to describe fifteen related First Nation tribes who live on the southwest coast of Vancouver Island.

The letter from the school outlined specific beliefs of the Nuu-chah-nulth: “everything is one, all is connected” and “everything has a spirit.” The school’s letter described in detail how the cleansing ritual would “cleanse” the classroom of “energy” and cleanse the “spirits” of the students. The letter claimed that without cleansing, the classroom and even the furniture would harbour negative “energy” and would not be safe until the “energy” was “released.” The letter stated that each student would participate in the cleansing ritual by holding onto a cedar branch while having “smoke from Sage fanned over [their] body and spirit.”

Concerned about the explicitly supernatural and religious nature of the cleansing ritual, and how it conflicted with her own family’s religious beliefs, Mrs. Servatius immediately went to the school to learn more. When she arrived, she was shocked to find out that the ritual had already been imposed on her nine-year old daughter. Mrs. Servatius had received less than 24 hours of notice from the school, and did not have the opportunity to opt her child out of the religious ritual.

When the child expressed to her teacher that she did not want to participate, the teacher told the girl that it would be “rude” not to participate in the ritual and that “all” the students were “required” to participate.

In January of 2016, Mrs. Servatius learned that a prayer based on First Nations spirituality had been performed at a JHES student assembly, with explicit references to an unspecified “god”. JHES did not notify parents.

School District 70 argued in court that the ceremonies and prayers that children are required to participate in violate the right of Mrs. Servatius and her children to be free of government-imposed religion, and claimed that such rituals are merely “cultural”.

One can hardly imagine the Court coming up with such a ruling if a charismaniac had insisted on going into a school and holding a service in which he cast out demons; the only difference I can think of is that charismaniacs view demons as spirit beings rather than negative energy. And I find it strange that Canadian Indians, who are increasingly whining about "cultural appropriation," should insist on forcing non-Indians to participate in their "cultural" ritual.

University of Alberta Pro-Life achieves victory in court over university administration

And now for something completely different: an item of good news, as reported by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, January 6, 2020 (links in original):

EDMONTON: The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (jccf.ca) is pleased with the January 6, 2020 decision of the Alberta Court of Appeal, which rejects the University of Alberta’s imposition of a $17,500 security fee on UAlberta Pro-Life. Demanded by the University in 2016, this security fee had prevented the small student club from hosting educational displays on campus. Analysis of the decision is ongoing.

The case arose in March of 2015, when the University of Alberta condoned the behaviour of a mob that physically obstructed a peaceful, stationary pro-life display on campus, which had been authorized and approved by the University. The mob used sheets, towels, banners, and mega-phones, making it impossible for passers-by to view the signs. The mob effectively silenced intellectual discussion and inquiry, in violation of the Code of Student Behaviour. Prior to this physical obstruction and disruption of a university-approved campus event, the University’s president had stated publicly that the pro-life group was entitled to express its opinions on campus. Then-president Indira Samarasekera stated the University must facilitate and protect the peaceful expression of all views, regardless of popularity.

Dr. Samarasekera’s statement was not taken seriously by campus security or by the students who violated the Code of Student Behaviour. The University’s campus security repeatedly told members of the obstructing mob that they were violating the Code of Student Behaviour, which expressly prohibits interrupting and obstructing university-related activities and events. Yet campus security took no action to stop the obstruction, or to discipline the students who identified themselves publicly and boasted on social media about their success in silencing a message they disagreed with.

In 2016, UAlberta Pro-Life applied again for a two-day campus event with a stationary display. The University then demanded a $17,500 security fee as a condition for going ahead with this campus event.

In an email, the University demanded that pro-life students pay for the wages of security guards and police, and costs of barricading the venue, and pay for the potential misconduct of people violating the University’s Code of Student Behaviour by obstructing and disrupting the display. Rather than render an invoice to the self-identified and self-confessed rule-breakers, the University instead told the small pro-life club that it could no longer set up a display on campus unless it first paid $17,500 in security fees. Unable to pay $17,500, UAlberta Pro-Life was forced to cancel the event that was planned for February 2016.

“In issuing this demand, the University of Alberta ignored the fact that any threat to safety and security that may have existed on campus came uniquely from those who physically obstructed and loudly interrupted a university-approved event,” stated lawyer John Carpay, president of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, which represents the students in their court action.

In its court application, filed in April of 2016, UAlberta Pro-Life sought a declaration that the University’s imposition of the $17,500 security fee on the club was illegal and unjustifiably violated the fundamental Canadian value of freedom of expression, protected by section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The court application asked for an order prohibiting the University from imposing such financial burdens on law-abiding students in future.

The court application also sought a ruling that the University made an unreasonable and therefore illegal decision in March of 2015 to condone the conduct of students who disrupted and blockaded the University-authorized UAlberta Pro-Life campus event, in violation of the Code of Student Behaviour. Although the University had advance notice that a mob was being organized to obstruct the display, and although Dr. Samarasekera had warned that any misbehaviour would be investigated and prosecuted, the University of Alberta Protective Services (UAPS) did nothing to stop the blockading and physical obstruction. UAPS also did not photograph or seek to identify any blockading student, even though the Code clearly prohibits students from disrupting or obstructing University-related functions.

Before taking court action, UAlberta Pro-Life first filed a formal complaint in March 2015 with UAPS against the disruptive students who had violated the Code of Student Behaviour. It took UAPS over eight months to release a decision. On November 30, 2015 UAPS confirmed that the University would not charge or prosecute students who had disrupted, blocked and obstructed the March 2015 display on campus. This decision came in spite of UAPS possessing ample photographic and video evidence as to which students had violated the Code of Student Behaviour, in addition to social media posts in which these blockading students publicly boasted about their own behaviour.

The Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench ruled in favour of the University in October 2017. The British Columbia Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) intervened before the Alberta Court of Appeal, in support of freedom of expression. The students appealed, and now have a decision from the Alberta Court of Appeal.

Christians reported fleeing Gaza because of persecution

This is the predictable result of self-government in the Palestinian Authority; as reported by Elizabeth Blade of Sputnik News, December 16, 2019 (bold, links in original):

A 60-year-old Christian from Gaza is now living on the streets of Nazareth but says he prefers to stay there than to go back to Gaza, where he had lived his entire life.

Kamal Tarazi fled the Gaza Strip in 2007 after Hamas, an Islamic group considered a terrorist outfit in Israel, seized control of the enclave, ousting its previous government, officials from Fatah.

"The moment they took control, they started persecuting us, ruining our churches and forcing Christians to convert to Islam", the 60-year-old Christian recalls.

The Turning Point

It was then that Tarazi decided to organise demonstrations against the movement, uniting Christians and Muslims alike. The calls to act didn't move the masses, but they did anger Hamas.

"I was jailed several times. Do you know what a Hamas prison is? It is pure torture", he explains, adding that the Islamic group decided to keep him alive to avoid depicting themselves as persecutors of the local Christian population, something that could potentially anger the international community.
After two months in prison, Tarazi had had enough. Shortly before Christmas, he applied for a permit that would allow him to cross the border into Israel and then travel to Bethlehem - located in the West Bank - to attend a series of religious ceremonies.

Once the permit was given and the border was crossed, Tarazi vowed he would never go back, and he is not alone.

Gaza's Christian community has been steadily declining over the years. Before Hamas came to power in 2007, Christians made up some 3,500 people in the Strip. Now, however, there are no more than 1,300 and Tarazi says the actual number is even lower.

"I am sure there are no more than 500 Christians left in Gaza and it is just part of the general trend", he explains.

Over the years, many Gazans decided to flee the Strip, unable to cope with the difficult security and economic situation.

In 2018 alone, some 35,000 Gazans fled the Strip and Tarazi says the number of those who have left since 2007 surpassed 200,000 people.

"For Gaza, with its total population of 1.8 million, this number is significant", he continues.

The Comeback

Despite promises he would never go back fearing for his life, Tarazi decided to give it a try in 2014, shortly before Israel started its operation Protective Edge aimed at putting an end to the continuous rocket barrage emanating from the Strip and targeting Israel's southern communities.

"I missed my family and wanted to see how they were doing", he says. But when he came home, he found an empty place.

"My wife and daughter left the flat where we used to live and moved in with my parents-in-law. As for my house, Hamas turned it into a warehouse, where they kept rockets and various ammunition", he goes on, adding that he wanted to flee again but the Islamic group wouldn't let him do so, imprisoning him for several months.
That, however, didn't silence Tarazi and every time he was out of prison, he gathered crowds sending a clear message to Hamas: "Bidna Naesh" - Arabic for "we want to live".

Similar protests have been staged by other peace activists but just like in the case of Tarazi, they too were silenced.

Hamas's Days Numbered?

But Tarazi says the policy to silence those who oppose the Hamas regime cannot continue for too long. "Christians and Muslims live well together in Gaza but both are tired of this organisation that kills and damages everything around them. Their days are numbered", he warns, adding that the situation in Gaza is explosive.

In Gaza, where 75 percent of the population lives in poverty, the unemployment rate is 52 percent, and the average salary is less than $20 a day, some 68 percent of Palestinians describe their situation as either bad or very bad, according to a recent poll conducted by the Palestinian Centre for Policy and Survey Research.

Leaving for good

"My situation was so bad and I was so desperate to leave that at some stage I tore my clothes off in public and wanted to set myself ablaze", Tarazi recalls, adding that Hamas prevented him from doing so. To hush him they finally gave him a permit to leave Gaza, five years after his return.

"Initially I went to Bethlehem and from there to a church in Nazareth that gave me shelter for some time, until one day they asked me to pay for the accommodation they provided me with, which of course I couldn't afford, and that pushed me to the streets of Nazareth, where I currently live", he continues.
With winter approaching, no money in his pocket, and no Israeli job permit, Tarazi relies on the aid of charity organisations.

But help won't come as Israel lacks relevant bodies that could take care of Tarazi's needs.

"Israel has organisations that take care of African refugees and NGOs that help Palestinians with mainly legal advice but none of them will be able to provide him with housing, medication or even food", explained a representative of Gisha, a non-profit organisation that protects the freedom of movement of Palestinians.
Tarazi, mewanwhile, continues to stroll along the streets of Nazareth, hoping that ordinary citizens will show more empathy.

Sputnik reached out to a number of other NGOs and aid organisations but none was able to help. Hamas hasn't responded to a request for comment by the time of publication.

Declaration of Christian faith can hurt one's job prospects in Norway

Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; John 15:20ab

Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. II Timothy 3:12

As reported by Sputnik News, November 13, 2019 (links in original):

The Christian faith is often seen as a handicap for job seekers, who sometimes go so far as to ask for articles mentioning their religious affiliation to be deleted. As one researcher put it, being an active Christian is almost as bad for you career as having a Pakistani-sounding name.

Christians are discriminated against almost as much as Muslims if they are open about their faith when applying for a job, a new Norwegian study has shown.

“It surprises us that Christian backgrounds turn out this negative in job applications”, Edvard Nergård Larsen, a research fellow at the Department of Sociology and Social Geography at the University of Oslo told the news outlet Vårt Land.

Together with colleagues, he has sent over 18,000 fictitious job applications to companies in Norway, the Netherlands, the UK, Germany, and Spain. Nearly 3,000 of them were addressed to Norwegian employers.

In the CV, all “applicants” stated that they had worked for an unnamed youth organisation. While “Kristian” and “Silje” purportedly belonged to a Christian organisation, “Tariq” and “Yasmeen” were part of a Muslim one.

While the main finding in the Norwegian part of the survey is that applicants with typically Norwegian names are preferred over applicants with foreign names, religion also turned out to be an important factor. If open about their religion, the perfectly Norwegian-sounding Kristian and Silje were found to have a mere 20-percent change of being called for an interview, which is fully comparable with the 10-percent chance that the Muslim couple reportedly had.

“It is almost as bad to be active in a Christian organisation as to have a Pakistani-sounding name”, Larsen concluded.

Furthermore, of the five countries the surveys have been conducted in, Norway is the only one where Christians were found to be discriminated against.

“It is possible that Norwegian employers consider it inappropriate to mention religious activity in a job context more generally”, Larsen suggested.
Another possible explanation could be the employer's active prejudice against this group, he mused.

“Being active in a Christian organisation can give employers associations with conservative attitudes more generally”, he suggested.
Strangely enough, for ethnic minorities, it is the other way around, as Christian involvement has been found to have a positive effect for them.

“Being active in a Christian organisation dampens the discrimination they otherwise face”, Larsen pointed out.

Karl Jahr, the editor-in-chief of the Christian newspaper Korsets seier, admitted that he often receives inquiries from people to delete articles that mention their Christian faith, which is often seen as a handicap when looking for a job.

Norway is a predominantly Christian country, with about 70 percent of the population belonging to the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Norway. The Catholic Church is the next largest Christian denomination at about 3 percent of the population.

Anti-Semitic Somalia suffers from Biblical plagues

And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: Genesis 12:3a

It's worth keeping in mind that Muslims from countries such as Somalia--taking with them views such as those described below--are increasingly being exported to traditionally non-Muslim countries, which may just have something to do with the reported rise of anti-Semitism. As reported by Adam Eliyahu Berkowitz in Breaking Israel News, December 23, 2019 (link in original):

Somalia has suffered non-stop disasters for more than two years. An almost exclusively Muslim country, Jew-hatred is the rule and not the exception. Somalian anti-Semitism was transplanted to the U.S. and some Islamic insiders are warning that it may soon become left-wing policy.

In 2017, a drought that was to last two years, began in Somalia, leaving more than 6 million people, or half the country’s population, facing food shortages with several water supplies becoming undrinkable due to the possibility of infection. Authorities reported that 50 people a day were dying of hunger.

Just as the plagues in Egypt were a series of natural disasters that left the land bereft of food, Somalia’s two-year drought was followed by an antithetical flood. In November, the worst flooding in modern history caused by more than three times the average rainfall for the winter months, displaced more than a quarter of a million people, destroying infrastructure. Authorities refused to say how many people were killed in the disaster. Crops growing in the wake of the drought were inundated and destroyed, raising the specter of famine yet again. As many as 6.3 million people were left without sufficient supplies of basic foodstuffs.

In addition to drought and famine, diseases, such as cholera and measles began to spread.

Locusts, the penultimate plague, finished up any shreds of food that remained in Egypt. In a similar manner, a plague of locusts, the worst in at least 25 years, descended on Somalia last week, destroying at least 175,000 acres of farmland.

“As the weather seems favorable for the locust breeding, there is a high probability that the locust will continue to breed until March-April 2020,” the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) regional coordinator David Phiri said.

As if that were not enough, the African nation was hit by an outbreak of Cholera in 2017 that is wreaking havoc unabated. The cumulative total number of suspected cholera cases since the beginning of this outbreak in December 2017 was 9042, including 46 associated deaths. Over 70% of the cases are children below five years of age. This outbreak contrasts the backdrop of a 60% drop in global cases of cholera.

As this series of natural disasters echoes the plagues that struck Egypt as a punishment for their treatment of Jews, it is worthwhile to take a look at Somalia’s treatment of the Chosen People. There is no known Jewish community in Somalia and almost 100% of the nation’s seven million inhabitants are Sunni Muslims. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali-born Dutch-American activist, is an advocate for reform in Islam, most especially regarding women’s issues. Perhaps less well-known is her criticism of the Muslim hatred of Jews present in her native land.

In her autobiography, Infidel, Ali writes about the pervasive anti-Semitism in Somalia and the Muslim world at large.

“[A]s a child growing up in a Muslim family, I constantly heard my mother, other relatives and neighbors wish for the death of Jews, who were considered our darkest enemy. Our religious tutors and the preachers in our mosques set aside extra time to pray for the destruction of Jews.”

“Only if all Jews were destroyed would peace come for the Muslims,” she wrote.

In her speeches, Ali describes how, as a teen, she was indoctrinated to believe that Jews were a sub-human enemy and that Israel occupies Muslim lands and must be destroyed.

“Islamist-driven anti-Semitism is the reigning anti-Semitism of the day,” she said in a speech in Montreal in May. She explained that Islamic anti-Semitism is distinct from the “classic” European variety, or today’s white supremacy movement.

“Little attention is paid (to it) and that is a pity because it is the most zealous, most potent Jew hatred,” she said. “It both condemns Jews wholesale and seeks to destroy the State of Israel.”

She warned that Islamic anti-Semitism was aligned with the social-justice left-wing narrative “woke” concept that’s prevalent on campuses today, which she termed, “The newest insanity … that everyone is oppressed except white men.”...

...Rabbi Yeshayahu Hollander, the Sanhedrin’s Foreign Minister, reacted to the string of natural Somalian catastrophes with a disclaimer.

“Can this be divine retribution, almighty providence?” Rabbi Hollander asked. “It is impossible to know what is in God’s mind but doesn’t it seem that these people who curse the Jews are being cursed? It is certainly a possibility. I certainly can’ know but I can only try to interpret it based on the Torah.”

A study of history shows that countries and nations who were anti-Semitic suffered greatly for it. More Germans were killed in World War Two than Jews. Today, they are much less anti-Semitic and they are fairly successful.”...

In the 1970s, the African countries of Niger, Ethiopia, Upper Volta (now Burkina Faso), Mali, Kenya, Nigeria, Dahomey (now Benin), Senegal, and Chad were all struck by famine and drought after severing diplomatic relations with Israel.

Greek Orthodox Church protests Palestinian Authority's attempt to expropriate church property in Bethlehem

As reported by Baruch Yedid in the Jewish Press, December 15, 2019:

The Christian Greek Orthodox community in Bethlehem has been in a tumult in recent days following the Palestinian Authority’s (PA) intention to expropriate the lands of the Church of Nativity which belong to the Church.

A few days ago, 11 institutions associated with the Greek-Orthodox Church published a statement protesting the ongoing attempt by the PA to take control of the plaza in front of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem.

The proclamation, which was initiated by the Patriarch of Jerusalem Theophilos III, protests the harming of the Christian presence in Bethlehem, the forfeiting of their rights, the harm to the Church’s assets and the violation of their right to light Christmas trees on the plaza.

The protest was also joined by Michelle Freij, the son of former Bethlehem mayor Elias Freij.

The leaders of the Greek Orthodox community have accused the PA of working in recent years to put its hand on the area near the Church of the Nativity, property of the Orthodox Church and turn it over to the municipality of Bethlehem and the PA’s local government office.

The protest has spread through social media networks, prompting the Bethlehem City Council to announce that it does not intend to harm the various sectors and will maintain the status quo in the city.

A church official told TPS that for three years, one of the Catholic Church’s leaders, Ibrahim Faltas, has been working with Bethlehem’s Mayor Anton Salman, a Catholic as well, to take over the Greek Orthodox Church’s lands.

He said the two became good friends while participating in negotiations during the 2002 crisis that took place in the Church of the Nativity in which terrorists barricaded themselves there and left only after extensive negotiations. The two are considered in Bethlehem to be PA operatives and close to the Fatah.

The official added that while the PA has recently announced through the municipality that it does not intend to discriminate against any of the communities or take over the land, the Greek Orthodox Church leaders are aware of the authority’s efforts to gain control of their property.

Speaking off record, sources involved in the affair said that one of the Greek Orthodox Church’s leaders is suspected by the PA of dealing in land with Jews and, therefore, the PA is working to counteract his actions by taking over the land. The tension is mounting between Salman and his deputy, Hanna Hananya, who supports the Greek Orthodox Church’s claims.

A Bethlehem official told TPS that since the PA arrived in the city in 1994, the number of Christians in the city has significantly diminished and currently accounts for less than 22 percent of the city’s residents.

He further said that Christmas ceremonies are gradually turning from a religious Christian event to a national event sponsored by the PA, even though in recent years it has acted to deprive Christians of their properties.

Meanwhile, further tensions are rising among Greek Orthodox Christians after the municipality of al-Azzariya near Bethlehem released a tender to operate the Tomb of Lazarus. Christians are angry because they say the land does not belong to the municipality and therefore it does not have the authority to issue tenders to operate the tourism site.

A Bethlehem resident told TPS that tourists who have recently visited the Tomb of Lazarus testified that a number of young people and thugs are demanding entry fees.

Several months ago, a violent incident occurred in the Christian village of Jifna, near Ramallah, when Fatah activists, operating under a senior official close to PA head Mahmoud Abbas, rioted in the village and ordered the Christian to pay the Jizyah tax “so that they could enjoy the PA’s protection.”

The Jizyah is an annual per capita tax levied by Islamic law on non-Muslim subjects residing in Muslim lands. The tax is a fee for protection provided by the Muslim ruler to non-Muslims, for the permission to practice a non-Muslim religion with some communal autonomy in a Muslim state, and as proof of the non-Muslims’ submission to the Muslim state and its laws.

Jizyah has also been understood by some as a ritual humiliation of non-Muslims in a Muslim state for not converting to Islam.

Duke University refuses to recognize Young Life because of the organization's refusal to support the alphabet pervert agenda

University campuses in the United States are becoming as hostile toward Christianity now as they were in the late 18th-early 19th century. As reported by Kate Murphy and Martha Quillin of the Charlotte Observer, September 18, 2019 (bold, links in original):

DURHAM -- Duke University’s student government has declined to recognize a national Christian organization as an official student group because of its stance on LGBTQ issues.

The student senate unanimously voted against Young Life last week, the Duke Chronicle reported.

Young Life, with local chapters in Durham and Chapel Hill, aims to introduce teens to Christianity and help them grow in their faith. The group has a rule that bans LGBTQ individuals from leadership positions, according to the student newspaper. The Duke student senate said that violates the Student Organization Finance Committee’s rule that every Duke student group must include a nondiscrimination statement in its constitution.

A Young Life sexual misconduct policy says it doesn’t exclude people “who practice a homosexual lifestyle from being recipients of ministry of God’s grace,” however, “such persons are not to serve as staff or volunteers in the mission and work of Young Life,” the Chronicle reported.

“They don’t have a non-discrimination clause in their constitution; they have a discrimination clause,” student senator Jackson Kennedy said at an earlier student government meeting where the issue was tabled.

The student government’s rules require that each student organization “affirms the spirit and letter of the University’s non-discrimination statement.” That statement from the Office for Institutional Equity says Duke prohibits “discrimination based on gender identity, sexual orientation and gender expression.”

Duke students already are volunteering with Young Life in Durham and Chapel Hill, but the group wanted to become a recognized organization on campus to recruit more students and get support from student government. Duke is a non-sectarian university with historic ties to the United Methodist Church.

At the meeting, junior Tommy Hessel asked the Duke Young Life chapter to amend its rules to comply with Duke’s nondiscrimination policy, according to the Duke Chronicle. In response, Jeff Bennett, a master’s candidate at the Duke Divinity School and member of Young Life, said the Duke chapter can’t break national policies.

So, the student senate turned down the request.

YOUNG LIFE AT OTHER NC CAMPUSES

At UNC-Chapel Hill, the Young Life-affiliated group College Life is a recognized student organization.

The group’s rules, adopted in 2013, say, “Young Life does not have a specific set of rules. The rules vary depending on the area. In the Chapel Hill/Durham area leaders just have to be committed to leading.”

Young Life makes it clear chapters across the country don’t turn away middle and high school students who are LGBTQ.

“Young Life is passionate about building relationships with people of all backgrounds, and participation in our programs is open to everyone regardless of ability, belief, race, sexuality or other factors,” Young Life spokesman Terry Swensen said.

Swensen told the News & Observer that Young Life isn’t seeing a trend of college campuses rejecting groups. But, it’s not the first time the issue has come up in the area.

In June, religious student organizations at Elon University were allowed to change to community ministries, Elon News Network reported. That meant trading student government funding to maintain or enforce their own policies, even if it goes against university policy.

Elon has a chapter of the group called Young Life College that is affiliated with Young Life in Alamance County. Its bylaws, revised in May 2019 and published on the university’s website, do not mention the word homosexuality, but say leaders are expected to refrain from any sexual relationships outside heterosexual marriage.

“Young Life welcomes everyone to our programs, meetings, and events,” the bylaws read. They continue: “That is the case not just on the Elon campus but everywhere we have a presence. You can be part of Young Life regardless of belief, identity or background.

“At the same time, we ask those who would be in a leadership role with Young Life to accept and support certain beliefs and standards of behavior. These standards include expectations in the area of sexuality, which we view as integral to individual health and thriving.”

On the subject of sexuality, the Elon bylaws say, “We believe that God created us as sexual beings with an inherent desire for relational intimacy. We also recognize the importance of the apostle Paul’s teaching that our bodies are sacred vessels and are to be lived in and cared for accordingly.

“As with all gifts of life, we desire to experience our sexuality as an expression of gratitude to God, love for others, personal integrity and alignment with scriptural teaching. We therefore ask those seeking leadership roles with Young Life to refrain from sexually intimate relationships outside of a heterosexual marriage covenant.

“We articulate these standards with humility, understanding some will not agree, and also with a high view of what it means to be a leader representing our organization.”

Swensen said Young Life wants to understand and comply with individual campus guidelines. Duke’s petition was unique, Swensen said, because it sought recognition for an existing group, not to establish a new program at Duke.

“We understand the student senate’s decision and appreciate their consideration,” Swensen said. “If the Duke students involved with Young Life decide to re-apply, we will work with them to create an application that complies with the university’s expectations.”