Friday, July 10, 2009

C Street, the Family and Ivanwald are still around?

This excerpt is from my post of 04/05/05:

When I googled "'republican party' platform," I stumbled onto, and the horror comedy abruptly started on my computer screen.

Dominionism? Dominionists?
It is dominion we are after. World conquest. That's what Christ has commissioned us to accomplish. We must win the world with the power of the Gospel. And we must never settle for anything less... Thus, Christian politics has as its primary intent the conquest of the land -- of men, families, institutions, bureaucracies, courts, and governments for the Kingdom of Christ.
The Changing of the Guard: Biblical Principles for Political Action by George Grant, former Executive Director of Coral Ridge Ministries
I wondered what was, was it just the angry ramblings of a pot-smoking paleo-hippie sitting cross-legged on a dirty floor somewhere, but TheocracyWatch is a project of the Center for Religion, Ethics and Social Policy (CRESP) at Cornell University. Does that make it credible? You decide.

Definitely check out for the fear factor. You'll read about, for example, the Constitution Restoration Act of 2004, an actual bill: H.R. 3799 and S. 2082. John F. Sugg of the Weekly Planet explains that the bill "would acknowledge Christianity's God as the 'sovereign source' of our laws. It would reach back in history and reverse all judicial decisions that have built a wall between church and state, and it would prohibit federal judges from making such rulings in the future." The text of H.R. 3799 can be read on the Yurica Report site and probably any number of other sites that could be found with a search engine.

As I researched the above paragraph, however, I noticed an innocuous-looking link on the same page that leads to a Harper's Magazine article entitled "Jesus Plus Nothing" by Jeffrey Sharlet. Now...after reading about Ivanwald, the Cedars, the Family—such tranquil, pastoral names—nothing is the same. I've passed through a gate, a membrane, into another place. Single young men, living and praying together in a D.C. suburb, denying the lusts of the flesh, consecrate themselves to preparing for covert war and are wholly focused on establishing a new government based on the power of Christ. But it's not just about a group of self-purifying zealots. It's also about the power suits who attend prayer breakfasts where the zealots are attendants, "a rotating group of ambassadors, businessmen, and American politicians." Are you ready to take the red pill? Read the article.


Now, was Jeffrey Sharlet killed shortly after publication of this article? How is it that the article is still online? Am I at risk because I link to it?

Wait, when was the article originally published? Was it an April fool's joke? March 2003. But there's no "gotcha" at the end of it, only footnotes.

Nah. The Family can't be real. Nobody's that dumb.


Unadulterated Underdog said...

I don't think Bush is the next Hitler or Stalin mind you, but he certainly came to power illegally and contintues to do shady things to get and keep power for his Party. It's all at the directive of the Central Committee, the RNC. Creepy? Yes? Forever? God I hope not.

: JustaDog said...

he certainly came to power illegally - what a joke - from a party that gets felons, illegal aliens, and dead people to vote their way. LOL

A big difference is democrats want more socialism - more of the hard working family to pay the way for those in society that suck from it without returning anything.

Jonathan Versen said...

I did an image search for Ivanwald. Nuthin'.

Anonymous said...

(Unless you were kidding),if you don't think the Family is real then you probably don't think Opus Dei is either.

"the Family" is real that is a photograph of Ivanwald--I've been there myself, was close to folks who are still "in," and remain close to several people who left because of the weirdness.

While I'm not sure if "cult" or "conspiracy" could be attached to the group, it exhibits many cult and conspiracy-like characteristics, which should be a cause of concern.

The lack of transparency (no website, no documentation or charter, no public relations) and fact that so little is known about it while so many powerful (wealthy and politically and religiously conservative) people are invovled should warrant a greater investigation by the general public.

Anonymous said...

Hey, Anon, I'd be interested in hearing about your experiences. I'm a journalist. Off the record til you say otherwise. Please contact me: js1839 at nyu dot edu.

Anonymous said...

I'm a little late to the party but here goes...

JustaDog said: A big difference is democrats want more socialism - more of the hard working family to pay the way for those in society that suck from it without returning anything.

Dog, are you TRYING to prove John's theory about folks on the right being "simpler?" If so, well done. If not, try to do a little "nuance" for once... why oh why would a hard working DEMOCRAT family want to see their tax dollars squandered? News flash: WE DON'T. Which is part of the reason we are not Republicans, who seem intent on taking are hard earned money and giving it to the wealthiest Americans, the very people who need it the least. As for helping the less fortunate, sure, to a certain degree that is fine. Keep in mind that when our nation goes to war it is usually those poor folks who (disproportionately) pay with their lives while the rich sit back in their country clubs making a fortune in war profits. So don't try to tell me they don't deserve a break.

Anonymous said...

hi... just dropping by!

Anonymous said...

Gay Daily News Blog

Jonathan Versen said...

John, how is it this 2009 post has comments from 2005 and 2007? Me heap confused.

John said...


I deleted part of the original post from 04/05/05 and published the abridged version as a new post. The comments came along for the ride. No magic was involved. The article by Jeffrey Sharlet was originally from '03, and I was surprised when Rachel Maddow brought up the Family again not long ago, and six years later. Apparently some of the guys who were living at C Street back in '03 are still there. Maddow didn't mention Ivanwald as far as I know. And Sharlet's article mentions The Cedars "just down the road from Ivanwald," also not mentioned by Maddow. But they're all the Family's properties. I feel so safe with the Family looking out for our interests. It's sort of like "The Waltons" for the 21st century.