I have been covering his tax travails since 2012. I stopped covering him on forbes.com last year, but continue to keep up with him on this site.
An Innocent Man
The latest drama from Kent's camp, is his innocence video which was put together by Brady Byrum. The idea was that you spend $50 to buy the eight disc set. The last disc of the eight instructs you to do some sort of filing which will result in Kent getting a huge judgment and Judge Margaret Casey Rodgers getting impeached - or something like that, if enough people do it.
Nobody, I know in the Hovindology community was willing to spring the fifty bucks and invest the lifespan in watching the videos. Ernie Land sent me some of the slides. The thing that I noted was that the case law that Brady cited on the structuring issue predated the statute under which Hovind was convicted. That is a classic tax protester error in constructing arguments.
Of course, I have not studied the whole thing so maybe it does work, somehow. I really wish these people would communicate in writing which is much more effective for laying out legal arguments.
Field Temporarily Abandoned To The Opposition
As it happens now if you want to find out about the video you are stuck with Robert Baty's site - the one Hovindicators love to hate. Creation Science Evangelism is no longer supporting the video. You can read Baty's theories on the subject if you want, but I think I have the straight dope from Ernie Land who wrote me.
Brady Byrum interviewed Dr. Kent Hovind intensively for weeks as an investigative reporter. After getting all the facts relating to Dr. Hovind’s case Brady Byrum has prepared a very well researched DVD series proving with case law Dr. Hovind’s innocence. The timing could not be more perfect as it seems this election has proven American’s have awaken to the excessive abuse in Politics, Government and in our Judicial system as well. Many of us felt the Judge was very biased and even overreached in an effort to discriminate against Christians. The DVD series Kent Hovind Innocent revels all those abuses with case law and the real reason codes were made in Congress to prove Dr. Hovind’s innocence. The Ministry and Creation Science Evangelism appreciates Brady exposing these truths. With that said we however do not wish to put Dr. Hovind in jeopardy and have made a decision to have Brady market any production third party to us.Another development that may or may not be related is that freekenthovind.com is down. Ernie did not have any information on that. He told me that he knows somebody who knows somebody who runs the site, but that is it.
Kent Hovind SJ
The final thing is what the title is based on. Bryan Delinger of King James Video Ministries has launched quite a vitriolic attack on Kent Hovind. "Kent Hovind's Vow Of Poverty And Ecumenical Agenda"
At nearly an hour and a half it is a major lifespan investment. A couple of key points are at 47:29 where they cite a letter that introduces this report from Jesuits Midwest finding special significance in this paragraph:
The word companions carries a special meaning for Jesuits. When founding our Order, Saint Ignatius wanted his group to be known as the Company of Jesus (synonymous with Society of Jesus). The root of company refers to people who share bread—an ancient symbol of life—mission,and community. And so our company extends beyond Jesuits and the leaders of Jesuit works to include students and alumni, parishioners and retreatants, those who are fed by Ignatian spirituality and who help heal a world in need. Together, let us look to the past with gratitude for all we have accomplished in building the Kingdom of God!At 55:27 Catherine (or it could be Katherine) starts discussing a very interesting document that "the Lord gave her". If you pay attention, I'll show you the mysterious way in which the Lord worked this time. The document is Form 990, the disclosure form that not for profits file, of the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester Mass - Choo, choo rah, rah
She probably spends a bit more time on it than she needs to. The point is to show that the Jesuits who work at Holy Cross don't get paid individually.
Which brings us to 1:05:00 where they discuss an article on forbes.com - Minister's Vow of Poverty Does Not Beat Income Tax - And Kent Hovind Update by Peter J. Reilly who has "openly admitted to being a Jesuit"
The source for the admission is a comment I made on a previous video they did on Kent Hovind in which I said that by their standards I might be a Jesuit, since they consider anybody who has ever attended a Jesuit school to be a Jesuit alongside the people, like Kent Hovind, whose subtle Jesuiticalness needs to be teased out.
Socrates Must Die
The latter is the point of the video which essentially boils down to Kent Hovind took a vow of poverty. Jesuits take vows of poverty. Therefore Kent Hovind is a Jesuit. Anybody who knows that Socrates had to die, can recognize the fallacy of the undistributed middle there. Of course, there is more to it. Kent also uses the term ecumenical in referring to his ministry - another sure sign he is a Jesuit.
In the process of laying out the argument, they provide a lot of interesting information on how Catholic clergy are compensated and the difference between clergy who are members of orders and those who are not. You are probably not going to find many people who know a good bit about Catholic clergy compensation and Kent Hovind, so it is not surprising they cite me as an authority. They may be people who believe preposterous things but they believe them in a very thorough manner, so I do feel a bit flattered.
And any time somebody gives that much attention to one of my posts, I've got to show some appreciation. I should note that my post includes a link to the Holy Cross 990, which I think makes it likely that I was the instrument the Lord used to show the document to Catherine. Just saying.
Still I really enjoyed the video and really like Bryan and Catherine Denliger. On their website, they lay out their beliefs and values and they seem to follow through. A couple of high points.
King James Is It
The KJV was translated by a superior technique that guaranteed accuracy. There were 47 of Europe’s most brilliant scholars to work on the translation, and each book of the Bible had to pass through 7 different tests before it would be accepted as scripture. Many of the new versions of the twentieth century were written by only one or two men! The KJV was also translated at a time of much higher moral purity. Unlike the new versions of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.
Our belief in the perfect authority of the KING JAMES VERSION enables us to speak God’s truth to ANYONE at any time without being dishonest. (Matthew 7:28-29) It is a sad fact that MANY pastors and Christians call their bible “God’s word” and yet in their heart they do not believe that it is without error. ( 1 John 5:10-13) This leads to what Jesus referred to as a “hypocrite”. (Read Matthew 23) If you do not have a perfect Bible, then you do not have a perfect God and Saviour!!Male Authority in the Church and Home
We do NOT believe in Female pastors because of the clear teaching against it in the bible. 1 Timothy 3:1-2a says, “This is a true saying, If a MAN desire the office of a bishop, HE desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the HUSBAND of one wife....” 1 Timothy 3:4 also says “his” twice and verse 5 says “man”, “his”, and “he”. The bible also says in 1 Timothy 2:11-12, “Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.” 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 plainly states, “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.”I have to say as youtube performers they model this very well. Catherine is dressed very modestly, Bryan does most of the talking with her standing there and nodding. When she does speak, she appears quite chagrined when he corrects her. From other videos, I think they have been married a year or two. It will be interesting to watch this evolve.
We believe that God has ordained the man to be the head of the home, and NOT the woman. (1 Corinthians 11:3, Ephesians 5:33, & 1 Peter 3:1-7)
Modest apparel for women
We believe that women should dress in a way that they do not draw attention to themselves. As Christians, both men and women should seek to bring glory to God with our lives. The bible tells women how they ought to dress. (1 Peter 3:3-4 & 1 Timothy 2:9-10) Dressing “modestly” is not only pleasing in God’s sight, but is also a way to gain more respect from men in the world. When women dress provocatively it says something about their character. It has been well said, “If you are not in business, then don’t advertize!” We believe that men should dress and act like men, and women should dress and act like women. There should be a clear distinction between the two.
YEC Of Course
We reject the theory of Evolution as an unscientific system of religious belief. (Romans 1:20-25) We believe that God “created all things by Jesus Christ” (Ephesians 3:9) We believe in the literal account of Genesis 1. We also reject the “Gap theory” as well as the “Day-age theory”. The bible teaching of creation lines up perfectly with the known laws of science, (things were good in the beginning, and get worse with age) whereas the theory of evolution goes against this established FACT of science by teaching that everything gets BETTER with time. This is not true of the natural world, and it is not true of the spiritual world either! (1 Timothy 4:1-3, 2 Timothy 3:1-7, & 4:3-4)The firm belief in young earth creationism makes it really hard for Bryan to call out Kent Hovind.
On the donate page, you get this.
If you wish to make a donation to King James Video Ministries, you must realize that your donation is a "gift" and is NOT tax deductible. This ministry is NOT a 501c3 organization.I really admire that approach to the state/church problems that are raised for churches, by our current system.
Kent Hovind As A Jesuit
Accusations that Kent Hovind is a a Jesuit are, of course, beyond preposterous. Nonetheless I reached out to a couple of my favorite Hovindicators for comment. Ernie Land wrote me
OK. I guess because you interviewed Kent you got him to join the organization. I find this one laughable. I guess a “vow of poverty” is for Catholicism only and as such a term none other can use.Rudy Davis who is singled out in the video as being particularly wicked wrote me.
Yes, part of me wants to apologize on behalf of Christians everywhere... although I am not really sure if they are indeed Christians but unfortunately I do suspect that they are Christians.... anyway I refer to their stupidity at about 30 mins into the video below at the bottom.
I am sure that many people think I go overboard in my conspiracy views, I do try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt before labeling them part of some greater conspiracy.
I really thinking Rudy was a little out of line when he says "his wife looks like an Amish cult member". Rudy takes exception to me referring to his youtube work as "a performance", but I use that term in a neutral sense to characterize the way he comes across, which I really appreciate.
In some ways I think Bryan Denlinger is the New England version of Rudy Davis
Me As A Jesuit
I think it got started because when I heard Rudy Davis bad mouthing the Jesuits. Because of that, when I interviewed Ernie Land
I told him that I thought highly of Jesuits and that I had eight years of Jesuit education (Xavier High School in Manhattan Class of 1970 and College of the Holy Cross in Worcester Mass Class of 1974). In a subsequent interview on God's Property Radio, Ernie translated this into my having been a Jesuit for eight years. So I found it amusing when Bryan Denlinger started in on Kent and Ernie's Jesuit connections.
But really I am not a Jesuit. I wrote to Bryan Denlinger but have not heard back from him I suggested three possibilities. One is that, in his view, the mind control techniques of the Jesuits are so powerful that there are thousands of people like me, who are Jesuits without being aware of it. The second is that Bryan thinks I am a liar. The third is that he is mistaken about me being a Jesuit.
The funny thing is that I have been doing a series about my high school days. High school had much more direct Jesuit influence than college did. I have seen comments from my classmates to the effect that they learned tolerance, open mindedness and compassion from the Jesuits, but I think I may have come to them, to the extent I have, from other influences like my parents, the Boy Scouts and a saint like curate in our parish, Father Charles McTague, who went on to be moderately famous. Ironically Father McTague flunked out of Xavier. Go figure. But I do think those values were reinforced by the school.
Oddly enough, my memories of the military side of the school are much more vivid. I would say that you might make a better case that Xavier made me a soldier rather than a Jesuit, but of course there is no case for the soldier either.
So it would be nice to hear if Bryan thinks I am flat out lying when I say I am not a Jesuit. I'll still like him regardless. I'd love to have a get together at my house some time with Rudy Davis and Bryan Denlinger and Ernie Land and the wives. I don't think my covivant would go for it though.
So the bottom line is that I'm not a Jesuit and neither is Kent Hovind. And I think Rudy should really apologize for that Amish crack about Mrs. Denlinger.
Peter J Reilly CPA is not now nor has he ever been a Jesuit.