Caustic Gnostics: The Saga of the PCA vs. ‘Concerned Presbyterians’

There’s doin’s a-transpirin’ within Presbyterianism.

As part and parcel of the melding of Christianity with Bolshevism, whereby our ancestors’ old paths must be thoroughly eradicated that a glorious phoenix may rise from the ashes, the Presbyterian Church in America recently adopted (by a vote of 861-123!)¹ the diktat ‘Overture 43 on Racial Reconciliation’. The gist of this five-year plan for the gated communities of suburbia is contained in the first paragraph:

Therefore be it resolved, that the 44th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America does recognize, confess, condemn and repent of corporate and historical sins, including those committed during the Civil Rights era, and continuing racial sins of ourselves and our fathers such as the segregation of worshipers by race; the exclusion of persons from Church membership on the basis of race; the exclusion of churches, or elders, from membership in the Presbyteries on the basis of race; the teaching that the Bible sanctions racial segregation and discourages inter-racial marriage; the participation in and defense of white supremacist organizations; and the failure to live out the gospel imperative that “love does no wrong to a neighbor” (Romans 13:10).

Expecting anything different from this group of capitulators is counterproductive. There isn’t even any point in asking if the new guidelines mean that the PCA is planning on dissolving its shockingly segregated Korean sub-denomination. They won’t. They are hypocrites who trumpet their alms in the streets, that they might have glory of men. So be it.

Actions speak louder than words, however, and a few weeks ago some members of our coterie concocted a brilliant response. Scott Terry of Shotgun Wild at Heart devised the idea of depositing anti-Overture flyers on cars in selected PCA parking lots every Sunday, using the driver’s side door handle instead of the windshield wiper so as to avoid any possibility of vehicular damage. The text for the flyer was penned by one of our own (who, in the interests of protecting his family, shall remain nameless), and it is superb. It is no hyperbole to state that it could very well serve as the constitution for a future Kinist Presbyterian denominational offshoot. It refutes the overture point-by-point and can be read here. For the purposes of this article, though, the flyer’s final paragraph both summarizes the counter-revolutionary Presbyterian position and serves as an excellent thumbnail primer on the tenets of kinism:

In contrast to the globalism, multiculturalism, pluralism, racial amalgamationism, and sexual confusion that passes for Christianity in the modern church, we advocate for the Biblical alternative:  Christian Kinism.  Kinism is a Christian view of man (anthropology) and groups of men (sociology), with our view of man informing our views of how men should associate in groups.  Kinism advocates that communities and social associations, both in society at large and in marriage, should primarily be structured on the basis of a similarity of religion, blood, language, place, history, and future goals, as a means of promoting a harmony of interests towards Christian growth and the greater glory of God.  It recognizes the ontological equality of all men while emphasizing their functional inequality, both on an individual and racial scale, highlighting the importance of heredity in these inequalities, while rejecting behavioral determinism.  Kinism is anti-Utopian, and seeks a realistic assessment of man and his social structures, with a view to reducing the frictions of sin and increasing the shared understanding and identity necessary for community.  It works to annihilate the burdens of false guilt and universalized responsibility by a) returning to God’s definition of sin, b) recognizing our own limitations as creatures, and c) emphasizing the regulation of responsibility in direct proportion to degree of consanguinity and affinity.  Kinists recognize that the elect include men of all races, and look forward to our eventual full fellowship in Heaven.

The authorship of this piece was attributed to the group ‘Concerned Presbyterians’, and a Facebook page was established to deal with questions and concerns that might arise from this salvo.

And boy, were there questions and concerns aplenty on the page’s introductory thread. Precious few of them addressed in anything approaching civility, either. This author has been a participant in a few online battles in his day, but he has rarely seen anything approaching the threatening vitriol and bile demonstrated by those who, though claiming to bear the mantle of Christ, instead came donning the Phrygian cap of Robespierre.

The general tone of the discussion was made manifest with the thread’s very first response: ‘Why don’t you come out from under the hood of anonymity and tell us who you are?’, posted by an obnoxious windbag named Tim LeCroy. Having a list of theological ‘accomplishments’ as long as Hadrian’s Wall on his personal page (including, most tellingly, ‘Pastor at Christ Our King Presbyterian Church’), and knowing the value of a catchy repetitive chant a la ‘We are the 99%!’ or ‘Black Lives Matter!’, LeCroy proceeded to spam the thread with reiterations of this demand every third or fourth response, calling the moderators cowards for refusing to do so. Never mind that one can find a plethora of official Presbyterian pages on FB that do not list their administrators. Never mind also that the denomination’s official Book of Church Order, 2007 edition, was penned by ‘Anonymous’, or that a Providence, RI, PCA church made favorable mention of the pro-cloak of secrecy ‘classic’ The Hiding Place without any apparent official approbation. No, LeCroy’s credentials and bombastic manner were apparently sufficient to establish him as a very big fish in a very small pond, and scores of other cucks took up the same call to ‘Show Your Face!’

The more credulous among them – I could be less magnanimous and call them more dishonest, but I certainly won’t do that – claimed that this was a necessity for the ‘guilty’ parties to allow themselves to be subject to church discipline. Sure, I’ll buy that, just as soon as I’m done buying the El Dorado gold mine located underneath the third base line of Shea Stadium. Those that keep databases of known ‘wreckers’, in the old communist parlance, are not satisfied with mere excommunication. No, they wish such fiendish facts to be known to the miscreants’ employers, to their closest family members, even to the federal government itself. They look upon any schism, especially a ‘reactionary’ one, as a cancer that must be thoroughly purged by any means necessary. If they can harness the powers of a tyranny that is otherwise just as hostile to them as it is to us, so much the better. As the thread progressed, this ulterior motive peeked out ever more blatantly from the pious facade. One Chekist-wannabe even went so far as to proudly mention that he had dredged up a kinist participant’s phone number online and that he lived in the same general area! He tried to soft-peddle these words with ‘maybe we can meet up for lunch sometime’, but no go. A veiled threat is still a threat.

In short: I could find precious little distinction between the bleating of ‘Show your face!’ and the men of Sodom hollering ‘Bring forth those men, that we may know them!’ I’m sure that will ruffle some PCA feathers. Good. Truth hurts.

The Rat Patrol might have been the dominant force, but there was plenty of representation from the rest of the Usual Gang of Idiots, as well. We endured the pompous proclamations crammed with six-bit words from those who brag about reading thousands of books on soteriology every month. (One such outstanding comment read, ‘Your exegesis is trash. Not only is it over reaching in its application but it’s completely eisegetical and historically uninformed.’)² The ADHD-addled adherents of Pittmanism showed up long enough to dispense some hipster snark, with ‘bruh’ and ‘dude’ taking the place of personal pronouns, before they could get back to eagerly awaiting the release date of Pokemon Go. And don’t get me started on the feminists. They showed up in droves to rebuke us for our ‘mean-spiritedness’ and to cheer on the likes of LeCroy, like dimwitted cheerleaders getting all dewy-eyed over the high school team’s second-string quarterback. Not coincidentally, one of the more common insulting adjectives hurled kinists’ way in the thread was ‘patriarchal’…and that not only from women, either. Has the PCA ever been a ‘con’servative denomination? Finally, we had an abundance of churchy admonitions (many from no-doubt exceptionally important PCA ministers) running the gamut from ‘Repent’ to ‘The name of Christ is blasphemed because of you.’ (This from a feminist.) Naturally, sprinkled among these clarion calls were passive-aggressive threats to report the page to the FB authorities (‘I’m surprised this kind of vitriol doesn’t violate FB’s “community standards.” It certainly violates mine.’), but as we are hip to online provocations by now, any such attempts have so far failed. The page still stands as of early August.

As can be expected, many historical discussions involving the nature of Southern slavery and global Marxism erupted, and on the alienist side the illiteracy demonstrated was shameful. One such example:

Kinist: do you spare any of your pious gush for the Irish whites of the era who were put into a far harsher servitude, as black slaves were considered too valuable for use in dangerous jobs such as shiplading?

Alienist: Can you provide documentation for the comparison? The prejudice against the Irish was a Catholic/Protestant issue not a racial one. Yes, and because I need to identify with being a “leftist” here, the work conditions of the 19th century were terrible and I’m thankful the market didn’t reign and laws were put into place to help protect the laborer regardless of race, religion or sex.

The respondent was apparently unaware of the preponderance of Irish servitude utilized by Maryland shipowners – a goodly portion of whom were members of the landed Catholic gentry.

Another stellar example came from Pastor LeCroy – who, I neglected to mention before, was proud of his credentials as a historian:

LeCroy: No, I understand what Marxism is. I wrote a dissertation that discussed Marxist forms of historiography, and i argued against them. I fully understand. Do you? Using big ole fancy words and expecting us to run away and hide? You call overture 43 Marxist, but you offer no proof. Confessing for the sin of hurting and oppressing a brother is not Marxism, it’s righteousness. There’s nothing radical about what we did. Over 800 PCA presbyters voted for this statement. Are you honestly suggesting that the PCA is harboring 800+ Marxists? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! LAUGHABLE! Take off your tin foil hat and go repent of your bigotry. And while you are at it, tell us which PCA church you worship at, if you even do.

Kinist Sympathizer: it’s apparent that you have a reading comprehension problem, dissertation notwithstanding. That you are incapable of distinguishing between the economic philosophical system known as Marxism, and the philosophy of societal and moral subversion known as Cultural Marxism, should embarrass you. The PCA has proven itself to be completely infested with the satanic swill of Cultural Marxism. Expect the PCA’s Overture 45 to call for repentance for the reprehensible ‘sin’ of homophobia.

LeCroy: Dude. I think you have the comprehension problem…

KS: hey dudette, I’m not the one who publicly displays a complete lack of knowledge concerning Cultural Marxism and the Frankfurt Institute for Social Research.

LeCroy: I’m saying you didn’t read my post. I’ve never heard of that institute, it sounds pretty specialized, and I’m a historian. I’m taking about folks like Claude Levi-Strauss, Leopold von Ranke, Jaques Derrida, and Marc Bloch. I know how Marxism is applied to the social sciences from those scholars. Anyway, nice talk.

Truly, Spurgeon could have been speaking of LeCroy when he said, ‘Many men know a great deal, and are all the greater fools for it. There is no fool so great a fool as a knowing fool.’ But no doubt his dropping of a few arcane names delighted his groupies, and it’s certainly difficult to believe he was putting forth a sorry excuse for a fight for any other reason.

Oddly enough, two of the very few instances of skeptical but civil questioning regarding kinism, emanating from what seemed to be genuine curiosity, came from black men. Especially soft-spoken was the one who described himself as a native Ghanan engaged to a white Reformed woman. An interesting demonstration as to how two centuries of vociferous Unitarian abolitionist agitprop has poisoned the minds of American blacks and, even more so, American and European whites.

The kinist response to these onslaughts, unsurprisingly, was salty but firm. Kind was responded to in kind. Querulous posts garnered sarcasm, facetious posts a noticeable chill, the handful of reasonable posts polite but determined answers. Doubtless few of the participants on the other side were convinced, but they aren’t our primary outreach anyway. Those who view the proceedings from the sidelines, perhaps too hesitant to jump into the fray but decidedly on the fence and leaning away from the postmodern rot, are the most promising bearers of fruit, in our experience. Several fine refutations of PCA hypocrisy went untouched. For example, a question as to whether the anti-segregation language of Overture 43 meant that the PCA was planning on disestablishing its thriving Korean presbytery in the United States received comments from the kinist side, but crickets from the opposing camp.

Which acts as an ideal summation as to what a valley of dry bones the PCA has become. No discussion on the merits and drawbacks of Overture 43 itself occurred on the thread – only invective, taunts, threats, and snivelling. Well indeed did Dabney speak when he said, “Nothing but the hand of a retributive Providence can avail to reach them. The few among them who do not pass me by with silent neglect, I am well aware will content themselves with scolding; they will not venture a rational reply.” This, too, was posted with nary a response from the rabble.

To paraphrase one of my own remarks on that thread: if such a vicious and venal response hasn’t convinced kinists that we can have no truck nor trade with these heretic cohenservatives who have the temerity to call themselves ‘orthodox’, I don’t know what will. Time to kick the dust off our feet and let these louts multiculti themselves into Hades. And good riddance.

As a coda, I can happily report that the flyer efforts of Concerned Presbyterians are well underway and are generating a massive response. I will let one of the page’s administrators explain the good tidings. Again, for reasons of privacy his geographical location has been edited out:

I was smiling ear-to-ear in church today (I can assure you that’s completely abnormal). During the announcements this morning, the pastor gave a long statement about racist fliers being distributed at PCA churches last week. It was what you’d expect: “if you see one, report it to an elder at once”, “the LUV of Jeebus is bigger than this attack”, etc. It was apparent from what was said that the entire ***** Presbytery had some sort of conference call or email chain about it. The ruling elders (at my church, at least) had obviously been alerted. Shy of repentance on their part, this is exactly the reaction I was hoping for at the leadership level. We definitely got their attention, and now they’re helping to spread the word to their congregations by discussing it. Any curious congregant can now search for us and read it for himself. It felt good to fight back.

Keep on fighting the good fight, lads, and know that we are behind you every step of the way.

Tweet