Podcasts about Orthodox

In this episode, Matt sits down with Joe Heschmeyer—author, debater, and Catholic Answers apologist—to talk about (and question) what we believe to be true, what's real and what's not, conspiracy theories, morality, and much more. 

Across the globe, memorial and grave sites are being increasingly weaponized in conflicts and politicized by parties to advance agendas. Here, Carol S. Lilly examines ideas of death, politics, memory, ideology and nationalism in the former Yugoslav republics of Bosnia & Hercegovina, Croatia, and Serbia to shine fresh light on cemetery culture in 20th-century Europe.More specifically, Death and Burial in Socialist Yugoslavia: The Politicization of Cemeteries and Ethnic Conflict in the Balkans (Bloomsbury, 2024) argues that while the CPY created its own communities of the dead in postwar Partisan Cemeteries, it failed to do the same for civilian cemeteries in ways that might reinforce its ideals of secularism, pluralism, and brotherhood and unity. Moreover, the communist regime left the previous system of ethno-religious segregation in place, further isolating Catholics, Orthodox, Muslims and Jews who continued to be buried in separate locations. Finally, it explicitly politicized burial rites and grave markers, making cemeteries into legitimate spaces of political discourse.As a result, by the time Yugoslavia disintegrated in the early 1990s, dead bodies and cemeteries had become a concerted weapon of war in the ongoing ethnic conflict. Ultimately, then, this timely study reveals for the first time the extent to which the communist regime not only failed to created their own communities of the dead but also further divided and alienated living communities in Yugoslavia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Welcome to The Times of Israel’s Daily Briefing, your 20-minute audio update on what’s happening in Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world. ToI founding editor David Horovitz joins host Jessica Steinberg for today’s episode. As Israel’s Supreme Court demanded the government justify its reasons for not establishing a state commission of inquiry into the events that led to the October 7 Hamas invasion and massacres in southern Israel, Horovitz discusses how the government’s current approach will not uncover what went wrong, creating a dangerous precedent for the country. The High Court also ordered the government to create effective enforcement measures against ultra-Orthodox draft dodgers, and Horovitz discusses the ruling written by High Court justice Noam Sohlberg, who rebuked the Haredi community and its assertion that Torah study outweighs army service, citing the ultra-Orthodox Rabbi Chaim Soloveitchik. Check out The Times of Israel’s ongoing liveblog for more updates. For further reading: Netanyahu’s Oct. 7 inquiry aims to safeguard his job, not Israel’s future High Court orders government to explain why it’s not launching Oct. 7 state inquiry High Court gives government 45 days to draw up sanctions for Haredi draft dodgers Subscribe to The Times of Israel Daily Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts. This episode was produced by Pod-Waves. IMAGE: Deputy President of the Supreme Court Noam Sohlberg arrives for a court hearing on the government’s draft of ultra-Orthodox Jews on October 29, 2025 (Chaim Goldberg/Flash90)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

He was born in Irenopolis, one of the "Ten Cities" of Asia Minor. Though his parents wanted him to marry, he entered monastic life as a young man, and struggled for many years, living in reclusion under the guidance of a wise spiritual father. One day, while in prayer, he was carried away to Paradise and experienced the blessedness that the redeemed will know at the general Resurrection. The vision seemed to him only to last for an hour, but he learned from his disciple that he had been in ecstasy for four days.   Aware that the Enemy can appear as an angel of light, and that we should be suspicious of seeming revelations, he sought the counsel of his Abbot, who reassured him, and told him to give thanks to God by continuing in his ascetic labors.   Soon, he was told by revelation that he was to go forth into the world, living without an earthly home, to uphold the Orthodox faith, which was then under attack by the Iconoclasts. He traveled through Ephesus, Constantinople, Corinth, Rome, Sicily, Thessalonica, and Constantinople again, laboring in defense of the Faith and working many miracles. Usually he would stay with poor people who welcomed him into their houses, though it was forbidden by law to receive an Orthodox monk (that is, one who defended the Icons). In his last few years, afflicted by illness, he settled in Constantinople, where he reposed in peace in 832, just before the end of iconoclasm and the restoration of Orthodoxy. Since 1490, his incorrupt relics have dwelt at the Monastery of Bistritsa in Romania, where they continue to be a source of miracles for the many pilgrims who come to venerate them.

Join Jacobs Premium: https://www.thenathanjacobspodcast.com/membershipThe book club (use code LEWIS): https://www.thenathanjacobspodcast.com/offers/aLohje7p/checkoutThis is part three of our three-part series on the seven ecumenical councils, focusing on the philosophical commitments embedded in the final five councils from Ephesus to Nicaea II. We examine the Nestorian controversy and Cyril of Alexandria's defense of moderate realism, the doctrine of complex natures, and the distinction between common faculties and idiosyncratic use in the monothelite debate. The episode concludes with the monoenergist controversy's codification of the essence-energies distinction and the ontology of image and archetype in iconography.All the links: Substack: https://nathanajacobs.substack.com/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thenathanjacobspodcastWebsite: https://www.nathanajacobs.com/X: https://x.com/NathanJacobsPodSpotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0hSskUtCwDT40uFbqTk3QSApple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-nathan-jacobs-podcastFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/nathanandrewjacobsAcademia: https://vanderbilt.academia.edu/NathanAJacobs00:00:00 - Intro00:05:36 Dogma vs. Kerygma: Basil's Distinction 00:10:26 The Council of Ephesus: Nestorius vs. Cyril 00:14:56 Moderate Realism and Complex Natures00:23:18 Nestorius's Metaphysical Error00:30:14 Why Mary Is Theotokos00:45:02 The Monophysite Controversy After Ephesus00:49:19 The Council of Chalcedon 00:57:00 Common Nature, Idiosyncratic Use01:02:00 The Theandric Operations: John of Damascus's Analogy01:07:56 The Essence-Energies Distinction in the Councils 01:13:34 Against Calling It "Palamite" 01:19:09 Nicaea II and the Ontology of Images Other words for the algorithm… ecumenical councils, Christology, Chalcedon, Council of Ephesus, Nestorius, Cyril of Alexandria, moderate realism, complex natures, theotokos, patristics, church fathers, early Christian philosophy, Byzantine theology, Eastern Orthodox, Orthodox theology, hupóstasis, essence-energies distinction, Gregory Palamas, Cappadocian fathers, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, John of Damascus, Maximus the Confessor, monothelite controversy, monoenergist controversy, monophysitism, Apollinarianism, hypostatic union, two natures one person, divine energies, theosis, deification, incarnation, Nicene Creed, Constantinople, Council of Chalcedon, hyalomorphism, Aristotle, Plato, realism, nominalism, universals, particular, form and matter, substance, accidents, common nature, Christian metaphysics, patristic theology, systematic theology, philosophical theology, philosophy of religion, Christian philosophy, Thomas Aquinas, scholasticism, medieval philosophy, ancient philosophy, Neoplatonism, divine simplicity, divine freedom, anthropology, theological anthropology, imago dei, image of God, iconography, Nicaea II, body and soul, will, free will, monothelitism, Apollinaris, Athanasius, homoousios, consubstantial, Trinity, divine nature, human nature, rational soul, theandric operations, dogma, kerygma, divine liturgy, anti-Chalcedonian, Council of Constantinople, moderate realist, extreme realism, archetypal ideas, common will, idiosyncratic use, Philippians 2, morphe, kenosis, inflamed blade analogy, David Bradshaw, essence and energies, Aristotle East and West, Gregory of Nazianzus, Chrysostom, ontology, metaphysics, formal properties, genera and species, specific difference

A man climbs a ladder to hang drapes and slips into a lifetime's truth: he's been decorating emptiness. We sat with Tolstoy's The Death of Ivan Ilyich and asked hard questions about status, ritual, and the kind of love that only shows up when it costs.Quick story snapshot (Tolstoy): Ivan Ilyich, a successful judge with a “proper” life, suffers a fatal illness after a trivial accident. As pain strips away his self-deception, society's politeness rings hollow—only the servant Gerasim meets him with honest compassion. In his final hours Ivan sees that a life ordered around comfort and appearances cannot save; repentance and self-giving love can.What we explore (through an Orthodox lens):Marriage as sanctification, not transaction—a place where pride dies and love learns to serve.Rituals with a why—why liturgy and household habits either form us or numb us.Seeing with others' eyes—how wives, husbands, converts, and cradle faithful re-read the same text and grow empathy.The bruise as a parable of sin—ignored at first, spreading quietly, distorting how we see those closest to us.Gerasim's ordinary holiness—humility, patience, and joy as the persuasive answer to “main-character energy.”Recovering a shared moral language—how myth and realism help us talk about death, judgment, and mercy in an age of “my truth.”Takeaway: Don't wait for a deathbed to choose communion over isolation. Read bravely, examine your ladders, and practice the love that moves first—especially when it costs.Questions about Orthodoxy? Please check out our friends at Ghost of Byzantium Discord server: https://discord.gg/JDJDQw6tdhPlease prayerfully consider supporting Cloud of Witnesses Radio: https://www.patreon.com/c/CloudofWitnessesFind Cloud of Witnesses Radio on Instagram, X.com, Facebook, and TikTokPlease leave a comment with your thoughts!

Hour 2 for 11/19/25 Drew and Brooke pray the Chaplet of Divine Mercy (1:00). Then, Fr. Richard Simon covers why young men are attracted to Orthodoxy (28:08). Caller: I have become Orthodox (39:29), Latin Mass (44:05), and my grandson wants to be Orthodox (46:40). Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/19/us/orthodox-christianity.html

“Do Some Orthodox Traditions Allow for Multiple Marriages?” This episode explores the nuances of Catholic and Orthodox relations, addressing questions like which Church Fathers and Councils support the Papacy, the historical split between the two churches, and how to respond to those drawn to Orthodoxy. Tune in for a thoughtful examination of these important topics. Join the Catholic Answers Live Club Newsletter Invite our apologists to speak at your parish! Visit Catholicanswersspeakers.com Questions Covered: 04:55 – What Fathers and Councils should I read that support the Papacy? 11:26 – Who led the parting of the Orthodox church with the Catholic church? What was the key disagreement? 16:15 – How can I respond to someone who feels that they are being led from Catholicism into Orthodoxy? 30:00 – Do some Orthodox traditions allow for more than one marriage? 40:40 – Are we allowed to take communion if a Catholic attends an Eastern Orthodox Church? 42:41 – Does it affect our Salvation if we don't believe in a Catholic church teaching? 52:22 – What is the difference or similarity between Eastern Orthodox or Catholics disagree with their leaders’ teachings?

Today we have a CHILL CHAT SESSION: We continue the series with part 4 on symmetrical and asymmetrical christology, logos-sarx christology, composite hyspotasis and tertium quid.  @OrthodoxShahada  and  @OrthodoxDavid  Send Superchats at any time here: https://streamlabs.com/jaydyer/tip David's key talk is here https://youtu.be/Gm_GRzu-BR0 Qai substack is here https://orthodoxshahada.substack.com/p/oriental-monophysites-do-not-understand-a2b https://orthodoxshahada.substack.com/p/st-basil-completely-refutes-oriental Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join Order New Book Available here: https://jaysanalysis.com/product/esoteric-hollywood-3-sex-cults-apocalypse-in-films/ Get started with Bitcoin here: https://www.swanbitcoin.com/jaydyer/ The New Philosophy Course is here: https://marketplace.autonomyagora.com/philosophy101 Set up recurring Choq subscription with the discount code JAY44LIFE for 44% off now https://choq.com Subscribe to my site here: https://jaysanalysis.com/membership-account/membership-levels/ Follow me on R0kfin here: https://rokfin.com/jaydyer Music by Amid the Ruins 1453 https://www.youtube.com/@amidtheruinsOVERHAUL Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join #comedy #podcast #entertainmentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/jay-sanalysis--1423846/support.

Alex Sorin has been creating some fire apologetics vids and today he joins me to cover his recent talks, upcoming debates and his path to Orthodoxy. Alex is here  @Alex_Ortodoxie  Send Superchats at any time here: https://streamlabs.com/jaydyer/tip Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join Order New Book Available here: https://jaysanalysis.com/product/esoteric-hollywood-3-sex-cults-apocalypse-in-films/ Get started with Bitcoin here: https://www.swanbitcoin.com/jaydyer/ The New Philosophy Course is here: https://marketplace.autonomyagora.com/philosophy101 Set up recurring Choq subscription with the discount code JAY44LIFE for 44% off now https://choq.com Subscribe to my site here: https://jaysanalysis.com/membership-account/membership-levels/ Follow me on R0kfin here: https://rokfin.com/jaydyer Music by Amid the Ruins 1453 https://www.youtube.com/@amidtheruinsOVERHAUL Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join #comedy #podcast #entertainmentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/jay-sanalysis--1423846/support.

Today we respond to the massive evangelical dispensational takeover of X by the Zl0 crowd of so called "Christianity" and highlight their root heresy of Judaising. Send Superchats at any time here: https://streamlabs.com/jaydyer/tip Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join Order New Book Available here: https://jaysanalysis.com/product/esoteric-hollywood-3-sex-cults-apocalypse-in-films/ Get started with Bitcoin here: https://www.swanbitcoin.com/jaydyer/ The New Philosophy Course is here: https://marketplace.autonomyagora.com/philosophy101 Set up recurring Choq subscription with the discount code JAY44LIFE for 44% off now https://choq.com Subscribe to my site here: https://jaysanalysis.com/membership-account/membership-levels/ Follow me on R0kfin here: https://rokfin.com/jaydyer Music by Amid the Ruins 1453 https://www.youtube.com/@amidtheruinsOVERHAUL Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join #comedy #podcast #entertainmentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/jay-sanalysis--1423846/support.

Interweaving memoir with Hebrew poetry, Going Out with Knots: My Two Kaddish Years with Hebrew Poetry (Jewish Publication Society, 2025) illluminates author Wendy I. Zierler's literary and personal Jewish mourning journey in the aftermath of unremitting personal loss. She begins with her story: the death of both her parents in one year; the challenges she faced as a woman saying Kaddish in an Orthodox synagogue; and her decision to teach a weekly class on modern Hebrew poems that addressed grief, prayer, and God wrestling. Each subsequent chapter delves into the works of a different modern Hebrew poet—Lea Goldberg, Avraham Ḥalfi, Yehuda Amichai, Rachel Morpurgo, Rachel Bluwstein, Ruhama Weiss, and Amir Gilboa—in the order in which she translated, interpreted, and taught their poems (many translated into English for the first time). Each poet, like Zierler, comes to writing deeply connected to Jewish tradition and yet at odds with it, too. Ultimately, Going Out with Knots reflects on how a woman living in a modern Orthodox community can claim a place in the male-centered rituals that Jewish tradition prescribes for mourning, and how immersion in modern Hebrew poetry can respond deeply to both communal (COVID-19, October 7) as well as personal losses, offering a new form of theology and Torah. Rabbi Dr. Wendy I. Zierler is Sigmund Falk Professor of Modern Jewish Literature and Feminist Studies at Hebrew Union College–Jewish Institute of Religion in New York and the coeditor of Prooftexts: A Journal of Jewish Literary History. She is the author of Movies and Midrash: Popular Film and Jewish Religious Conversation and And Rachel Stole the Idols: The Emergence of Hebrew Women's Writing and coeditor of These Truths We Hold: Judaism in an Age of Truthiness. Rabbi Marc Katz is the Senior Rabbi of Temple Ner Tamid in Bloomfield, NJ. He is the author of Yochanan's Gamble: Judaism's Pragmatic Approach to Life. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Interweaving memoir with Hebrew poetry, Going Out with Knots: My Two Kaddish Years with Hebrew Poetry (Jewish Publication Society, 2025) illluminates author Wendy I. Zierler's literary and personal Jewish mourning journey in the aftermath of unremitting personal loss. She begins with her story: the death of both her parents in one year; the challenges she faced as a woman saying Kaddish in an Orthodox synagogue; and her decision to teach a weekly class on modern Hebrew poems that addressed grief, prayer, and God wrestling. Each subsequent chapter delves into the works of a different modern Hebrew poet—Lea Goldberg, Avraham Ḥalfi, Yehuda Amichai, Rachel Morpurgo, Rachel Bluwstein, Ruhama Weiss, and Amir Gilboa—in the order in which she translated, interpreted, and taught their poems (many translated into English for the first time). Each poet, like Zierler, comes to writing deeply connected to Jewish tradition and yet at odds with it, too. Ultimately, Going Out with Knots reflects on how a woman living in a modern Orthodox community can claim a place in the male-centered rituals that Jewish tradition prescribes for mourning, and how immersion in modern Hebrew poetry can respond deeply to both communal (COVID-19, October 7) as well as personal losses, offering a new form of theology and Torah. Rabbi Dr. Wendy I. Zierler is Sigmund Falk Professor of Modern Jewish Literature and Feminist Studies at Hebrew Union College–Jewish Institute of Religion in New York and the coeditor of Prooftexts: A Journal of Jewish Literary History. She is the author of Movies and Midrash: Popular Film and Jewish Religious Conversation and And Rachel Stole the Idols: The Emergence of Hebrew Women's Writing and coeditor of These Truths We Hold: Judaism in an Age of Truthiness. Rabbi Marc Katz is the Senior Rabbi of Temple Ner Tamid in Bloomfield, NJ. He is the author of Yochanan's Gamble: Judaism's Pragmatic Approach to Life. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/jewish-studies

“Why stay Catholic if Orthodox have valid sacraments and papacy?” This episode explores the unique aspects of Catholicism, addressing questions like the interpretation of Jesus’ image in Catholicism compared to Orthodoxy and whether it’s acceptable to disagree with a priest on teachings. Join us for a thoughtful examination of faith and tradition. Join the Catholic Answers Live Club Newsletter Invite our apologists to speak at your parish! Visit Catholicanswersspeakers.com Questions Covered: 03:51 – Why stay Catholic if the Orthodox have valid sacraments? 12:25 – The images of Jesus tend to be the same in Orthodox Churches. Why does His image seem to be up for interpretation in Catholicism? 17:14 – Is it ever okay to disagree with your priest about a Catholic teaching? 19:50 – Since Catholics need to believe in the Papacy, how can the Orthodox be in communion? 29:25 – Why is it a big deal that the Orthodox don't accept the Papacy since they accept everything else? 36:30 – Why is there an emphasis on the need to believe in the Assumption or the Immaculate conception? 44:30 – Why would it matter if you are Orthodox or Catholic, if we both can be in heaven? 49:37 – How can one Pope claim he couldn't add the filioque to the creed and another claimed he could?

I have been wanting to do a stream refuting my old bad ideas as well as steel--manning them. Send Superchats at any time here: https://streamlabs.com/jaydyer/tip Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join Order New Book Available here: https://jaysanalysis.com/product/esoteric-hollywood-3-sex-cults-apocalypse-in-films/ Get started with Bitcoin here: https://www.swanbitcoin.com/jaydyer/ The New Philosophy Course is here: https://marketplace.autonomyagora.com/philosophy101 Set up recurring Choq subscription with the discount code JAY44LIFE for 44% off now https://choq.com Subscribe to my site here: https://jaysanalysis.com/membership-account/membership-levels/ Follow me on R0kfin here: https://rokfin.com/jaydyer Music by Amid the Ruins 1453 https://www.youtube.com/@amidtheruinsOVERHAUL Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join #comedy #podcast #entertainmentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/jay-sanalysis--1423846/support.

Fr. Evan answers your questions about being supportive of a spouse battling addiction, the role of the Orthodox church in the lives of the faithful, how to communicate with both non-Orthodox and Orthodox parish leadership during a conversion, putting aside one's theological prejudices on their journey into the church, and more in this week's episode of Orthodoxy Live!

Open calls and questions and challenges on any topic! TAG, philosophy, metaphysics & MORE! Send Superchats at any time here: https://streamlabs.com/jaydyer/tip Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join Order New Book Available here: https://jaysanalysis.com/product/esoteric-hollywood-3-sex-cults-apocalypse-in-films/ Get started with Bitcoin here: https://www.swanbitcoin.com/jaydyer/ The New Philosophy Course is here: https://marketplace.autonomyagora.com/philosophy101 Set up recurring Choq subscription with the discount code JAY44LIFE for 44% off now https://choq.com Subscribe to my site here: https://jaysanalysis.com/membership-account/membership-levels/ Follow me on R0kfin here: https://rokfin.com/jaydyer Music by Amid the Ruins 1453 https://www.youtube.com/@amidtheruinsOVERHAUL Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join #comedy #podcast #entertainmentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/jay-sanalysis--1423846/support.

Open calls and questions and challenges on any topic! TAG, philosophy, metaphysics & MORE! Send Superchats at any time here: https://streamlabs.com/jaydyer/tip Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join Order New Book Available here: https://jaysanalysis.com/product/esoteric-hollywood-3-sex-cults-apocalypse-in-films/ Get started with Bitcoin here: https://www.swanbitcoin.com/jaydyer/ The New Philosophy Course is here: https://marketplace.autonomyagora.com/philosophy101 Set up recurring Choq subscription with the discount code JAY44LIFE for 44% off now https://choq.com Subscribe to my site here: https://jaysanalysis.com/membership-account/membership-levels/ Follow me on R0kfin here: https://rokfin.com/jaydyer Music by Amid the Ruins 1453 https://www.youtube.com/@amidtheruinsOVERHAUL Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join #comedy #podcast #entertainmentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/jay-sanalysis--1423846/support.

In this episode, Fr. Anthony reflects on Christ's call of St. Matthew as a revelation of the Lord's pastoral wisdom, patience, and mercy. Drawing on St. John Chrysostom, he shows how Christ approaches each person at the moment they are most able to receive Him, gently leading sinners to repentance while shielding the weak from the self-righteous. The homily invites us to imitate this divine pedagogy—offering mercy before rebuke, healing before judgment, and a way of life that draws others to the knowledge of God. +++ Mercy, Not Sacrifice: Christ's Pastoral Method in the Calling of Matthew St. Matthew 9:9-13 At that time, as Jesus passed on from there, He saw a man called Matthew sitting at the tax office; and He said to him, "Follow Me." And he rose and followed Him. And as He sat at table in the house, behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and sat down with Jesus and His disciples. And when the Pharisees saw this, they said to His disciples, "Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?" But when Jesus heard it, He said, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. Go and learn what this means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice.' For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."  When looking at this encounter, it is important to know the context.  Jesus had been at this for a while.  He had already called at least four of the twelve; Andrew, Peter, James and John, to be his disciples.  Moreover, in addition to them, many others were following him.  He had already been baptized, been tempted, given the Sermon on the Mount and performed several public miracles. Knowing this allows us to better appreciate Christ, how He operates, and therefore how we might better imitate Him as we claim to operate in + His name. Example One: Calling the disciples Let's go back to His calling the disciples.  Why didn't He call Matthew at the same time He called Andrew, Peter, James, and John?  St. John Chrysostom indicates that it was Christ's pastoral heart that determined when we called each of His disciples.  Remember, as the Logos, He shares the Father's will that "all be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth." (1 Timothy 2:4).  This means that He addressed people in the time and manner they were most likely to hear.  St. John Chrysostom points out that Matthew's heart was not open to Christ's call at the same time as Andrew, Peter, James, and John.  It took miracles and profound teaching to soften His heart for the encounter.  And He didn't just do this for Matthew, look how long it took for the Apostle Paul!  And perhaps, we can look at long he waited for us! We should learn from this lesson from Christ's earthly ministry and imitate Him.  We may need to live among some people for a while, showing the miracle of God's love working in and through us in the way we act and the things we say, before they are ready to accept an invitation to join us in The Way that heals and perfects.  Many of us jump the gun; skipping the vital step of living a public life of miraculous love – and then are surprised when the call to "follow Christ" goes unheeded.  Yes, there are times when the modern equivalents of scribes and pharisees need to be confronted, but once again, let's imitate Christ and let them out themselves when they question our motives and sanity for performing acts of sacrificial compassion.  If we skip the step of imitating Christ in His love for mankind, not only won't we win converts, we may also be indicating that we aren't really working in His Name at all.   Example Two: Leaving, not owning the opposition Speaking of which, Christ also demonstrates his pastoral care at the very beginning of today's lesson.  You may remember that today's lesson begins with something that seems to be a throwaway line; a transitional clause that lets the reader know that the narrative is moving on to another scene.  St. Matthew writes; "At that time, as Jesus passed on from there,…" and then segues into this lesson about how Christ called him, the author, to be His disciple.  But what did He leave and why?  What did He "pass on" from in the previous scene? Let me share that with you; just prior to this, Jesus had publicly corrected some scribes - leaders in the Jewish community - by healing a man of his paralysis after they doubted His ability to forgive sins.  Do you see how they out themselves as fools?  But Christ doesn't want them to remain in ignorance.  He desires that they, too, be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth …  but He also knew that they were not ready to accept the truth, so He left before they could double down on their sin and thus become even less likely to change their way of thinking and eventually answer His call to discipleship. As St. John Christostom puts it; For when He had performed the miracle, He did not remain, lest, being in sight, He should kindle their jealousy the more; but He indulges them by retiring, and soothing their passion. This then let us also do, not encountering them that are plotting against us; let us rather soothe their wound, giving way and relaxing their vehemence. Jesus could have owned those scribes!   This is what our polarized and self-indulgent culture seems to require of us: to immediately jump on any perceived weakness to show the superiority of our way.  We even manufacture offenses so that we have an opportunity to score points and play to the crowd.  But that's not what Jesus did; there was a real offense and a real weakness – but He didn't want or need to impress anyone.  Again, his desire is that of His Father; that all be saved and come to a knowledge of the Truth.  And so He forbeared and gave them an opportunity to cool off and repent while He moved off to spend time with someone who was ready to hear Him. These are the kinds of lessons that are obvious to those who have "eyes to see and ears to hear," but for the rest of us, it takes time.  As we have discussed previously, we still see the Gospel "through a glass darkly" and only see reality as "trees walking."  But we want to learn, and so we ask those who have made this journey successfully before us, men like the Holy Apostle and Evanglist Matthew, whose memory we celebrate today and St. John Chrysostom who shares the deeper Truths that St. Matthew shared – we ask them to guide and pray for us as go deeper into The Way. Let's see what more we can learn about Christ's approach to evangelism and pastoral care in today's lesson.  It is worth remembering that Matthew was a tax collector.  When Jesus gave him the invitation to "follow me", he responded with hospitality.  He opened his house to the Lord, his disciples, fellow tax collectors, and unspecified sinners.  Just to make sure everyone had a good time, this was all done within view of some local Pharisees.  The Pharisees spent their whole lives dedicated to righteousness (as should all of us).  I am perfectly willing to believe that they were sincere in their devotion to the Law.  In fact, it was probably their devotion to the Law that led to their revulsion at seeing an alleged rabbi (Jesus) eating with sinners.  They shared their righteous indignation with the Lord's disciples and He overheard them.  We can learn a lot about how to pastoral ministry by looking at Christ's response. First, He said (e.g. St. Mark 2:17); Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick do. I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.  This is the most obvious point: God was explaining what His mission to these sinners (and the world) was:  He had come to bring them to repentance.  This would hardly satisfy any ultra-Orthodox takfirists – they always want their pound of flesh!  After all, they say, repentance requires tears, and the best way to bring someone to tears is not to eat with them and provide them a living example of the better way; no, surely it is more effective to beat them over the head with the Sin-Stick, right?!  Evidently not, at least according to the all-knowing and all-loving God-man Jesus Christ. After acknowledging the sinfulness of His dinner companions and their need for repentance, He corrected the Pharisees' dubious pedagogical and evangelical instincts with this (e.g. St. Matthew himself in 9:13); Go and learn what it means, 'I will have mercy, and not sacrifice': for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. Christ is quoting Hosea when He says; "I will have mercy, and not sacrifice".  The full passage (which was implied) continues with (Hosea 6:6); "… and [I desire] the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings."  This is huge.  The Pharisees knew the full quote and its context; they would have seen that Christ was telling them that they were guilty of the very same sorts of things that went against God throughout the Old Testament.  He was telling them that they were more concerned with fulfilling the letter of the law (i.e. doing the "burnt offerings" well) than they were with knowing God or bringing others to Him.  At that meal, He was doing something that they should have been doing themselves. How Christ Discipled His Sinners cum Apostles More importantly, along with His entire response, Christ used this quote to describe His method for bringing the "knowledge of God" to sinners; He would use mercy to lead them to repentance, which would in turn allow them to grow in the knowledge of God.   St. John Chrysostom brings this point out at the end of his homily on this passage; What Christ is saying through his words and deads is this, "The disciples have not yet become strong; they still need a lot of condescension. They have not been renewed by the Spirit yet.  You really shouldn't put a lot of injunctions on people who are still weak."  And He said all these things in order to set laws and rules for His own disciples, so that when it was their turn to train disciples, they would deal with them very gently.  To reiterate St. John Chrysostom's point, God is showing His disciples how the Gospel is to be taught: gently and with mercy … while protecting the weak from the attacks of the self-righteous.  This is important for us as Christian leaders: we are called to follow Christ!  We are called to take His Gospel to sinners so that they might repent,  come to the knowledge of God, and be saved.  Keep the Sin-Stick ready, but use it the way Christ Himself did; to defend the weak from the attacks of the self-righteous. There is a temptation to bring sinners to a full awareness of their sin in order to drive them towards repentance, but be careful with this.   Psalm 129: 3-4 (which we often repeat as a prokimen so that we will master it – or rather so that it might master us);  If thou, Lord, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand? But there is forgiveness with thee. And later in that same Psalm, we learn from the Psalmist, in the Spirt, what the purpose of this merciful forgivness is; so that He might bring salvation to Israel (129:8). Repentance, kenosis, and discernment are fostered over time.  It is an iterated and communal process.  The wounds this world inflicts on God's children are serious and it takes time for Him to heal them.  This means that you may not be able to see the process through to its conclusion, but it is okay to simply begin the treatment; the Church has trained other physicians that can continue the process, just as you will be called to continue the work others have begun.  As Christ said "One soweth, and another reapeth." (St. John 4:37:4) Conclusion Saint Matthew's life is a testimony to the efficacy of this gentle discipleship process.  He was a sinner.  The Lord protected Him and showed Him mercy.  Over time, through His example, His holiness, and His teachings, He brought Matthew through repentance to the true knowledge of God.  As a recipient of this grace, St. Matthew could do nothing else but offer it to others.   It is true that the Church is a hospital, and that Christ is the Great Physician; and it is also true that St. Matthew found healing in the Church under the Doctor's care.  But it is also true that He did not stay in the hospital bed. After a lifetime spent spreading the Gospel, this "good and faithful servant" earned the martyr's crown in Ethiopia. May the Lord transform us into the kind of patient, merciful, and holy pastors who can do the same.

Join Stephen Boyce and Pat May on FACTS as we continue our series on the Seven Ecumenical Councils with a deep dive into the Council of Chalcedon (451 AD) — the largest and one of the most influential councils in the history of the Christian Church. With over 520 bishops in attendance, Chalcedon delivered the definitive teaching on the two natures of Christ, reversed the chaos of the Robber Council of 449, and shaped the theological world of Christianity for centuries.In this episode, we break down: • The background and controversies leading up to Chalcedon • Eutyches, Flavian, Dioscorus, and the fallout from the Latrocinium • Pope Leo's Tome and its role in defining orthodox Christology • The Chalcedonian Definition: fully God, fully man. • Canon 28 and the Constantinople–Rome tension • The rise of the Oriental Orthodox Churches (Coptic, Syriac, Armenian) • Why Chalcedon still matters for Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants todayWhether you're studying church history, Christology, or exploring the roots of Christian doctrine, this episode provides a clear and accessible guide to one of the most important events in the ancient Church.If you'd like to donate to our ministry or be a monthly partner that receives newsletters and one on one discussions with Dr. Stephen Boyce, here's a link: https://give.tithe.ly/?formId=6381a2ee-b82f-42a7-809e-6b733cec05a7 ⸻#CouncilOfChalcedon #SevenEcumenicalCouncils #ChalcedonianDefinition #ChurchHistory #Christology #PopeLeo #TomeOfLeo #Eutyches #Dioscorus #CopticOrthodox #OrientalOrthodox #Patristics #EarlyChurch #ChristianTheology #FACTSPodcast #StephenBoyce

In 2009, Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople gifted a Quran to a Muslim leader — and many Christians are still asking: Why would an Orthodox patriarch do that? And it's not an isolated example. In recent decades we've seen a growing list of gestures and statements from major Christian leaders that seem totally at odds with […]

How common is online dating in the Yeshivish community? What about Modern Orthodox? Is it ever acceptable to adjust your age, height, or weight on a dating profile? Should men and women post profile photos, and what are the concerns? Is using an older photo to appear younger misleading? What are the halachos of leaving feedback or “reviews” for shadchanim or daters? Host: Ari Wasserman, author of the newly published, revised and expanded book Making it Work, on workplace challenges and Halachic Q & A on the Job with Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz – Rov of Bais Haknesses of North Woodmere and Head of Semicha at RIETS – 10:37 with Dr. Rachel Ginsberg – Principal Researcher at the Center for Communal Research of the OU – 39:37 with Mrs. Lisa Elefant – Founder and Program Developer of AdoptAShadchan (www.adoptashadchan.com) – 1:09:30 with Mrs. Malka Levitin – Founder of Canopy Shidduchim (www.canopyshidduchim.com) – 1:28:25 Conclusions and takeaways – 1:45:08 מראי מקומות   

When did Christians first recognize the biblical canon and how do we know we have the right books? Today, we have New Testament scholar Dr. Michael Kruger (The Question of Canon) to unpack what “canon” means, why recognition began far earlier than the 4th century, and how both intrinsic factors (covenant, apostles) and extrinsic factors (heretics like Marcion) shaped the process. We also address why Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox differ, and what to make of texts like The Shepherd of Hermas and the Gospel of Thomas. READ: The Question of Canon: Challenging The Status Quo In The New Testament Debate by Michael J. Kruger (https://amzn.to/4nPtbE0) *Get a MASTERS IN APOLOGETICS or SCIENCE AND RELIGION at BIOLA (https://bit.ly/3LdNqKf) *USE Discount Code [smdcertdisc] for 25% off the NEW Talbot Apologetics Certificate program (https://bit.ly/3AzfPFM) *See our fully online UNDERGRAD DEGREE in Bible, Theology, and Apologetics: (https://bit.ly/448STKK) FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA: Twitter: https://x.com/Sean_McDowell TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@sean_mcdowell?lang=en Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/seanmcdowell/ Website: https://seanmcdowell.org Discover more Christian podcasts at lifeaudio.com and inquire about advertising opportunities at lifeaudio.com/contact-us.

What if the church you've been searching for all along is the one you didn't know existed? Kyle David shares how a lifetime of sincere belief still left him split between Sunday performance and weekday drift—until a medical collapse forced brutal honesty about faith, pride, and the limits of self-reliance. The story begins with restless church-hopping across megachurch stages and traditional pews, and moves through a pandemic-era return to the sanctuary that felt more like rebellion than routine.We trace Kyle's path from church fatigue and a divided life to a near-death crisis that reawakened faith, reverence, and daily discipline. The journey lands in Orthodoxy, where mystery is honored, repentance is central, and community finally feels like home.• Protestant upbringing across multiple denominations• dissatisfaction with casual worship and lack of reverence• gap years from church without renouncing belief• pandemic as a catalyst to reexplore tradition• medical collapse, surgery, and dependence on grace• honoring science while affirming providence• music as a metaphor for spiritual discipline• Eastern sense of mystery aligning with Orthodoxy• finding belonging at St. Anthony the Great• repentance and Christ as the physician of soulsThat restlessness turns into a reckoning when COVID pneumonia, a hurricane evacuation, and months in hospitals strip away pretense. Kyle talks candidly about respecting modern medicine and still seeing providence at work: surgeons and science as channels, not the source, of healing. From that edge of life, he stops “presenting” as Christian and starts practicing one—daily prayer, Scripture, repentance, and a slower, steadier walk. We explore how Orthodoxy's humility before mystery resonates with his Korean heritage and why the Church as a “hospital for the soul” shifted his understanding of mercy, sin, and healing.Music threads through the conversation as a living metaphor. As a drummer, Kyle learned to keep time within and adjust to the room without losing the beat. That's how he approaches faith now—discipline that makes space for grace. The turning point came at St. Anthony the Great in San Diego, where belonging finally felt honest: fewer smoke machines, more reverence; less hype, more healing. If you've felt the gap between head knowledge and a changed life, this story will meet you where you are and invite you deeper into a faith that doesn't explain away mystery but teaches you to stand before it.If this conversation moved you, tap follow, share it with a friend who's searching, and leave a review so more listeners can find the show.Questions about Orthodoxy? Please check out our friends at Ghost of Byzantium Discord server: https://discord.gg/JDJDQw6tdhPlease prayerfully consider supporting Cloud of Witnesses Radio: https://www.patreon.com/c/CloudofWitnessesFind Cloud of Witnesses Radio on Instagram, X.com, Facebook, and TikTokPlease leave a comment with your thoughts!

00:00 Intro/Back from China03:56 Journalism in China & The West09:51 Harmony, rancor, journalism, editorial & social media19:49 Saint Paul to The Church in Rome on quiet living23:07 Vacation vs daily life in a place27:29 Nominalism cannot be the path to social harmony35:57 To love neighbor & enemy we must participate in God's holiness40:12 Humble repentance is the path to a just society43:11 Christianity isn't convenient, look at Syria50:10 Models of church & state53:20 No such thing as Orthodox government54:54 The Church is perfect, stop trying to defend it from itself58:55 The is no invisible church, there is only The Church63:45 Two ways to try to be above the bishops65:27 No, we can't all just get along/ClosingA huge part of the problem with "politics" in The United States is both "sides" have the same underlying assumption: we can't live the good life until everyone agrees with us & the laws reflect our agreement.Fr Symeon's recent trip to visit his family in China provides an opportunity to poke holes in this assumption by discussing the ways in which, simply as a practical example, we can see people living, as St Paul said "...aspire to live quietly, to mind your own affairs, and to work with your hands..." in a country most Americans would insist is about as far from what we want our society to be as is possible. Well, if people can do it in China, then Orthodox Christians can do it in the USA, whether the political winds are going their way, or against them.And if we can walk in the way of the life of faithfulness no matter the political climate, then why are we spending so much time getting wound up about it? Maybe what it boils down to, is we're afraid of inconvenience.Reference materials for this episode: St John Chrysostom's commentary on Romans -12:9-21 - https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/210221.htm & https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/210222.htm - 13:1-7 - https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/210223.htmScripture citations for this episode:Romans - 12:9-21 live in harmony - 13:1-7 be good citizens1 Corinthians - 6:1-11 lawsuitsEphesians - 6:5-9 no slave rebellionsPhilemon - no slave rebellions#china #syria  #journalism #editorial #quietlifeThe Christian Saints Podcast is a joint production of Generative sounds & Paradosis Pavilion with oversight from Fr Symeon KeesParadosis Pavilion - https://youtube.com/@paradosispavilion9555https://www.instagram.com/christiansaintspodcasthttps://twitter.com/podcast_saintshttps://www.facebook.com/christiansaintspodcasthttps://www.threads.net/@christiansaintspodcastIconographic images used by kind permission of Nicholas Papas, who controls distribution rights of these imagesPrints of all of Nick's work can be found at Saint Demetrius Press - http://www.saintdemetriuspress.comAll music in these episodes is a production of Generative Soundshttps://generativesoundsjjm.bandcamp.comDistribution rights of this episode & all music contained in it are controlled by Generative SoundsCopyright 2021 - 2023

What was the nature of paradise? How should we understand the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? St. John of Damascus explains this and more.A reading from Chapter 2, Book 11 of the Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith

The guys speak with two witnesses of the mysterious Holy Love Apparition Shrine. WARNING: This is an unapproved Marian apparition, and there is a lot going on in Ohio concerning this. Gumbi and Aaron wanted to find out more from firsthand witnesses to find more details. Check out this lively recording session in a cozy **recording studio atmosphere! The hosts bring the **energy** while sharing laughs and discussing various topics. This episode was shot and recorded at The Cleveland Winery and animal sanctuary,Home | Cleveland Winery#podcast #bible #beer #Christian #Catholic #wine #alcohol #Cleveland #Ohio  #evangelical #church #history #popculture #geekculture #krujuice #buylocal  #craftbeer #religion #martialarts #microbre

Explore Parshas Chayei Sarah and discover profound Torah wisdom about spiritual growth and character development through Abraham's life. This weekly Torah portion reveals surprising insights about faith and daily Torah practice that transform how we understand Jewish living.Why does Rabbeinu Yonah teach that Abraham's purchase of the Cave of Machpelah was his greatest test—even more challenging than the Akeidah? How can an ordinary real estate transaction reveal more about spiritual greatness than ultimate sacrifice? This Torah podcast examines questions that challenge conventional understanding of Jewish faith and personal growth.Drawing on Torah commentary from Rabbi Frand and Rav Dessler, alongside powerful stories from the Gemara about Rabbi Chanina ben Tardyon, this episode explores how ordinary moments reveal authentic character more accurately than dramatic spiritual peaks. Learn Torah insights about the difference between adrenaline-fueled tests and unwatched daily choices that define who we truly are.Perfect for Orthodox Jews, Torah learners, and anyone seeking practical Judaism and spiritual development. This Jewish podcast offers Torah teachings that speak to modern Orthodox families and Torah students looking to deepen their understanding of biblical insights and Jewish wisdom. Discover how daily Torah practice and small, unnoticed actions reveal genuine spiritual growth more powerfully than any public performance.Weekly Torah podcast series bringing ancient Jewish teachings into practical daily living.

Answering your questions on our Discord and discussing everything on your mind. Politics, theology, comedy, philosophy Send Superchats at any time here: https://streamlabs.com/jaydyer/tip Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join Order New Book Available here: https://jaysanalysis.com/product/esoteric-hollywood-3-sex-cults-apocalypse-in-films/ Get started with Bitcoin here: https://www.swanbitcoin.com/jaydyer/ The New Philosophy Course is here: https://marketplace.autonomyagora.com/philosophy101 Set up recurring Choq subscription with the discount code JAY44LIFE for 44% off now https://choq.com Subscribe to my site here: https://jaysanalysis.com/membership-account/membership-levels/ Follow me on R0kfin here: https://rokfin.com/jaydyer Music by Amid the Ruins 1453 https://www.youtube.com/@amidtheruinsOVERHAUL Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join #comedy #podcast #entertainmentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/jay-sanalysis--1423846/support.

Friends of the Rosary,Today, the Church celebrates the Memorial of St. Josaphat (1580-1643), a Catholic and a Ukrainian Basilian monk who is invoked as the “Apostle of Unity.”As Archbishop of Polotsk (present-day Ukraine), he promoted unity between East and West by fostering an Eastern liturgy in union with Rome.Josaphat was murdered by an angry Orthodox mob in Russia on November 12, 1623, at the age of forty-three.With furious cries of "Kill the papist!", the killers rushed upon him with gun and sword. Josaphat's body was thrown into the river but emerged, surrounded by rays of light.His murderers, when sentenced to death, repented their crime and became Catholics.Josaphat is one of the patrons of Poland.Come, Holy Spirit, come!To Jesus through Mary!Here I am, Lord; I come to do your will.Please give us the grace to respond with joy!+ Mikel Amigot w/ María Blanca | RosaryNetwork.com, New YorkEnhance your faith with the new Holy Rosary University app:Apple iOS | New! Android Google Play• ⁠November 12, 2025, Today's Rosary on YouTube | Daily broadcast at 7:30 pm ET 

How are the federal courts faring during these tumultuous times? I thought it would be worthwhile to discuss this important subject with a former federal judge: someone who understands the judicial role well but could speak more freely than a sitting judge, liberated from the strictures of the bench.Meet Judge Nancy Gertner (Ret.), who served as a U.S. District Judge for the District of Massachusetts from 1994 until 2011. I knew that Judge Gertner would be a lively and insightful interviewee—based not only on her extensive commentary on recent events, reflected in media interviews and op-eds, but on my personal experience. During law school, I took a year-long course on federal sentencing with her, and she was one of my favorite professors.When I was her student, we disagreed on a lot: I was severely conservative back then, and Judge Gertner was, well, not. But I always appreciated and enjoyed hearing her views—so it was a pleasure hearing them once again, some 25 years later, in what turned out to be an excellent conversation.Show Notes:* Nancy Gertner, author website* Nancy Gertner bio, Harvard Law School* In Defense of Women: Memoirs of an Unrepentant Advocate, AmazonPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com.Three quick notes about this transcript. First, it has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter substance—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning. Second, my interviewee has not reviewed this transcript, and any errors are mine. Third, because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email; to view the entire post, simply click on “View entire message” in your email app.David Lat: Welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host, David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to at davidlat.substack.com. You're listening to the eighty-fifth episode of this podcast, recorded on Monday, November 3.Thanks to this podcast's sponsor, NexFirm. NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com. Want to know who the guest will be for the next Original Jurisdiction podcast? Follow NexFirm on LinkedIn for a preview.Many of my guests have been friends of mine for a long time—and that's the case for today's. I've known Judge Nancy Gertner for more than 25 years, dating back to when I took a full-year course on federal sentencing from her and the late Professor Dan Freed at Yale Law School. She was a great teacher, and although we didn't always agree—she was a professor who let students have their own opinions—I always admired her intellect and appreciated her insights.Judge Gertner is herself a graduate of Yale Law School—where she met, among other future luminaries, Bill and Hillary Clinton. After a fascinating career in private practice as a litigator and trial lawyer handling an incredibly diverse array of cases, Judge Gertner was appointed to serve as a U.S. District Judge for the District of Massachusetts in 1994, by President Clinton. She retired from the bench in 2011, but she is definitely not retired: she writes opinion pieces for outlets such as The New York Times and The Boston Globe, litigates and consults on cases, and trains judges and litigators. She's also working on a book called Incomplete Sentences, telling the stories of the people she sentenced over 17 years on the bench. Her autobiography, In Defense of Women: Memoirs of an Unrepentant Advocate, was published in 2011. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Judge Nancy Gertner.Judge, thank you so much for joining me.Nancy Gertner: Thank you for inviting me. This is wonderful.DL: So it's funny: I've been wanting to have you on this podcast in a sense before it existed, because you and I worked on a podcast pilot. It ended up not getting picked up, but perhaps they have some regrets over that, because legal issues have just blown up since then.NG: I remember that. I think it was just a question of scheduling, and it was before Trump, so we were talking about much more sophisticated, superficial things, as opposed to the rule of law and the demise of the Constitution.DL: And we will get to those topics. But to start off my podcast in the traditional way, let's go back to the beginning. I believe we are both native New Yorkers?NG: Yes, that's right. I was born on the Lower East Side of Manhattan, in an apartment that I think now is a tenement museum, and then we moved to Flushing, Queens, where I lived into my early 20s.DL: So it's interesting—I actually spent some time as a child in that area. What was your upbringing like? What did your parents do?NG: My father owned a linoleum store, or as we used to call it, “tile,” and my mother was a homemaker. My mother worked at home. We were lower class on the Lower East Side and maybe made it to lower-middle. My parents were very conservative, in the sense they didn't know exactly what to do with a girl who was a bit of a radical. Neither I nor my sister was precisely what they anticipated. So I got to Barnard for college only because my sister had a conniption fit when he wouldn't pay for college for her—she's my older sister—he was not about to pay for college. If we were boys, we would've had college paid for.In a sense, they skipped a generation. They were actually much more traditional than their peers were. My father was Orthodox when he grew up; my mother was somewhat Orthodox Jewish. My father couldn't speak English until the second grade. So they came from a very insular environment, and in one sense, he escaped that environment when he wanted to play ball on Saturdays. So that was actually the motivation for moving to Queens: to get away from the Lower East Side, where everyone would know that he wasn't in temple on Saturday. We used to have interesting discussions, where I'd say to him that my rebellion was a version of his: he didn't want to go to temple on Saturdays, and I was marching against the war. He didn't see the equivalence, but somehow I did.There's actually a funny story to tell about sort of exactly the distance between how I was raised and my life. After I graduated from Yale Law School, with all sorts of honors and stuff, and was on my way to clerk for a judge, my mother and I had this huge fight in the kitchen of our apartment. What was the fight about? Sadie wanted me to take the Triborough Bridge toll taker's test, “just in case.” “You never know,” she said. I couldn't persuade her that it really wasn't necessary. She passed away before I became a judge, and I told this story at my swearing-in, and I said that she just didn't understand. I said, “Now I have to talk to my mother for a minute; forgive me for a moment.” And I looked up at the rafters and I said, “Ma, at last: a government job!” So that is sort of the measure of where I started. My mother didn't finish high school, my father had maybe a semester of college—but that wasn't what girls did.DL: So were you then a first-generation professional or a first-generation college graduate?NG: Both—my sister and I were both, first-generation college graduates and first-generation professionals. When people talk about Jewish backgrounds, they're very different from one another, and since my grandparents came from Eastern European shtetls, it's not clear to me that they—except for one grandfather—were even literate. So it was a very different background.DL: You mentioned that you did go to Yale Law School, and of course we connected there years later, when I was your student. But what led you to go to law school in the first place? Clearly your parents were not encouraging your professional ambitions.NG: One is, I love to speak. My husband kids me now and says that I've never met a microphone I didn't like. I had thought for a moment of acting—musical comedy, in fact. But it was 1967, and the anti-war movement, a nascent women's movement, and the civil rights movement were all rising around me, and I wanted to be in the world. And the other thing was that I didn't want to do anything that women do. Actually, musical comedy was something that would've been okay and normal for women, but I didn't want to do anything that women typically do. So that was the choice of law. It was more like the choice of law professor than law, but that changed over time.DL: So did you go straight from Barnard to Yale Law School?NG: Well, I went from Barnard to Yale graduate school in political science because as I said, I've always had an academic and a practical side, and so I thought briefly that I wanted to get a Ph.D. I still do, actually—I'm going to work on that after these books are finished.DL: Did you then think that you wanted to be a law professor when you started at YLS? I guess by that point you already had a master's degree under your belt?NG: I thought I wanted to be a law professor, that's right. I did not think I wanted to practice law. Yale at that time, like most law schools, had no practical clinical courses. I don't think I ever set foot in a courtroom or a courthouse, except to demonstrate on the outside of it. And the only thing that started me in practice was that I thought I should do at least two or three years of practice before I went back into the academy, before I went back into the library. Twenty-four years later, I obviously made a different decision.DL: So you were at YLS during a very interesting time, and some of the law school's most famous alumni passed through its halls around that period. So tell us about some of the people you either met or overlapped with at YLS during your time there.NG: Hillary Clinton was one of my best friends. I knew Bill, but I didn't like him.DL: Hmmm….NG: She was one of my best friends. There were 20 women in my class, which was the class of ‘71. The year before, there had only been eight. I think we got up to 21—a rumor had it that it was up to 21 because men whose numbers were drafted couldn't go to school, and so suddenly they had to fill their class with this lesser entity known as women. It was still a very small number out of, I think, what was the size of the opening class… 165? Very small. So we knew each other very, very well. And Hillary and I were the only ones, I think, who had no boyfriends at the time, though that changed.DL: I think you may have either just missed or briefly overlapped with either Justice Thomas or Justice Alito?NG: They're younger than I am, so I think they came after.DL: And that would be also true of Justice Sotomayor then as well?NG: Absolutely. She became a friend because when I was on the bench, I actually sat with the Second Circuit, and we had great times together. But she was younger than I was, so I didn't know her in law school, and by the time she was in law school, there were more women. In the middle of, I guess, my first year at Yale Law School, was the first year that Yale College went coed. So it was, in my view, an enormously exciting time, because we felt like we were inventing law. We were inventing something entirely new. We had the first “women in the law” course, one of the first such courses in the country, and I think we were borderline obnoxious. It's a little bit like the debates today, which is that no one could speak right—you were correcting everyone with respect to the way they were describing women—but it was enormously creative and exciting.DL: So I'm gathering you enjoyed law school, then?NG: I loved law school. Still, when I was in law school, I still had my feet in graduate school, so I believe that I took law and sociology for three years, mostly. In other words, I was going through law school as if I were still in graduate school, and it was so bad that when I decided to go into practice—and this is an absolutely true story—I thought that dying intestate was a disease. We were taking the bar exam, and I did not know what they were talking about.DL: So tell us, then, what did lead you to shift gears? You mentioned you clerked, and you mentioned you wanted to practice for a few years—but you did practice for more than a few years.NG: Right. I talk to students about this all the time, about sort of the fortuities that you need to grab onto that you absolutely did not plan. So I wind up at a small civil-rights firm, Harvey Silverglate and Norman Zalkind's firm. I wind up in a small civil-rights firm because I couldn't get a job anywhere else in Boston. I was looking in Boston or San Francisco, and what other women my age were encountering, I encountered, which is literally people who told me that I would never succeed as a lawyer, certainly not as a litigator. So you have to understand, this is 1971. I should say, as a footnote, that I have a file of everyone who said that to me. People know that I have that file; it's called “Sexist Tidbits.” And so I used to decide whether I should recuse myself when someone in that file appeared before me, but I decided it was just too far.So it was a small civil-rights firm, and they were doing draft cases, they were doing civil-rights cases of all different kinds, and they were doing criminal cases. After a year, the partnership between Norman Zalkind and Harvey Silverglate broke up, and Harvey made me his partner, now an equal partner after a year of practice.Shortly after that, I got a case that changed my career in so many ways, which is I wound up representing Susan Saxe. Susan Saxe was one of five individuals who participated in robberies to get money for the anti-war movement. She was probably five years younger than I was. In the case of the robbery that she participated in, a police officer was killed. She was charged with felony murder. She went underground for five years; the other woman went underground for 20 years.Susan wanted me to represent her, not because she had any sense that I was any good—it's really quite wonderful—she wanted me to represent her because she figured her case was hopeless. And her case was hopeless because the three men involved in the robbery either fled or were immediately convicted, so her case seemed to be hopeless. And she was an extraordinarily principled woman: she said that in her last moment on the stage—she figured that she'd be convicted and get life—she wanted to be represented by a woman. And I was it. There was another woman in town who was a public defender, but I was literally the only private lawyer. I wrote about the case in my book, In Defense of Women, and to Harvey Silvergate's credit, even though the case was virtually no money, he said, “If you want to do it, do it.”Because I didn't know what I was doing—and I literally didn't know what I was doing—I researched every inch of everything in the case. So we had jury research and careful jury selection, hiring people to do jury selection. I challenged the felony-murder rule (this was now 1970). If there was any evidentiary issue, I would not only do the legal research, but talk to social psychologists about what made sense to do. To make a long story short, it took about two years to litigate the case, and it's all that I did.And the government's case was winding down, and it seemed to be not as strong as we thought it was—because, ironically, nobody noticed the woman in the bank. Nobody was noticing women in general; nobody was noticing women in the bank. So their case was much weaker than we thought, except there were two things, two letters that Susan had written: one to her father, and one to her rabbi. The one to her father said, “By the time you get this letter, you'll know what your little girl is doing.” The one to her rabbi said basically the same thing. In effect, these were confessions. Both had been turned over to the FBI.So the case is winding down, not very strong. These letters have not yet been introduced. Meanwhile, The Boston Globe is reporting that all these anti-war activists were coming into town, and Gertner, who no one ever heard of, was going to try the Vietnam War. The defense will be, “She robbed a bank to fight the Vietnam War.” She robbed a bank in order to get money to oppose the Vietnam War, and the Vietnam War was illegitimate, etc. We were going to try the Vietnam War.There was no way in hell I was going to do that. But nobody had ever heard of me, so they believed anything. The government decided to rest before the letters came in, anticipating that our defense would be a collection of individuals who were going to challenge the Vietnam War. The day that the government rested without putting in those two letters, I rested my case, and the case went immediately to the jury. I'm told that I was so nervous when I said “the defense rests” that I sounded like Minnie Mouse.The upshot of that, however, was that the jury was 9-3 for acquittal on the first day, 10-2 for acquittal on the second day, and then 11-1 for acquittal—and there it stopped. It was a hung jury. But it essentially made my career. I had first the experience of pouring my heart into a case and saving someone's life, which was like nothing I'd ever felt before, which was better than the library. It also put my name out there. I was no longer, “Who is she?” I suddenly could take any kind of case I wanted to take. And so I was addicted to trials from then until the time I became a judge.DL: Fill us in on what happened later to your client, just her ultimate arc.NG: She wound up getting eight years in prison instead of life. She had already gotten eight years because of a prior robbery in Philadelphia, so there was no way that we were going to affect that. She had pleaded guilty to that. She went on to live a very principled life. She's actually quite religious. She works in the very sort of left Jewish groups. We are in touch—I'm in touch with almost everyone that I've ever known—because it had been a life-changing experience for me. We were four years apart. Her background, though she was more middle-class, was very similar to my own. Her mother used to call me at night about what Susan should wear. So our lives were very much intertwined. And so she was out of jail after eight years, and she has a family and is doing fine.DL: That's really a remarkable result, because people have to understand what defense lawyers are up against. It's often very challenging, and a victory is often a situation where your client doesn't serve life, for example, or doesn't, God forbid, get the death penalty. So it's really interesting that the Saxe case—as you talk about in your wonderful memoir—really did launch your career to the next level. And you wound up handling a number of other cases that you could say were adjacent or thematically related to Saxe's case. Maybe you can talk a little bit about some of those.NG: The women's movement was roaring at this time, and so a woman lawyer who was active and spoke out and talked about women's issues invariably got women's cases. So on the criminal side, I did one of the first, I think it was the first, battered woman syndrome case, as a defense to murder. On the civil side, I had a very robust employment-discrimination practice, dealing with sexual harassment, dealing with racial discrimination. I essentially did whatever I wanted to do. That's what my students don't always understand: I don't remember ever looking for a lucrative case. I would take what was interesting and fun to me, and money followed. I can't describe it any other way.These cases—you wound up getting paid, but I did what I thought was meaningful. But it wasn't just women's rights issues, and it wasn't just criminal defense. We represented white-collar criminal defendants. We represented Boston Mayor Kevin White's second-in-command, Ted Anzalone, also successfully. I did stockholder derivative suits, because someone referred them to me. To some degree the Saxe case, and maybe it was also the time—I did not understand the law to require specialization in the way that it does now. So I could do a felony-murder case on Monday and sue Mayor Lynch on Friday and sue Gulf Oil on Monday, and it wouldn't even occur to me that there was an issue. It was not the same kind of specialization, and I certainly wasn't about to specialize.DL: You anticipated my next comment, which is that when someone reads your memoir, they read about a career that's very hard to replicate in this day and age. For whatever reason, today people specialize. They specialize at earlier points in their careers. Clients want somebody who holds himself out as a specialist in white-collar crime, or a specialist in dealing with defendants who invoke battered woman syndrome, or what have you. And so I think your career… you kind of had a luxury, in a way.NG: I also think that the costs of entry were lower. It was Harvey Silverglate and me, and maybe four or five other lawyers. I was single until I was 39, so I had no family pressures to speak of. And I think that, yes, the profession was different. Now employment discrimination cases involve prodigious amounts of e-discovery. So even a little case has e-discovery, and that's partly because there's a generation—you're a part of it—that lived online. And so suddenly, what otherwise would have been discussions over the back fence are now text messages.So I do think it's different—although maybe this is a comment that only someone who is as old as I am can make—I wish that people would forget the money for a while. When I was on the bench, you'd get a pro se case that was incredibly interesting, challenging prison conditions or challenging some employment issue that had never been challenged before. It was pro se, and I would get on the phone and try to find someone to represent this person. And I can't tell you how difficult it was. These were not necessarily big cases. The big firms might want to get some publicity from it. But there was not a sense of individuals who were going to do it just, “Boy, I've never done a case like this—let me try—and boy, this is important to do.” Now, that may be different today in the Trump administration, because there's a huge number of lawyers that are doing immigration cases. But the day-to-day discrimination cases, even abortion cases, it was not the same kind of support.DL: I feel in some ways you were ahead of your time, because your career as a litigator played out in boutiques, and I feel that today, many lawyers who handle high-profile cases like yours work at large firms. Why did you not go to a large firm, either from YLS or if there were issues, for example, of discrimination, you must have had opportunities to lateral into such a firm later, if you had wanted to?NG: Well, certainly at the beginning nobody wanted me. It didn't matter how well I had done. Me and Ruth Ginsburg were on the streets looking for jobs. So that was one thing. I wound up, for the last four years of my practice before I became a judge, working in a firm called Dwyer Collora & Gertner. It was more of a boutique, white-collar firm. But I wasn't interested in the big firms because I didn't want anyone to tell me what to do. I didn't want anyone to say, “Don't write this op-ed because you'll piss off my clients.” I faced the same kind of issue when I left the bench. I could have an office, and sort of float into client conferences from time to time, but I did not want to be in a setting in which anyone told me what to do. It was true then; it certainly is true now.DL: So you did end up in another setting where, for the most part, you weren't told what to do: namely, you became a federal judge. And I suppose the First Circuit could from time to time tell you what to do, but….NG: But they were always wrong.DL: Yes, I do remember that when you were my professor, you would offer your thoughts on appellate rulings. But how did you—given the kind of career you had, especially—become a federal judge? Because let me be honest, I think that somebody with your type of engagement in hot-button issues today would have a challenging time. Republican senators would grandstand about you coming up with excuses for women murderers, or what have you. Did you have a rough confirmation process?NG: I did. So I'm up for the bench in 1993. This is under Bill Clinton, and I'm told—I never confirmed this—that when Senator Kennedy…. When I met Senator Kennedy, I thought I didn't have a prayer of becoming a judge. I put my name in because I knew the Clintons, and everybody I knew was getting a job in the government. I had not thought about being a judge. I had not prepared. I had not structured my career to be a judge. But everyone I knew was going into the government, and I thought if there ever was a time, this would be it. So I apply. Someday, someone should emboss my application, because the application was quite hysterical. I put in every article that I had written calling for access to reproductive technologies to gay people. It was something to behold.Kennedy was at the tail end of his career, and he was determined to put someone like me on the bench. I'm not sure that anyone else would have done that. I'm told (and this isn't confirmed) that when he talked to Bill and Hillary about me, they of course knew me—Hillary and I had been close friends—but they knew me to be that radical friend of theirs from Yale Law School. There had been 24 years in between, but still. And I'm told that what was said was, “She's terrific. But if there's a problem, she's yours.” But Kennedy was really determined.The week before my hearing before the Senate, I had gotten letters from everyone who had ever opposed me. Every prosecutor. I can't remember anyone who had said no. Bill Weld wrote a letter. Bob Mueller, who had opposed me in cases, wrote a letter. But as I think oftentimes happens with women, there was an article in The Boston Herald the day before my hearing, in which the writer compared me to Lorena Bobbitt. Your listeners may not know this, but he said, “Gertner will do to justice, with her gavel, what Lorena did to her husband, with a kitchen knife.” Do we have to explain that any more?DL: They can Google it or ask ChatGPT. I'm old enough to know about Lorena Bobbitt.NG: Right. So it's just at the tail edge of the presentation, that was always what the caricature would be. But Kennedy was masterful. There were numbers of us who were all up at the same time. Everyone else got through except me. I'm told that that article really was the basis for Senator Jesse Helms's opposition to me. And then Senator Kennedy called us one day and said, “Tomorrow you're going to read something, but don't worry, I'll take care of it.” And the Boston Globe headline says, “Kennedy Votes For Helms's School-Prayer Amendment.” And he called us and said, “We'll take care of it in committee.” And then we get a call from him—my husband took the call—Kennedy, affecting Helms's accent, said, ‘Senator, you've got your judge.' We didn't even understand what the hell he said, between his Boston accent and imitating Helms; we had no idea what he said. But that then was confirmed.DL: Are you the managing partner of a boutique or midsize firm? If so, you know that your most important job is attracting and retaining top talent. It's not easy, especially if your benefits don't match up well with those of Biglaw firms or if your HR process feels “small time.” NexFirm has created an onboarding and benefits experience that rivals an Am Law 100 firm, so you can compete for the best talent at a price your firm can afford. Want to learn more? Contact NexFirm at 212-292-1002 or email betterbenefits@nexfirm.com.So turning to your time as a judge, how would you describe that period, in a nutshell? The job did come with certain restrictions. Did you enjoy it, notwithstanding the restrictions?NG: I candidly was not sure that I would last beyond five years, for a couple of reasons. One was, I got on the bench in 1994, when the sentencing guidelines were mandatory, when what we taught you in my sentencing class was not happening, which is that judges would depart from the guidelines and the Sentencing Commission, when enough of us would depart, would begin to change the guidelines, and there'd be a feedback loop. There was no feedback loop. If you departed, you were reversed. And actually the genesis of the book I'm writing now came from this period. As far as I was concerned, I was being unfair. As I later said, my sentences were unfair, unjust, and disproportionate—and there was nothing I could do about it. So I was not sure that I was going to last beyond five years.In addition, there were some high-profile criminal trials going on with lawyers that I knew that I probably would've been a part of if I had been practicing. And I hungered to do that, to go back and be a litigator. The course at Yale Law School that you were a part of saved me. And it saved me because, certainly with respect to the sentencing, it turned what seemed like a formula into an intellectual discussion in which there was wiggle room and the ability to come up with other approaches. In other words, we were taught that this was a formula, and you don't depart from the formula, and that's it. The class came up with creative issues and creative understandings, which made an enormous difference to my judging.So I started to write; I started to write opinions. Even if the opinion says there's nothing I can do about it, I would write opinions in which I say, “I can't depart because of this woman's status as a single mother because the guidelines said only extraordinary family circumstances can justify a departure, and this wasn't extraordinary. That makes no sense.” And I began to write this in my opinions, I began to write this in scholarly writings, and that made all the difference in the world. And sometimes I was reversed, and sometimes I was not. But it enabled me to figure out how to push back against a system which I found to be palpably unfair. So I figured out how to be me in this job—and that was enormously helpful.DL: And I know how much and how deeply you cared about sentencing because of the class in which I actually wound up writing one of my two capstone papers at Yale.NG: To your listeners, I still have that paper.DL: You must be quite a pack rat!NG: I can change the grade at any time….DL: Well, I hope you've enjoyed your time today, Judge, and will keep the grade that way!But let me ask you: now that the guidelines are advisory, do you view that as a step forward from your time on the bench? Perhaps you would still be a judge if they were advisory? I don't know.NG: No, they became advisory in 2005, and I didn't leave until 2011. Yes, that was enormously helpful: you could choose what you thought was a fair sentence, so it's very advisory now. But I don't think I would've stayed longer, because of two reasons.By the time I hit 65, I wanted another act. I wanted another round. I thought I had done all that I could do as a judge, and I wanted to try something different. And Martha Minow of Harvard Law School made me an offer I couldn't refuse, which was to teach at Harvard. So that was one. It also, candidly, was that there was no longevity in my family, and so when I turned 65, I wasn't sure what was going to happen. So I did want to try something new. But I'm still here.DL: Yep—definitely, and very active. I always chuckle when I see “Ret.,” the abbreviation for “retired,” in your email signature, because you do not seem very retired to me. Tell us what you are up to today.NG: Well, first I have this book that I've been writing for several years, called Incomplete Sentences. And so what this book started to be about was the men and women that I sentenced, and how unfair it was, and what I thought we should have done. Then one day I got a message from a man by the name of Darryl Green, and it says, “Is this Nancy Gertner? If it is, I think about you all the time. I hope you're well. I'm well. I'm an iron worker. I have a family. I've written books. You probably don't remember me.” This was a Facebook message. I knew exactly who he was. He was a man who had faced the death penalty in my court, and I acquitted him. And he was then tried in state court, and acquitted again. So I knew exactly who he was, and I decided to write back.So I wrote back and said, “I know who you are. Do you want to meet?” That started a series of meetings that I've had with the men I've sentenced over the course of the 17-year career that I had as a judge. Why has it taken me this long to write? First, because these have been incredibly moving and difficult discussions. Second, because I wanted the book to be honest about what I knew about them and what a difference maybe this information would make. It is extremely difficult, David, to be honest about judging, particularly in these days when judges are parodied. So if I talk about how I wanted to exercise some leniency in a case, I understand that this can be parodied—and I don't want it to be, but I want to be honest.So for example, in one case, there would be cooperators in the case who'd get up and testify that the individual who was charged with only X amount of drugs was actually involved with much more than that. And you knew that if you believed the witness, the sentence would be doubled, even though you thought that didn't make any sense. This was really just mostly how long the cops were on the corner watching the drug deals. It didn't make the guy who was dealing drugs on a bicycle any more culpable than the guy who was doing massive quantities into the country.So I would struggle with, “Do I really believe this man, the witness who's upping the quantity?” And the kinds of exercises I would go through to make sure that I wasn't making a decision because I didn't like the implications of the decision and it was what I was really feeling. So it's not been easy to write, and it's taken me a very long time. The other side of the coin is they're also incredibly honest with me, and sometimes I don't want to know what they're saying. Not like a sociologist who could say, “Oh, that's an interesting fact, I'll put it in.” It's like, “Oh no, I don't want to know that.”DL: Wow. The book sounds amazing; I can't wait to read it. When is it estimated to come out?NG: Well, I'm finishing it probably at the end of this year. I've rewritten it about five times. And my hope would be sometime next year. So yeah, it was organic. It's what I wanted to write from the minute I left the bench. And it covers the guideline period when it was lunacy to follow the guidelines, to a period when it was much more flexible, but the guidelines still disfavored considering things like addiction and trauma and adverse childhood experiences, which really defined many of the people I was sentencing. So it's a cri de cœur, as they say, which has not been easy to write.DL: Speaking of cri de cœurs, and speaking of difficult things, it's difficult to write about judging, but I think we also have alluded already to how difficult it is to engage in judging in 2025. What general thoughts would you have about being a federal judge in 2025? I know you are no longer a federal judge. But if you were still on the bench or when you talk to your former colleagues, what is it like on the ground right now?NG: It's nothing like when I was a judge. In fact, the first thing that happened when I left the bench is I wrote an article in which I said—this is in 2011—that the only pressure I had felt in my 17 years on the bench was to duck, avoid, and evade, waiver, statute of limitations. Well, all of a sudden, you now have judges who at least since January are dealing with emergencies that they can't turn their eyes away from, judges issuing rulings at 1 a.m., judges writing 60-page decisions on an emergency basis, because what the president is doing is literally unprecedented. The courts are being asked to look at issues that have never been addressed before, because no one has ever tried to do the things that he's doing. And they have almost overwhelmingly met the moment. It doesn't matter whether you're ruling for the government or against the government; they are taking these challenges enormously seriously. They're putting in the time.I had two clerks, maybe some judges have three, but it's a prodigious amount of work. Whereas everyone complained about the Trump prosecutions proceeding so slowly, judges have been working expeditiously on these challenges, and under circumstances that I never faced, which is threats the likes of which I have never seen. One judge literally played for me the kinds of voice messages that he got after a decision that he issued. So they're doing it under circumstances that we never had to face. And it's not just the disgruntled public talking; it's also our fellow Yale Law alum, JD Vance, talking about rogue judges. That's a level of delegitimization that I just don't think anyone ever had to deal with before. So they're being challenged in ways that no other judges have, and they are being threatened in a way that no judges have.On the other hand, I wish I were on the bench.DL: Interesting, because I was going to ask you that. If you were to give lower-court judges a grade, to put you back in professor mode, on their performance since January 2025, what grade would you give the lower courts?NG: Oh, I would give them an A. I would give them an A. It doesn't matter which way they have come out: decision after decision has been thoughtful and careful. They put in the time. Again, this is not a commentary on what direction they have gone in, but it's a commentary on meeting the moment. And so now these are judges who are getting emergency orders, emergency cases, in the midst of an already busy docket. It has really been extraordinary. The district courts have; the courts of appeals have. I've left out another court….DL: We'll get to that in a minute. But I'm curious: you were on the District of Massachusetts, which has been a real center of activity because many groups file there. As we're recording this, there is the SNAP benefits, federal food assistance litigation playing out there [before Judge Indira Talwani, with another case before Chief Judge John McConnell of Rhode Island]. So it's really just ground zero for a lot of these challenges. But you alluded to the Supreme Court, and I was going to ask you—even before you did—what grade would you give them?NG: Failed. The debate about the shadow docket, which you write about and I write about, in which Justice Kavanaugh thinks, “we're doing fine making interim orders, and therefore it's okay that there's even a precedential value to our interim orders, and thank you very much district court judges for what you're doing, but we'll be the ones to resolve these issues”—I mean, they're resolving these issues in the most perfunctory manner possible.In the tariff case, for example, which is going to be argued on Wednesday, the Court has expedited briefing and expedited oral argument. They could do that with the emergency docket, but they are preferring to hide behind this very perfunctory decision making. I'm not sure why—maybe to keep their options open? Justice Barrett talks about how if it's going to be a hasty decision, you want to make sure that it's not written in stone. But of course then the cases dealing with independent commissions, in which you are allowing the government, allowing the president, to fire people on independent commissions—these cases are effectively overruling Humphrey's Executor, in the most ridiculous setting. So the Court is not meeting the moment. It was stunning that the Court decided in the birthright-citizenship case to be concerned about nationwide injunctions, when in fact nationwide injunctions had been challenged throughout the Biden administration, and they just decided not to address the issue then.Now, I have a lot to say about Justice Kavanaugh's dressing-down of Judge [William] Young [of the District of Massachusetts]….DL: Or Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justice Kavanaugh.NG: That's right, it was Justice Gorsuch. It was stunningly inappropriate, stunningly inappropriate, undermines the district courts that frankly are doing much better than the Supreme Court in meeting the moment. The whole concept of defying the Supreme Court—defying a Supreme Court order, a three-paragraph, shadow-docket order—is preposterous. So whereas the district courts and the courts of appeals are meeting the moment, I do not think the Supreme Court is. And that's not even going into the merits of the immunity decision, which I think has let loose a lawless presidency that is even more lawless than it might otherwise be. So yes, that failed.DL: I do want to highlight for my readers that in addition to your books and your speaking, you do write quite frequently on these issues in the popular press. I've seen your work in The New York Times and The Boston Globe. I know you're working on a longer essay about the rule of law in the age of Trump, so people should look out for that. Of all the things that you worry about right now when it comes to the rule of law, what worries you the most?NG: I worry that the president will ignore and disobey a Supreme Court order. I think a lot about the judges that are dealing with orders that the government is not obeying, and people are impatient that they're not immediately moving to contempt. And one gets the sense with the lower courts that they are inching up to the moment of contempt, but do not want to get there because it would be a stunning moment when you hold the government in contempt. I think the Supreme Court is doing the same thing. I initially believed that the Supreme Court was withholding an anti-Trump decision, frankly, for fear that he would not obey it, and they were waiting till it mattered. I now am no longer certain of that, because there have been rulings that made no sense as far as I'm concerned. But my point was that they, like the lower courts, were holding back rather than saying, “Government, you must do X,” for fear that the government would say, “Go pound sand.” And that's what I fear, because when that happens, it will be even more of a constitutional crisis than we're in now. It'll be a constitutional confrontation, the likes of which we haven't seen. So that's what I worry about.DL: Picking up on what you just said, here's something that I posed to one of my prior guests, Pam Karlan. Let's say you're right that the Supreme Court doesn't want to draw this line in the sand because of a fear that Trump, being Trump, will cross it. Why is that not prudential? Why is that not the right thing? And why is it not right for the Supreme Court to husband its political capital for the real moment?Say Trump—I know he said lately he's not going to—but say Trump attempts to run for a third term, and some case goes up to the Supreme Court on that basis, and the Court needs to be able to speak in a strong, unified, powerful voice. Or maybe it'll be a birthright-citizenship case, if he says, when they get to the merits of that, “Well, that's really nice that you think that there's such a thing as birthright citizenship, but I don't, and now stop me.” Why is it not wise for the Supreme Court to protect itself, until this moment when it needs to come forward and protect all of us?NG: First, the question is whether that is in fact what they are doing, and as I said, there were two schools of thought on this. One school of thought was that is what they were doing, and particularly doing it in an emergency, fuzzy, not really precedential way, until suddenly you're at the edge of the cliff, and you have to either say taking away birthright citizenship was unconstitutional, or tariffs, you can't do the tariffs the way you want to do the tariffs. I mean, they're husbanding—I like the way you put it, husbanding—their political capital, until that moment. I'm not sure that that's true. I think we'll know that if in fact the decisions that are coming down the pike, they actually decide against Trump—notably the tariff ones, notably birthright citizenship. I'm just not sure that that's true.And besides, David, there are some of these cases they did not have to take. The shadow docket was about where plaintiffs were saying it is an emergency to lay people off or fire people. Irreparable harm is on the plaintiff's side, whereas the government otherwise would just continue to do that which it has been doing. There's no harm to it continuing that. USAID—you don't have a right to dismantle the USAID. The harm is on the side of the dismantling, not having you do that which you have already done and could do through Congress, if you wanted to. They didn't have to take those cases. So your comment about husbanding political capital is a good comment, but those cases could have remained as they were in the district courts with whatever the courts of appeals did, and they could do what previous courts have done, which is wait for the issues to percolate longer.The big one for me, too, is the voting rights case. If they decide the voting rights case in January or February or March, if they rush it through, I will say then it's clear they're in the tank for Trump, because the only reason to get that decision out the door is for the 2026 election. So I want to believe that they are husbanding their political capital, but I'm not sure that if that's true, that we would've seen this pattern. But the proof will be with the voting rights case, with birthright citizenship, with the tariffs.DL: Well, it will be very interesting to see what happens in those cases. But let us now turn to my speed round. These are four questions that are the same for all my guests, and my first question is, what do you like the least about the law? And this can either be the practice of law or law as an abstract system of governance.NG: The practice of law. I do some litigation; I'm in two cases. When I was a judge, I used to laugh at people who said incivility was the most significant problem in the law. I thought there were lots of other more significant problems. I've come now to see how incredibly nasty the practice of law is. So yes—and that is no fun.DL: My second question is, what would you be if you were not a lawyer/judge/retired judge?NG: Musical comedy star, clearly! No question about it.DL: There are some judges—Judge Fred Block in the Eastern District of New York, Judge Jed Rakoff in the Southern District of New York—who do these little musical stylings for their court shows. I don't know if you've ever tried that?NG: We used to do Shakespeare, Shakespeare readings, and I loved that. I am a ham—so absolutely musical comedy or theater.DL: My third question is, how much sleep do you get each night?NG: Six to seven hours now, just because I'm old. Before that, four. Most of my life as a litigator, I never thought I needed sleep. You get into my age, you need sleep. And also you look like hell the next morning, so it's either getting sleep or a facelift.DL: And my last question is, any final words of wisdom, such as career advice or life advice, for my listeners?NG: You have to do what you love. You have to do what you love. The law takes time and is so all-encompassing that you have to do what you love. And I have done what I love from beginning to now, and I wouldn't have it any other way.DL: Well, I have loved catching up with you, Judge, and having you share your thoughts and your story with my listeners. Thank you so much for joining me.NG: You're very welcome, David. Take care.DL: Thanks so much to Judge Gertner for joining me. I look forward to reading her next book, Incomplete Sentences, when it comes out next year.Thanks to NexFirm for sponsoring the Original Jurisdiction podcast. NexFirm has helped many attorneys to leave Biglaw and launch firms of their own. To explore this opportunity, please contact NexFirm at 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com to learn more.Thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers. To connect with me, please email me at davidlat@substack.com, or find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram and Threads at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat.substack.com. This podcast is free, but it's made possible by paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode should appear on or about Wednesday, November 26. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

Thank you for tuning in!In this episode, I explore the journey of seeking a deeper relationship with God, emphasizing the importance of prayer, repentance, and understanding God's love. I discuss the transformative power of the Jesus Prayer and encourage you to open your hearts to God's healing and grace. The conversation highlights the call to intimacy with God and living a life of faith and surrender, ultimately inspiring listeners to become blessings to others through their relationship with God.Timestamps:Chapters00:00 Embracing God's Love and Forgiveness04:07 The Power of the Jesus Prayer06:53 The Journey of Repentance and Healing10:03 The Intimacy of Relationship with God12:57 The Call to Trust and Surrender16:07 Living a Life of Purpose and Service18:53 Becoming a Blessing to Others26:06 Introduction to Being Brave Podcast26:38 Faithful Living in God's GraceSubscribe to my newsletter & get your FREE "3 Questions for Kingdom Clarity" guide https://sashalipskaia.substack.com 1:1 Biblical Coaching: Book a Clarity Call

Join the show with a TEXT here!A former Protestant apologist has flipped the script: once a defender of sola scriptura, he now argues that the church's authority supersedes Scripture. In this episode we watch his video, unpack his central objections to sola scriptura, and trace how his new ecclesial framework reshapes his understanding of dogma.We'll move from close reaction to careful analysis, testing his claims against historical and theological standards and then putting one of the canons from Nicaea II under the microscope to show where an ecclesial-first approach clashes with a Scripture-centered view of authority.This episode is for anyone interested in doctrinal controversies, patristic authority, or the Protestant–Catholic/Eastern conversation—pastors, students, and curious listeners alike. Grab your Bible, bring a snack, and settle in!

St. Gregory details the nature and characteristics of the Triune God: Father, Son, & Holy Spirit. A reading from Homily 8 (p. 55-58) from Saint Gregory Palamas: The Homilies

A recent caller asked about the allure of the Orthodox Church, with its ancient ceremonies and traditions. Sure, it sounds appealing – who wouldn't want something that feels deeper than the usual Sunday service? But just because something's been around for ages doesn't make it right.Remember the Galatians? They got duped by mixing law and grace, and we wouldn't follow their lead just because they're ancient. The real question is, what have you done with Jesus?Tradition can be seductive, but when it veers from the Gospel taught by the apostles, it's time to run for the hills. Click to watch and explore why the truth of the Gospel is what truly matters – not the age of a movement!We hope you enjoyed this episode. Since we're a nonprofit organization, episodes like these are only made possible by friends like you.You can help us continue sharing God's message of grace with the world here: https://andrewfarley.org/donate/Connect with Dr. Andrew Farley here:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DrAndrewFarleyInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/drandrewfarleyTwitter: https://twitter.com/DrAndrewFarleyTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@drandrewfarleyWebsite: https://www.andrewfarley.org/

In this sermon from John 6, Christian Barrett explores the reality of Christ's presence in the Eucharist — not as a mere symbol, but as a real and spiritual participation in His life.1. Discover what Jesus meant by calling Himself "the Bread of Life”2. Understand the Protestant view of the Real Presence3. See how John 6 points to the cross, the resurrection, and the ongoing life of faith. Key Passage: John 6:25–71This message invites us to take seriously Jesus' words about feeding on Him — to approach communion not casually, but with awe and faith.Whether you're Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant, this passage calls us to see that Christ is truly present among His people when we gather in faith, and that the Lord's Supper is more than a symbol. It also challenges the ideas presented by Roman Catholics and Orthodox against Protestants for their views on the Lord's Supper. Support Emet Ministries, so we can continue to provide content and resources to help disciples become disciplers: https://veritas-ministry-415223.churchcenter.com/givingmy reading list:⁠ https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/74696644-christian-barrettSubscribe for more sermons and studies through John's Gospel. #John6 #BreadOfLife #RealPresence #Eucharist #Communion #ProtestantTheology #JesusIsPresent #LordSupper #ChristianLiving #BibleTeaching #GospelOfJohn #FaithInChrist #TheologyOfWorship

Jews are experts at social inclusion. Take Miryam Kabakov, an American Jewish social worker, editor and community organizer from St. Paul Minnesota. She is the Executive Director of Eshel, a national organization that supports and advocates for LGBTQ+ Orthodox Jews. What does it mean to advocate for LGBTQ+ Jews in the Orthodox space and, more importantly, how can that help and inspire the rest of us, to take on our sacred role and demonstrate to the world that we need to cover all of our differences with love? Join the live show.WHAT IS THEJEWFUNCTION - A 10min EXPLANATIONhttps://youtu.be/5TlUt5FqVgQLISTEN TO THE MYSTERY BOOK PODCAST SERIES:https://tinyurl.com/y7tmfpesSETH'S BOOK:https://www.antidotetoantisemitism.com/FREE AUDIOBOOK (With Audible trial) OF THE JEWISH CHOICE - UNITY OR ANTISEMITISM:https://amzn.to/3u40evCLIKE/SHARE/SUBSCRIBEFollow us on Twitter/Facebook/Instagram/Tiktok @thejewfunctionNEW: SUPPORT US ON PATREONpatreon.com/thejewfunction

Answering your questions on our Discord and discussing everything on your mind. Politics, theology, comedy, philosophy Send Superchats at any time here: https://streamlabs.com/jaydyer/tip Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join Order New Book Available here: https://jaysanalysis.com/product/esoteric-hollywood-3-sex-cults-apocalypse-in-films/ Get started with Bitcoin here: https://www.swanbitcoin.com/jaydyer/ The New Philosophy Course is here: https://marketplace.autonomyagora.com/philosophy101 Set up recurring Choq subscription with the discount code JAY44LIFE for 44% off now https://choq.com Subscribe to my site here: https://jaysanalysis.com/membership-account/membership-levels/ Follow me on R0kfin here: https://rokfin.com/jaydyer Music by Amid the Ruins 1453 https://www.youtube.com/@amidtheruinsOVERHAUL Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join #comedy #podcast #entertainmentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/jay-sanalysis--1423846/support.

Sam Tripoli is here https://samtripoli.comX: https://x.com/samtripoliSend Superchats at any time here: https://streamlabs.com/jaydyer/tip Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join Order New Book Available here: https://jaysanalysis.com/product/esoteric-hollywood-3-sex-cults-apocalypse-in-films/ Get started with Bitcoin here: https://www.swanbitcoin.com/jaydyer/ The New Philosophy Course is here: https://marketplace.autonomyagora.com/philosophy101 Set up recurring Choq subscription with the discount code JAY44LIFE for 44% off now https://choq.com Subscribe to my site here: https://jaysanalysis.com/membership-account/membership-levels/ Follow me on R0kfin here: https://rokfin.com/jaydyer Music by Amid the Ruins 1453 https://www.youtube.com/@amidtheruinsOVERHAUL Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join #comedy #podcast #entertainmentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/jay-sanalysis--1423846/support.

Fr. Evan answers your questions about the appropriateness of laypeople reading the Old Testament, the role of remembrance of death in Orthodox spirituality, the ways in which the sacraments reflect spiritual reality, the purpose of praying for the deceased, how we can obey church teachings absent a consensus amongst the clergy, and more in this week's episode of Orthodoxy Live!

Cappadocia (in eastern Turkey) is virtually devoid of Christians now, but in 1840, when St Arsenios was born there, there were still vital Orthodox communities. He became a monk and was sent to his native town, Farasa, to serve the people. He became known as a mighty intercessor before God, praying for all who came to him, Muslims as well as Christians. His countless miracles of healing became known throughout Cappadocia; those who could not come to see him would sometimes send articles of clothing for him to pray over. He became known as Hadjiefendis, a Muslim term of honour for pilgrims, because he made pilgrimage to the Holy Land every ten years on foot. He never accepted any gifts in return for his prayers and healings, saying ‘Our faith is not for sale!'   “He concealed his holiness as much as he could beneath a rough and sharp-tempered exterior. If anyone expressed admiration for him, he would reply "So you think I'm a saint? I'm only a sinner worse than you. Don't you see that I even lose my temper? The miracles you see are done by Christ. I do no more than lift up my hands and pray to him." But as the Scriptures say, the prayers of a righteous man avail much, and when St Arsenios lifted up his hands, wonders often followed.   “He lived in a small cell with an earthen floor, fasted often and was in the habit of shutting himself in his cell for at least two whole days every week to devote himself entirely to prayer.   “Father Arsenios predicted the expulsion of the Greeks from Asia Minor before it happened, and organized his flock for departure. When the expulsion order came in 1924, the aged Saint led his faithful on a 400-mile journey across Turkey on foot. He had foretold that he would only live forty days after reaching Greece, and this came to pass. His last words were "The soul, the soul, take care of it more than the flesh, which will return to earth and be eaten by worms!" Two days later, on November 10, 1924, he died in peace at the age of eighty-three. Since 1970, many apparitions and miracles have occurred near his holy relics, which reside in the Monastery of Souroti near Thessalonica. He was officially glorified by the Patriarchate of Constantinople in 1986.” — Source: Orthodox Parish of St John of Kronstadt (UK) The primary source for the life of St Arsenios is Saint Arsenios the Cappadocian, compiled by Elder Païsios of the Holy Mountain, who was baptized as an infant by the Saint.

Fr. Andrew Iskander- 5th Sunday of Babah. A reflection on the tests that God gave the disciples during the feeding of the multitudes, how the gospel teaches us to deal with challenges, and the spiritual and physical practices that the Bible teaches us for dealing with them. Click the icon below to listen.

[00:05:06] – Hospital Murder & Medical TyrannyKnight revisits the case of Grace Schara, a Down-syndrome patient given a DNR order against her family's wishes. He calls it proof the medical system has become a state-run death regime prioritizing control over care. [00:17:09] – The Monster RNA LieKnight cites new data showing spike proteins persisting for years. He brands Trump “one of history's great poisoners” for bankrolling the shots through Operation Warp Speed. [00:42:39] – Orthodox Jews vs. Zionist PowerKnight features an Orthodox rabbi denouncing Zionism as political idolatry, praising Jews who separate faith from nationalism. [01:21:49] – Trump's SNAP Shutdown: Starving for LeverageKnight condemns Trump for using food stamps as political ransom during the shutdown. [01:47:38] – Michael Burry's Billion-Dollar AI ShortKnight analyzes investor Michael Burry's massive short against AI giants. [02:16:23] – AI Revolution: White-Collar Job ExtinctionKnight covers mass layoffs as AI replaces cognitive work. [02:31:15] – The Self-Driving Prison GridKnight warns that Musk's autonomous car agenda is rooted in DARPA's surveillance programs. Calling it the road to total mobility control. [02:40:21] – The Coming Greater Depression & Great ResetKnight predicts Burry's AI crash will trigger the “Next Great Reset,” a global collapse managed through digital rationing, war, and financial reprogramming. [02:55:10] – Trump's $300 Million Epstein BallroomKnight ends by revealing Trump's new ballroom funded by donors tied to government contracts. Follow the show on Kick and watch live every weekday 9:00am EST – 12:00pm EST https://kick.com/davidknightshow Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to https://davidknight.gold/ for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to https://trendsjournal.com/ and enter the code KNIGHTFind out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @DavidKnightShow@protonmail.comCash App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

Today we recap the history of the absurd heresy known as Xian Zlonism and its many offshoots, as well as key figures like Hagee that are mouthpieces of the nonsense. Send Superchats at any time here: https://streamlabs.com/jaydyer/tip Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join PRE-Order New Book Available in Sept here: https://jaysanalysis.com/product/esoteric-hollywood-3-sex-cults-apocalypse-in-films/ Get started with Bitcoin here: https://www.swanbitcoin.com/jaydyer/ The New Philosophy Course is here: https://marketplace.autonomyagora.com/philosophy101 Set up recurring Choq subscription with the discount code JAY44LIFE for 44% off now https://choq.com Subscribe to my site here: https://jaysanalysis.com/membership-account/membership-levels/ Follow me on R0kfin here: https://rokfin.com/jaydyer Music by Amid the Ruins 1453 https://www.youtube.com/@amidtheruinsOVERHAUL Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join #comedy #podcast #dispensationalistBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/jay-sanalysis--1423846/support.

Answering your questions listed on X and investigating recent social trends for coming economic and social unrest. Send Superchats at any time here: https://streamlabs.com/jaydyer/tip Scream queens event: https://tampabayscreams.com Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join PRE-Order New Book Available in Sept here: https://jaysanalysis.com/product/esoteric-hollywood-3-sex-cults-apocalypse-in-films/ Get started with Bitcoin here: https://www.swanbitcoin.com/jaydyer/ The New Philosophy Course is here: https://marketplace.autonomyagora.com/philosophy101 Set up recurring Choq subscription with the discount code JAY44LIFE for 44% off now https://choq.com Subscribe to my site here: https://jaysanalysis.com/membership-account/membership-levels/ Follow me on R0kfin here: https://rokfin.com/jaydyer Music by Amid the Ruins 1453 https://www.youtube.com/@amidtheruinsOVERHAUL Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnt7Iy8GlmdPwy_Tzyx93bA/join #comedy #podcast #entertainmentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/jay-sanalysis--1423846/support.

[00:05:06] – Hospital Murder & Medical TyrannyKnight revisits the case of Grace Schara, a Down-syndrome patient given a DNR order against her family's wishes. He calls it proof the medical system has become a state-run death regime prioritizing control over care. [00:17:09] – The Monster RNA LieKnight cites new data showing spike proteins persisting for years. He brands Trump “one of history's great poisoners” for bankrolling the shots through Operation Warp Speed. [00:42:39] – Orthodox Jews vs. Zionist PowerKnight features an Orthodox rabbi denouncing Zionism as political idolatry, praising Jews who separate faith from nationalism. [01:21:49] – Trump's SNAP Shutdown: Starving for LeverageKnight condemns Trump for using food stamps as political ransom during the shutdown. [01:47:38] – Michael Burry's Billion-Dollar AI ShortKnight analyzes investor Michael Burry's massive short against AI giants. [02:16:23] – AI Revolution: White-Collar Job ExtinctionKnight covers mass layoffs as AI replaces cognitive work. [02:31:15] – The Self-Driving Prison GridKnight warns that Musk's autonomous car agenda is rooted in DARPA's surveillance programs. Calling it the road to total mobility control. [02:40:21] – The Coming Greater Depression & Great ResetKnight predicts Burry's AI crash will trigger the “Next Great Reset,” a global collapse managed through digital rationing, war, and financial reprogramming. [02:55:10] – Trump's $300 Million Epstein BallroomKnight ends by revealing Trump's new ballroom funded by donors tied to government contracts. Follow the show on Kick and watch live every weekday 9:00am EST – 12:00pm EST https://kick.com/davidknightshow Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to https://davidknight.gold/ for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to https://trendsjournal.com/ and enter the code KNIGHTFind out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @DavidKnightShow@protonmail.comCash App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-real-david-knight-show--5282736/support.

“Can I become Catholic without an annulment?” This episode addresses the complexities of joining the Church, especially for those with previous marriages. Additionally, we explore questions about purgatory in the Protestant Bible, the implications of sola scriptura, and the reasons behind the Catholic Church’s calendar changes. Tune in for a thoughtful examination of these important topics. Join the Catholic Answers Live Club Newsletter Invite our apologists to speak at your parish! Visit Catholicanswersspeakers.com Questions Covered: 14:01 – If I was previously married and couldn't get annulled and as a result and could never receive the Eucharist, why would I become Catholic? 24:22 – Where in the Protestant bible does it talk about purgatory? 33:31 – I'm interested in Catholicism, but I follow sola scriptura very strictly. 45:06 – Why did the Catholic Church change the calendar that now disagrees with the Orthodox? 50:44 – I'm thinking about leaving Catholicism because the Church discriminates against homosexuals from being admitted into seminary to become priests?