The PACA Plan and the Second American Civil War

The PACA Plan and the Second American Civil War November 2, 2017

A flyer about the PACA (“Pray America Christian Again”) Plan was stuck on the outside door of my church, and the person who found it gave it to me. It is an effort not to simply pray, but to try to get Christians elected in all government positions. From the flyer, one learns that they have some specific Christians in mind, since Hillary Clinton is vilified with either no awareness of the fact, or no willingness to recognize, that she is a Christian herself.

Whoever put this together isn’t advocating a violent coup – yet – but the plan, and the language used to justify it, will nonetheless remind a lot of readers of this blog of a kind of prequel to The Handmaid’s Tale. Listen to this language from the PACAPlan website:

Let us be clear from the start. We will no doubt be blasphemed by the anti-Christian media as wanting to implement a Puritan theocracy. Puritanism moderated into a Constitutional Republic implemented by profoundly Christian men. That original Constitutional Republic, slow-dripped high-jacked by non-Christians for the last 100 years,  is all we strive to return to; where laws were just when conforming to Christian ideals of morality and were unjust when in contradiction to God’s will. We will not allow ourselves to be intimidated to inaction by mere words again.

We are in a run-up to a second American Civil War and the non-Christian propagandists for that war are on a war footing…

The second Civil War will pit New York City against South, North, West, Southwest and Midwest. Although you would not know this fact, because you will not be fighting non-Christians from NYC, but instead would be fighting NYC’s mercenary army of pandered, misguided, underclass, foot soldiers from across the country.

It seems to have started here in Indiana, and thus far to be limited to this state. I’m going to guess that this will probably be the first that most or perhaps indeed all readers of this blog have heard of it. The website says:

If Indiana cannot go PACA, cannot provide inspiration for the rest of the country,  then there is no hope for any State to go PACA.

They don’t seem much more fond of Donald Trump than of Hilary Clinton, since both have New York connections, and they seem to hate New York more than anything or anyone else.

This union of politics with religion makes it seem appropriate to share this tweet by Nebuchadnezzar that Phil Ledgerwood shared in a comment after first posting it on Fred Clark’s blog:

Make Babylon Great Again

Hebrew captives not bowing to statue when anthem plays? BAD PATRIOTISM. Will fire them, literally. #MakeBabylonGreatAgain

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • PACA sounds like a Christianized version of ISIS.

    • So voting democratically in America you equate to ISIS tactics? How is that logic arrived at?

      • The rhetoric of a second civil war, is what I equate to ISIS.

        • You should have spent a bit more time trying to understanding what was written. We are clearly headed toward another Civil War without PACA. PACA is an attempt to head that tragedy off.

  • Phil Ledgerwood

    I read the “Reflections” page you linked to, and honestly, James, these people sound crazy. Like, above and beyond your typical politically-minded Christian fundamentalist crazy. I can’t imagine this getting traction outside of the typical slice of people this sort of thing already appeals to. But, then again, I couldn’t imagine Trump becoming the Republican candidate, either, so I’m probably not the best gauge for such things.

    It is interesting, though, the large tone of disapproval of manifestations of the far right thus far. Although I got a strong vibe that their basic issue with the Tea Party is that it wasn’t Christian or successful. They essentially want what the Tea Party was supposed to have been except with a focus on strengthening the overall base of Christian power rather than narrowly focusing on who’s President these days.

    • I wonder if it is exactly the same people, or the same sort of people, who’ve realized that getting a president that you want elected doesn’t achieve what you hope it might.

      • Phil Ledgerwood

        That is an excellent point. We seem to be observing that very fracturing among former supporters. One group didn’t get the Hitler they wanted, while another group is coming to the realization that he’s a lot more like Hitler than they wanted.

        • We neither want a Hitler Trump, nor a Stalin Hillary. How about an American patriot with morals? I personally think Christian morals have served this country quite well, don’t you?

          • Phil Ledgerwood

            When I see this country operating off Christian morals, I’ll let you know.

          • Not going to happen unless you support PACA.

          • Phil Ledgerwood

            I’m all right, thanks.

      • I believe you hit on the main premise of the PACA Plan. We keep going to the polls, both on the left and on the right, and whoever wins continues doing exactly what his predecessor did, who we were trying to get rid of.

    • ChrisDACase95

      You want crazy ? I recomend you check out a dozen or so pages Premier Christianity; British fundamentalists are about the same as American ones. Dare I say, more ravenous.

  • Cute, equating the PACA Plan with The Handmaid’s Tale. Nice dystopian show, but what did it have to do with Christianity? Since it was all Old Testament, looked to me like it was more of an Orthodox Jewish future for America. Perhaps marginally better than a Progressive Jewish America?

  • You understand that Hillary saying she is a Christian does not mean she practices anything that would resemble what a fairly well read Christian would say is Christianity.

    • And presumably you understand that you saying Hillary Clinton is not a Christian does not mean that she does not practice what a fairly well read Christian would say is Christianity.

      • I can only judge Hillary from the actions of President and First Lady Bill Clinton. There was the unprovoked attack on a Christian Church, during Sunday services, outside the Texas town of Waco. Then there was the merciless bombing of Christian Serbs to protect Kosovo Muslims who were running around beheading every Christian Serbian policeman they could get their hands on. There was the two appointments of non-Christians to the Supreme Court (probably as a bribe for large non-Christian campaign contributions and all the help to get elected.). And Hillary personally referred to the Bible Belt as deplorables. You obviously have a more enlightened view of Christianity than I do if you honestly believe she is a true Christian.

        • So your definition of true Christianity is Branch Davidianism? I would not have guessed. But at any rate, when you judge a person based on their spouse, and seem to also think the tribal nationalism (with fundamentalist Christianity as its brand label) that is rampant in the Bible Belt is what Christianity really looks like, it does not convey the impression at all that you are judging such questions fairly or reasonably, never mind in a Christian manner,

          • I have never been a Branch Davidian and I suppose you have not either, but our government should protect everyone, even Christian, disagree?

            OK, Bill and Hilary were not co-presidents (even though they said they were). But I can judge her for attacking women who were sexually harassed and even raped by her husband. I can question her Christianity when she advocates for the murder of children still in the womb. I can listen to her own DNC chairman tell us that she had no morality in the corruption she did to secure the Democrat presidency, when a Christian should lead an honest life, disagree?

            Come on, please tell me what makes Hillary a Christian in your mind.

          • If your definition of a Christian is someone who has never done wrong nor acted in a manner that is at odds with their purported values, then not only will you find it impossible to identify enough candidates to enact your political plan, but you have misunderstood Christianity at the most fundamental level imaginable.

          • You are engaging in pure deflection, as you are stating a known principle all Christians embrace – we are all sinners. What are you really saying James?

            I gave you example, after example, after example, of unchristian behavior by Hillary, with no attempt at forgiveness, with no attempt at repentance, without any acceptance on her part that she has sinned. What is there to forgive of Hillary’s sins which would bring her into such good graces, that we should place her at the head of our government, over someone like Indiana’s own Pence, who is openly mocked for actually having Christian beliefs.

            After these posts back and forth in support of Hillary, when there are so many good Americans who are superior in everyway for the office of President, I’m wondering why you even bother to call yourself a Progressive Christian and don’t come out like Kevin Spacey did about his beliefs, drop the fake description of Christian and say you are just a Progressive?

          • Anyway, moving on. A total waste of my time here.

          • Gary

            A total waste of time is correct. Although I am surprised that everyone got diverted into a discussion of who is a Christian, or not. Good play. However, the primary goal is to repeal the 17th Amendment. The diversion is typical of this web site. I think the “follow the money” is appropriate here, since people like the Koch brothers are probably funding the effort. The only thing surprising is that the extent of the effort is posting flyers on churches in Indiana. Pretty small effort, considering the funding behind the effort.


          • I was not aware of this effort. Thanks for sharing. You know, it’s laughable to argue that “follow the money” corruption had a bigger influence in Washington before the 17th Amendment, than the “follow the money” corruption we have today in Washington.

            Yes, the repeal of the 17th Amendment will take the Federal Government closer to the government who is directly over them. But you miss the fundamental point of PACA. Our State legislatures are not really Christian either. We cannot have an honest and moral federal government ran by the States, if we do not first make the States worthy of having that decentralized control.

            What is more laughable is for you to associate the non-Christian Koch Brothers with the highly Christian-based PACA Plan.

            I can assure you that PACA is NOT an objective of either the Koch Brothers or the Weinstein Brothers.

            And yes, as you surmised, this effort does not have millions of dollars of non-Christian money to sustain it. Only your word of mouth and support.

          • Gary

            I don’t know the origin of your movement. Although 17th amendment repeal seems to have developed from high rollers, and adopted by evangelicals (at least some).
            Politics breeds corruption, regardless. I certainly don’t feel threatened by flyers distributed on church doorsteps in Indiana, unlike some people obviously do. Free speech. Better than anarchists shutting down free speech at Berkeley, or DNC controlled by Hillary to shut down Sanders. What I find offensive is the “holier than thou” attitude of some people on the left that are offended by flyers they don’t agree with. And seem to have some deep-seated fear of the right, indicating their inferiority complex. Such as:
            “Whoever put this together isn’t advocating a violent coup – yet – but the plan, and the language used to justify it, will nonetheless remind a lot of readers of this blog of a kind of prequel to The Handmaid’s Tale.”

            Fear of flyers. My, my. In Indiana, yet.

          • I was having a hard time reading your first post to determine if you were speaking of my website or the website here. You obviously are displaying much more sense as I get a feel for where you are coming from.

            I assure you it was high rollers who instituted the 17th Amendment in the first place. Indeed, corruption goes where the money is. When the States ran the Senate, the corruption was all at the State level. Too much corruption in one State, too much tax, too many regulations, then we had freedom to move to another State, a freer State, both as employers and as employees. (exceptions being what cannot be moved, like coal in West Virginia) What does freedom of choice bring? Competition between State governments, as they are doing for Amazon right now. (Although, the ultra-liberal Amazon, -think Washington Post-, is a liberal example of having their cake and eating it whole, since they will condemn State governments competing, even to make an ultra-liberal corporation like Amazon cozy). Competition puts government to work for us. And what is the enemy of a Progressive Christian such as James McGrath? Competition in government.

            A mammoth Federal, one size fits all government, ran out of New York City, is the enemy of freedom and liberty.

            Progressives love big government. The bigger, the better, the more corrupt they come. Hence, the 17th. Which explains the backlash against any attempt to repeal it. Great observations Gary.

          • When you seemed to be denying, and were at the very least ignoring, a most basic tenet of Christianity, it seemed appropriate to highlight it. It still isn’t clear that you are supporting historic Christianity, as opposed to a modern conservative American distortion thereof. I am curious why you think Pence is an appropriate exemplar of the kind of thing you are looking for and idealizing, given how he has moved against religious freedom (ironically under a banner that says RFRA) and has never repented of his support for and alliance with Donald Trump. Or is your religion one in which women must repent publicly of their husband’s sins while a man’s own can be glossed over without him saying anything at all?

          • Now you are going out into the weeds and spreading out all over the place talking about 10 things at once which I cannot figure out how you are associating an anything together.

            Pence is moving against religious freedom by supporting the Religious Freedom Restoration Act? Come again?

          • I am not from Indiana and you have obviously given this RFRA legislation in Indiana a whole lot of thought. But I definitely get the feeling that you don’t seem to have much concern about Christians being discriminated against, but you are focused like a laser should gays be discriminated against. I am guessing you are gay?

            Frankly, I don’t understand why there is a need for a RFRA in Indiana or elsewhere, as the First Amendment already constitutionally gives Americans religious freedom. Nothing to Restore Constitutionally and that is the supreme law of the land (minus what a handful of criminally-placed, non-Christians on the Supreme Court have to say about it).

            I have yet to see any amendment in the Constitution specifically giving gays any rights whatsoever above and beyond what any of the rest of us enjoy. Tell me, why in your eyes should gays be placed ahead of Christians?

          • Your reasoning would be laughable or bizzarre if it were not so common. It is a shameful historical fact that most of the people marching for black rights have been black and most of those marching for women’s rights have been women. But it should not be so. As a Baptist, I have a principled concern for religious freedom, and far from prioritizing the rights of gays over Christians, I am prioritizing the right of individuals over corporations and employers who wish to impose their will on their employees and customers. RFRA in Indiana has taken a form that pretends that the corporation or employer is having their religious freedom infringed if they are not free to prevent their employees and customers from acting in a manner they disagree with. I hope you can see why that is an affront to a straight white male who stands in the historic Baptist tradition.

          • Your historical learning is suspect. There were no blacks marching for black rights in 1860. They were all white, (with the two exceptions you will proudly tell me about). Six hundred thousands white men died in a Civil War, supposedly about slavery, and yet all 13 States signed our Constitution agreeing to end the slave trade in 1808 – and they did so.

            There were not a single black man or black woman who voted for the 13th Amendment.

            There was not a single woman of any color who voted for the 19th Amendment.

            And yet you have such distain for white men. I’m curious. Why do Progressives do that and still proudly say they have principles?

          • “I am prioritizing the right of individuals over corporations and employers who wish to impose their will on their employees and customers”

            Yes, I see the socialism in your message. Got that loud and clear. I have yet to see the Christianity.

  • Al Cruise

    Spelling error! It’s not PACA it’s PAWA . Pray America White Again.

    • The pamphlets I posted were left on black churches. They were left on churches where the front display was all in Spanish words. They were left on churches that were Asian. The only exceptions were non-Christian churches — for that you can condemn me.

      • Al Cruise

        I am sure you did.

        • A real clever fellow you are. Accuse me of being a White Supremacist, then call me a liar, all without any proof whatsoever. Enjoy your hatred.

        • Heh Al, I know you are going to rush out to perform a survey to proof the fraud I am. Let me help you just a bit. I will confess that I did not navigate near 38th Avenue in Indianapolis, because I was told to stay out of that area for my own personal safety. There you have it. You have forced a confession out of me.

        • Al, you know you got me again. I just remembered the really run-down church I drove up to, where I could not tell if it was still being used for services or abandoned. As I was walking up to it, there was a tough looking black man who was approaching from a distance simply asking me “Can I help you?” Nice of him to be concerned about an obvious stranger in his neighborhood, but that helped me decide that the church was abandoned and I should get out of the area. Trouble was I had forgotten to take off my KKK hood Al, and still had a burning cross in my hand, so he probably rightfully thought I was up to no good, lol.