———- Forwarded message ———
From: Boyd Camak
Date: Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 4:38 PM
Subject: [redacted]
To: [redacted]
Thanks [redacted].
1. Christ’s kingdom does not need to be “encouraged” any more than gravity needs to be encouraged. It is a metaphysical Reality that simply is. Ironically, it is often revealed most clearly amid suffering and persecution. Moreover, setting aside slave Bibles and the parade of horrors of Western Civ–including many that we white males are only tangentially aware of if at all, I think that the spiritual vacuity and psychological violence of our contemporary culture is a species of the breaking and entering of Luke 12:39:
“But know this, that if the householder had known at what hour the thief was coming, he would not have left his house to be broken into.” Without watchfulness (nepsis as the desert fathers say), verse 39 warns that our “house” (our inner life) can be “broken into”—our peace stolen—when we least expect it. And this is much worse than physical violence or overt censorship.
2. Scripture is not a topical handbook with an index. The Bible is a collection of documents–a lot of which Christians appropriated from Judaism–yielding some interpretations that sought to read Christ into every letter and punctuation mark, while cutting us off from the rich treasure of Rabbinic interpretation. Nonetheless, those interpretations were and are valuable because they show how God can use anything to reveal himself to His people–from Balaam’s ass to the (Calvinistic) ESV. Don’t get me wrong, I’m very grateful for the canon of scripture viewing it as our forefathers doing us a big favor and by filtering out BS for us. Karl Rahner, if memory serves, called the formation of the canon an event. I believe that God was very much at work in setting the canon even if the authors (i.e. Paul, Peter) did not foresee that as the future of their writing. The New Testament is a collection of documents that give us many opportunities to encounter Christ. Tragically, but not surprisingly (cf. Matthew 13:24-43) much of it gets put through the meat grinder of proof texting, arbitrary intellectual frameworks, and theological scaffolding.
As for false revelation, I agree. I think that most of contemporary American Christianity is false revelation. But I don’t think that scripture–in the sense of a collection of proof texts that can be arranged for any occasion or dilemma–is the way out. (Apologies if I am turning your view into a straw man here.) This fact is demonstrated in Christ’s temptation in the wilderness. (Matthew 4:1-11). Satan is the leading scriptural scholar of our time–or any time. If we are trying to just arrange words with our intellect–(and maybe even prayer?), we will lose to the enemy every time. (Cf. Irenaeus’s analogy in Against Heresies where men take apart a mosaic of a king and rearrange the jewels and gems to form the image of a dog.)
God knows how to speak to each of His children (even using bad theology and meat-grinder scripture interpretation if needed), however–the most freedom is available by seeing the scriptures as an opportunity to encounter Christ, who is very much alive and present with us. We can abide in His presence in a palpable way, although extreme desolation or mental illness can be part of the journey too. The spiritual journey is about dialing in more and more and more into Christ’s presence and wordless (usually) communication to each of us (often through more and more and more personal crucifixions). Most of that is about everyday stuff, because most of our lives and the most important part of our lives is boring everyday stuff. On occasion we may find ourselves approaching a stressful conflict, but Christ promises that the Spirit will give us the words that we need at that time–including if we are called on to expose a false prophet. Theoretically our brothers and sisters in Christ and spiritual directors will help us with this listening and discerning of the Holy Spirit’s call. According to my recollection, but not necessarily reality, [redacted] preached a sermon that included commentary about how some of us feel that connection and some don’t. To me that’s another important matter that must be addressed in community. FWIW my go to guy for discernment is Ignatius of Loyola. I think that his approach is a restatement of the same Christian tradition but structured for a more modern chaotic world that was emerging during his time.
3. Christ and the money changers is about forcefully removing corrupt and exploitative barriers to God and Truth. “And he told those who sold the pigeons, “Take these things away; you shall not make my Father’s house a house of trade.” John 2:16 It has nothing to do with changing an external life circumstance, much less a geo-political circumstance. (Separately, I do think that it calls out the Christian publishing industry, but that’s a different issue.)
If there is such a thing as a just war, it is not mentioned in scripture. And if there is such a thing as a geo-political entity acting for the sake of wisdom and justice (even as defined by Aristotle rather than Christ)–I’m not much of a historian, but I bet than even in reading victor’s history, it would be hard to find one of these “just wars.”
Finally, if you don’t like getting these long emails and theological pronouncements from me, pray that I can square the circle of [redacted]. Okay, that’s more of a triangle…add that to the help needed list too. 
Boyd Camak’s theology offers a paradox: he rejects physical violence like a pacifist, yet refuses the passivity often associated with pacifism. For Camak, fighting an attacker—especially on their terms—does more than risk harm. It enslaves you internally, keeping you reactive, tangled in others’ agendas, and cut off from the freedom Christ offers. His “non-fighting” is not withdrawal, but alignment with Christ’s counter-intuitive Way: embracing suffering, telling disruptive truths, and rejecting worldly “solutions” that promise peace through domination.
Why Continued Fighting Fails
How This Differs from Traditional Pacifism
Orthodox Roots, Unconventional Edge
Camak’s theology is anchored in classic Christian convictions: Christ and the Cross as God’s ultimate revelation, God’s unconditional love, and the transformative power of suffering. He draws on Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant sources alike, from Karl Rahner to Karl Barth.
Yet his rhetorical style is deliberately raw. He rejects sentimental portrayals of Christ, likens the Cross to a lynching tree or electric chair, and openly names doctrines he finds harmful as “complete nonsense” or worse. He embraces vulnerability, identifying himself as “a hypocrite with logs in my eyes,” so that readers meet a fellow struggler rather than a polished persona.
The Core of His Stance
Camak’s rejection of fighting is not about avoiding trouble—it is about refusing the spiritual captivity that comes from meeting evil on its own terms. His Way is to face the wound, speak the truth, and trust God’s providence, even when that truth disrupts the world’s false peace.
(By the way, being co-crucified with Christ is the deepest union possible with Peace, Joy, Truth, Love, Wisdom incarnate. Game, set, match Jesus and his flock.)
Here’s a note I shared with a church men’s group that is focusing on western civ.
If a church men’s group is going to focus on something other than the gospel, perhaps a study of other wisdom traditions, or maybe Christianity in other regions of the world. According to Professor Internet, the majority of Christians today live outside traditional Western regions.
If there is a fixation on “the west,” perhaps focus on particular artifacts: impressionist painting, medieval architecture, the linguistic turn in philosophy, the evolution of English language including the impact of the printing press and AI, the concept of the warrior king that led from the front vs. the military industrial complex, jam bands like the Grateful Deal and Phish–anything other than this preoccupation with “defending” a concept, an artifact that has nothing to do with Christ’s kingdom which is Reality itself.
Boyd Camak 