Bloodlines

“Keep thy heart…”
Clarel by Herman Melville

In the 1980’s the Coca-Cola Company saw that Pepsi was gaining on them, so they decided to make a Coca-Cola that was just like Pepsi. As it turned out the Coke that was just like Pepsi was not acceptable to Coke drinkers, so Coca-Cola once again became Coca-Cola. Happy day if you were a Coke drinker.

At the turn of the 20th century the Christian churches – Anglican, Roman Catholic, and Protestant – thought that they were losing ground to liberalism, so rather than fight liberalism they decided to become liberals. And unfortunately the churches did not return to their ‘classic’ beliefs when their new liberal Christianity still continued to lose ground to secular liberalism. By the 21st century, there was no difference between the Christianity preached in the mainstream churches and the liberalism preached in the pulpits of liberal academia. The churches, with the exception of some splinter groups in every denomination, have all been leased out to the liberals.

What is so amazing to me about the splinter groups is that they still insist on using the same apologetics for their sects that were used prior to the collapse of the mainstream wings of their churches. The traditionalist Roman Catholics still insist on the doctrine of papal infallibility while maintaining the right to disregard everything the liberal popes say. They still insist that Latin and Aquinas can save, and they still insist that the apostolic succession exists only in the Roman Catholic Church.

The Orthodox Anglicans, or Biblical Catholics, combine the sacramental elements that the Protestants lack and the Biblical element that the Roman Catholics lack. The Bible, the Church Fathers, and the two creeds, the Apostle’s Creed and the Nicene Creed, are their touchstones of reality. The Orthodox Anglicans also claim a divine mandate for their teaching authority based on the apostolic succession of their ministers. (1)

The Protestant fundamentalists generally do not claim apostolic succession; in fact, they deny the necessity of apostolic succession. The Protestant’s divine mandate to preach the Gospel comes from an inward call of the Holy Spirit. Both the traditionalist Roman Catholic and the Orthodox Anglican have pointed out the subjectivity of the fundamentalists’ mandate, but neither the traditionalist Roman Catholic nor the Orthodox Anglican see that their preaching mandate does not rest on as firm a foundation as they maintain, because they do not confront the apostasy of the mainstream branches of their respective churches. Why should I believe in the divine mandate of the Roman Catholic Church when their pope is a blasphemer? And why should I believe in the divine mandate of the Anglican Church when they ordain women and homosexuals? It seems to me that the Traditionalist Roman Catholics and the Orthodox Anglicans are in the same boat with the fundamentalists; they have not come to terms with the apologetics disaster caused by the liberalism of their church.

Back in the days when I used to debate with liberals, they would always label my belief in the divinity of Christ as ‘wish fulfillment.’ “You merely want to recapture the dream of your childhood, the dream of an all-loving Savior who saved you and your loved ones from death.” There is no absolute rejoinder to that accusation. One can only insist, as Thomas Hughes insists in his debate with the Biblical exegetes, “[T]hey must pardon us if even at the cost of being thought and called fools for our pains, we deliberately elect to live our lives to the contrary assumption. It is useless to tell us that we know nothing of these things, that we can know nothing until their critical examination is over; we can only say, ‘Examine away; but we do know something of this matter, whatever you may assert to the contrary, and mean to live on that knowledge.’”

The churches went wrong when they attempted to defend themselves from the attacks of the rationalist, scientific forces of modernity by trying to make their churches more rational and more scientific. They ended up outside their own traditions, looking in at the faith they used to have. The splinter groups are fighting losing battles because they hold on to the apologetics that brought them down. The fundamentalists keep quoting Scripture independent of any tradition, the traditionalist Roman Catholics keep trying to ram the Tridentine Mass and the modernist theology of Thomas Aquinas down your throat, and the Orthodox Anglicans try to prove that they, despite the apostasy of the Anglican hierarchy, are the true heirs of the first apostles. But we can’t simply wish something to be true, as the liberals accused me of doing with the divinity of Christ, because we want it to be true. I would like to believe that the Anglican Church, for instance, is the true Catholic Church, because I love the 19th century authors such as Jane Austen and Sheridan Le Fanu, who came from the Anglican tradition. And I idolize the Rev. Frances Lyte, but how can I honestly say that the Anglican Church is the rock which Christ spoke of when I look at the feminists and homosexual clergy prancing around the Anglican altars?

It seems to me that all the splinter groups have tried to run before they were ready to walk. The religion of the heart, so denigrated by the religious apologists, must come before the clerical apostolic succession genealogy charts. (2) Why would I pick up a book on Anglicanism if I wasn’t first moved to do so because I had fallen in love with the Christ I saw embodied in the culture of the 19th century English Anglicans? And why would I reject traditionalist Catholicism despite its present pomp and past splendor if I hadn’t seen, through the eyes of my heart, that it was a whited sepulchre of a church that had not charity? And lastly, why would I be both attracted and repelled by fundamentalist Protestantism if my heart was not drawn to their insistence on an adherence to the Word of God -- and subsequently sickened when they treat the word of God as a self-help popular mechanics handbook that can be quoted selectively for sectarian motives?

The heart is the great sifting ground. There the battle for the faith must be waged. No Christian denomination is without Christians, but no denomination has proven it is the rock to which we can cling in times of adversity. What would be wrong with viewing Faith as the rock and judging every church by how faithful, in the eyes of our heart, they are to Him?

The liberals are forever looking for the missing link that will prove Darwin’s theory of evolution. Christian Europeans need to find the missing link in their apologetics. The missing link is the bloodlines of the European people. Consulting the Bible, the creeds, and the experts about Christ without looking at the inner life of the Europeans is like consulting the local library to learn about your grandfather, while you ignore the testimonies of your father and your grandfather’s blood relations. The creeds came from the marriage of Christ and the European people. The way we interpret the Bible stems from the first Europeans’ vision of Christ. We cannot divorce ourselves from the European past and still hold on to the blood faith of the Europeans of the past.

“The fool in his heart says there is no God.” And hasn’t the European clergyman, by denying the existence of the heartfelt faith of the European people, said there is no God? A God of parchment, devoid of a heart, is not a God. The fundamentalist’s Bible mentions the heart more times than can be counted. The litanies of the Roman and Anglican Catholics refer time and again to His Sacred Heart. Is the heart of man then such an irrelevancy that it can be ignored? The heart is the spiritual organ of sight. One only reads the Bible or studies the creeds when one sees a vision of the Man of Sorrows. In calmer moments, when the white heat of vision has cooled, we write creeds and underline passages of the Bible, but we can’t sever ourselves from our bloodlines without killing the vision which our faith is based upon. We perish today because we have lost our vision.

The mystic mariner, Herman Melville, had something to say about the ultimate source of divine revelation:

Then keep they heart, though yet but ill-resigned—
Clarel, thy heart, the issues there but mind;
That like the crocus budding through the snow--
That like a swimmer rising from the deep--
That like a burning secret which doth go
Even from the bosom that would hoard and keep;
Emerge thou mayst from the last whelming sea,
And prove that death but routs life into victory. +

_______________________________________

(1) I don’t understand how a sect that professes to be “Biblical” can ignore the incident in the Bible where the apostles come to Christ and tell him other men, besides their small group of apostles, are casting out devils in Christ’s name:

And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us. But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is on our part. For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.
– Mark 9: 38-41

(2) The entire religious crisis of the 20th and now the 21st century was succinctly articulated by Richard Weaver in his book Visions of Order:

This brings us to the necessity of concluding that the upholders of mere dialectic, whether they appear in this modern form or in another, are among the most subversive enemies of society and culture. They are attacking an ultimate source of cohesion in the interest of a doctrine which can issue only in nullity. It is no service to man to impugn his feeling about the world qua feeling. Feeling is the source of that healthful tension between man and what is -- both objectively and subjectively. If man could be brought to believe that all feeling about the world is wrong, there would be nothing for him but collapse.

Between Heaven and Earth

“This is I, Hamlet, the Dane!”

It’s happened to me more times than I can recount. I’m in the presence of a professed Christian, and I happen to mention, with no intent to shock, that our society is demonic. “Whatever do you mean?” is always the shocked reply.

Apparently there is nothing in the eyes of modern, halfway house, conservative Christians that cannot be blended with Christianity. You can be a feminist and a Christian (“St. Paul be damned”), you can believe that the Jews (not the followers of Christ) are God’s people, you can believe that the colored races are free from original sin, and you can believe that all women are exempt from original sin. All this is covered under the blanket of conservative Christianity. Are there any beliefs outside the ken of Christianity? Yes, there are. The belief that Christianity is a patriarchal religion, the belief that the colored races need to be controlled lest the world become a jungle, and the belief that any group of people who openly avow their hatred of Christ, such as liberals and Jews, must not be trusted. Any of the latter views would shock the conservative Christian, but the former views about the immaculate conception of women and the colored races and the synthesis of Judaism and Christianity, would not shock the conservative Christian. What’s going on? There has been a perverse, dare we say, Satanic change (yes, we dare). What the Europeans of Walter Scott’s Europe held to be satanic – feminism, the worship of the natural savage, and the deification of the unbelieving Jew – we now hold to be Christian precepts. And what the Europeans of Walter Scott’s Europe held to be Christian – the patriarchal family, a hierarchically structured society in which the lesser races without the law were held in check, and a healthy mistrust of the recalcitrant Jew – are all seen as evil (they would call it satanic, but they no longer believe in Satan) by the modern, conservative, halfway-house Christians.

The halfway-house Christian has been bred by the liberal world, and he is fed by the modern liberal world. It is only natural that he should love the modern world, is it not? No, it is not. It is 'natural' if we use the word ‘natural’ as we would use it to describe cattle feeding or sheep grazing. It is animalistic. But it is unnatural, as unnatural as Lady Macbeth’s tryst with Satan, if we are speaking of the natural substance of man, spirit. Any man with a soul that has not been covered over with mountains of Satanic ash would react to the modern world as a man reacts when he places his hand on a hot stove: he recoils from it.

Halfway-house Christians do not recoil from Satanism because the nerve endings in their souls are dead. Having cut themselves off from the European past, they have become dead to the ideals and the faith of the past. It doesn’t take brains to see that feminism, Negro worship, and Christian Judaism are from the devil. It takes a heart that has not been hardened from years of trying to blend Christianity and liberalism.

1) Negro worship – It should be obvious to anyone with even a tiny remnant of a soul that making the Negro into a demigod is like trying to make a house pet of a rattlesnake. From Haiti to the American South to the Negro-infested cities of the United States and Europe, there is only one conclusion to be drawn about the Negro: his propensities for murder and rape and his hatred for the white man’s civilization must be fought, not countenanced.

LUCIUS: O barbarous, beastly villains like thyself!

AARON (A MOOR): Indeed, I was their tutor to instruct them.
That codding spirit had they from their mother,
As sure a card as ever won the set;
That bloody mind, I think, they learn’d of me,
As true a dog as ever fought at head.
Well, let my deeds be witness of my worth.
I train’d thy brethren to that guileful hole
Where the dead corpse of Bassianus lay;
I wrote the letter that thy father found,
And hid the gold within that letter mention'd,
Confederate with the Queen and her two sons;
And what not done, that thou hast cause to rue,
Wherein I had no stroke of mischief in it?
I play'd the cheater for thy father's hand,
And, when I had it, drew myself apart
And almost broke my heart with extreme laughter.
I pried me through the crevice of a wall,
When, for his hand, he had his two sons' heads;
Beheld his tears, and laugh'd so heartily
That both mine eyes were rainy like to his;
And when I told the Empress of this sport,
She swooned almost at my pleasing tale,
And for my tidings gave me twenty kisses.

GOTH. What, canst thou say all this and never blush?

AARON. Ay, like a black dog, as the saying is.

LUCIUS. Art thou not sorry for these heinous deeds?

AARON. Ay, that I had not done a thousand more.
Even now I curse the day- and yet, I think,
Few come within the compass of my curse-
Wherein I did not some notorious ill;
As kill a man, or else devise his death;
Ravish a maid, or plot the way to do it;
Accuse some innocent, and forswear myself;
Set deadly enmity between two friends;
Make poor men's cattle break their necks;
Set fire on barns and hay-stacks in the night,
And bid the owners quench them with their tears.
Oft have I digg'd up dead men from their graves,
And set them upright at their dear friends' door
Even when their sorrows almost was forgot,
And on their skins, as on the bark of trees,
Have with my knife carved in Roman letters
'Let not your sorrow die, though I am dead.'
Tut, I have done a thousand dreadful things
As willingly as one would kill a fly;
And nothing grieves me heartily indeed
But that I cannot do ten thousand more.

LUCIUS. Bring down the devil, for he must not die
So sweet a death as hanging presently.

AARON. If there be devils, would I were a devil,
To live and burn in everlasting fire,
So I might have your company in hell
But to torment you with my bitter tongue!

LUCIUS. Sirs, stop his mouth, and let him speak no more.

Are murder rape and rapine the exclusive acts of the black and Mexican tribes? No, of course not. White civilization is an endless catalog of murder, rape, and rapine. But here is the difference. Murder, rape, and rapine did not form the basis of Christian Europe; the Europeans viewed such barbaric activities as crimes. In the tribal lives of the Negro and the Aztec barbaric murder and rape is a tribal rite. Holy communion for the Aztec is a slice from a still palpitating heart, and the holiest act for a black man is to plunge a knife into the heart of a white woman whom he has just raped. Exposure to Western civilization has not changed the colored tribes. That is evident when we see, now that liberals have removed the restrains formerly placed on them, the violent predatory behavior of the unrestrained Mexican and the black. The barbarism of the colored tribes combined with the permissiveness of the techno-barbarian white is a deadly coupling. Life on earth is a vale of tears, but when white Christians rule there are white moments, times when a man feels that his Redeemer liveth and will raise him up on the last day.

2) Jewish-Christianity – It is not my contention that a Jew, or any man is not a candidate for God’s grace, but you cannot force God’s grace. If an individual or a group of individuals is adamantly opposed to Christ, we cannot declare him or them to be Christian simply because we want it to be so. The halfway-house Protestant and the Roman Catholic ecumenist do not distinguish between belief in God and a belief in Jesus Christ as the one true God. And in the case of the evangelicals, they deify a people who do not even believe in the God of the Jews. The halfway-house Christian no longer sees any difference between Christianity and Judaism because he has lived so long in the tents of the liberal that he is morally blind. His heart has become just as hardened to the light as the liberal and the recalcitrant Jew. The halfway-house Christian, the liberal, and the Jew, are now united in their hatred of the white Christian: all three want their pound of flesh:

SHYLOCK: I have possess'd your grace of what I purpose;
And by our holy Sabbath have I sworn,
To have the due and forfeit of my bond:
If you deny it, let the danger light
Upon your charter, and your city's freedom.
You'll ask me, why I rather choose to have
A weight of carrion flesh, than to receive
Three thousand ducats: I'll not answer that:
But, say, it is my humour. is it answer'd?
What, if my house be troubled with a rat
And I be pleas'd to give ten thousand ducats
To have it ban'd? What, are you answer'd yet?
Some men there are love not a gaping pig;
Some, that are mad if they behold a cat;
And others, when the bagpipe sings i' the nose,
Cannot contain their urine: for affection,
Master of passion, sways it to the mood
Of what it likes, or loathes. Now, for your answer.
As there is no firm reason to be render'd,
Why he, cannot abide a gaping pig;
Why he, a harmless necessary cat;
Why he, a woollen bagpipe,—but of force
Must yield to such inevitable shame,
As to offend himself, being offended;
So can I give no reason, nor I will not,
More than a lodged hate, and a certain loathing,
I bear Antonio, that I follow thus
A losing suit against him. Are you answer'd?

BASSANIO: This is no answer, thou unfeeling man,
To excuse the current of thy cruelty.

SHYLOCK: I am not bound to please thee with my answers.

BASSANIO: Do all men kill the things they do not love?

SHYLOCK: Hates any man the thing he would not kill?

BASSANIO: Every offence is not a hate at first.

SHYLOCK: What, wouldst thou have a serpent sting thee twice?

ANTONIO: I pray you, think you question with the Jew,
You may as well go stand upon the beach,
And bid the main flood bate his usual height;
You may as well use question with the wolf,
Why he hath made the ewe bleat for the lamb;
You may as well forbid the mountain pines
To wag their high tops, and to make no noise
When they are fretten with the gusts of heaven;
You may as well do anything most hard,
As seek to soften that (than which what's harder?)
His Jewish heart.—therefore, I do beseech you,
Make no more offers, use no farther means,
But, with all brief and plain conveniency,
Let me have judgment and the Jew his will.

For Antonio there was a saving grace because he lived in Christian Europe:

[W]e do pray for mercy;
And that same prayer, doth teach us all to render
The deeds of mercy.

Where is the saving grace now that we have abandoned the God of mercy?

3) Feminism – I have been remiss in not writing often enough about the scourge of feminism (see ‘The Underground Men’) , but quite frankly I cannot bare to look at the Gorgon’s head too often. There is nothing so terrible as the spiritually unsexed woman. And now that “we have our grace forgot,” we have institutionalized the value system of Lady Macbeth.

LADY MACBETH: Give him tending;
He brings great news.
[ Exit Messenger]
The raven himself is hoarse
That croaks the fatal entrance of Duncan
Under my battlements. Come, you spirits
That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here,
And fill me from the crown to the toe top-full
Of direst cruelty! make thick my blood;
Stop up the access and passage to remorse,
That no compunctious visitings of nature
Shake my fell purpose, nor keep peace between
The effect and it! Come to my woman's breasts,
And take my milk for gall, you murd'ring ministers,
Wherever in your sightless substances
You wait on nature's mischief! Come, thick night,
And pall thee in the dunnest smoke of hell,
That my keen knife see not the wound it makes,
Nor heaven peep through the blanket of the dark,
To cry "Hold, hold!"

And the horror of 21st century feminism is that the modern feminist lacks the conscience of Lady Macbeth! The feminist does not desire the perfumes of Arabia to wash the blood off her hands; she desires more victims in order to plunge the whole world into a feminist blood bath. “All is cheerless, dark and deadly,” when feminists rule.

When Tea Party whites gather together to protest one small item on a vast liberal agenda they also come with a pathetic declaration of their innocence of crimes against liberaldom. “We are not racist, we are not sexist, and we are not anti-semitic.” When the white man is ready to declare that, “Yes, I am opposed to the barbarism of the sons of Ham; yes, I am opposed to sexless, bloodthirsty hag queens from hell; and yes, I am opposed to the reign of the unrepentant, pound-of-flesh Jew; then and only then will the white man be able to call his soul his own. +

In Defiance of Ruin and Death

“We are in God’s hand, brother, not in theirs.”

I begin with a quote from John Sharp Williams (whose speech from 1904 was posted on Spirit Water Blood in 2007):

But there was something else, and even a greater cause than local self-government, for which we fought. Local self-government temporarily destroyed may be recovered and ultimately retained. The other thing for which we fought is so complex in its composition, so delicate in its breath, so incomparable in its symmetry, that, being once destroyed, it is forever destroyed. This other thing for which we fought was the supremacy of the white man’s civilization in the country which he proudly claimed his own; 'in the land which the Lord his God had given him;' founded upon the white man’s code of ethics, in sympathy with the white man’s traditions and ideals.

Mr. Williams maintains that the white man’s civilization once destroyed is forever destroyed. What would he say today? Let us not delude ourselves and say that white civilization has not been destroyed; it has. And every white man with a heart that still “indignant breaks” is trying to come to terms with the fact of the destruction of white civilization. Is it really, now that it has been destroyed, gone forever? That is more than we can know or should seek to know. Mr. Williams, who was a white man back when white males were men, would be the last man, when viewing the ruins of Western civilization, to advise us to remain content with its destruction.

The European civilization was “complex in its composition.” And that complexity makes it impossible to rebuild it as if it were a cathedral or a statue, but I wonder if the reason for the complexity of European civilization might be the smoking ember that could rekindle a fire? The white man’s civilization was complex because it was the only fully human civilization. Certainly there have been fully developed human beings in non-white civilizations, but those individuals became fully human because they adhered to the ethics and values of the white man’s civilization. Kipling’s “Gunga Din” is an example:

An' for all 'is dirty 'ide,
'E was white, clear white, inside

The keystone of the distinctively human civilization was the faith of the European people, as a people, in Jesus Christ. Their link to Him, as evidenced by their culture, was sacramental; the incarnate Lord was all around them, in their churches, in their architecture, in their stories and in their traditions. It is indeed tragic that the Protestants who were once committed to a strict adherence to the Bible have rejected the notion that God became incarnate through His people. And it is doubly tragic that Roman Catholics who were once committed, prior to the revolt of the scholastics, to a sacramental view of the holy Eucharist should have joined the Protestants in their denial of the incarnational aspects of the faith. The unspoken, implicit creed of both the modern Protestant and Roman Catholic is that Christ’s thoughts became incarnate of the Holy Ghost through the virgin Mary and were made manifest to a select few who were capable of understanding great thought. Modern Christianity is Socratic, not Christian.

In order to fill the void in their souls that cannot be filled by Socrates, Plato, or Aristotle, the modern European Christian has gone a-whoring after new Gods who can fulfill his need for an incarnational faith. The evangelical’s blasphemous attempt to make non-believing Jews into the people of God is one manifestation of the European’s need to see his faith embodied in a people. But what type of faith is it that can only be held by rejecting the central role of Christ as the one and only mediator between God and Man? And what type of faith is represented by the ecumenical conferences at Assisi where every faith and every people are glorified except the antique European and the Christ of the antique European? The end result, fast approaching, of the modern Europeans' desire to replace their lost faith in a European people connected to the Living God, is to elevate the Negro to the status of God’s people. They are the true evidence, to the modern white man, of God’s grace. Look around you. Is that smug, conceited look on the faces of whites with black children and black grandchildren merely the after-effects of a good bowel movement? No, the white European is all aglow because he or she has become connected to the people of God. It is a terrible thing to lack a living embodiment of God’s grace. The New Age Catholic and Protestant think they have found that embodiment in the black man.

Things spiritual cannot be proven by the dialectical. That is why Philip does not respond to Nathaniel’s question, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” with a Socratic dialogue. He says, “Come and see.”

If a man truly has eyes to see and ears to hear can he fail to see the difference between old Europe and modern Europe? The incarnate Christ is present in the former, and Satan is incarnate in the latter. The children of antique Europe danced and mourned to the Divine Piper’s tune, and they became fully human as a result. The children of modernity have not danced or mourned to the Piper’s tune, and they have become inhuman as a result.

The Shakespearean tragedies and the Bible share one central theme: the words we use to frame our laws and worship come from an “abundance of the heart.” It is evident that the post-Christian European has given his heart to the false gods; otherwise he would not worship the Negro and seek to blend Christianity, Judaism, and liberalism.

The great poet Miguel de Unamuno was right to write about the “agony of Christianity.” The Christian must face the tragedy of existence with only his faith in Christ to comfort him. When that faith wavers, and the Christian asks himself, “Suppose He is not really who He claims to be?”, then the previously fervent devotee becomes first a lukewarm adherent, and finally a full scale apostate, whoring after any God that can comfort him in the here and now. And the hereafter? “Best to blot that from my consciousness.”

The love for Christ is no longer in the European’s heart because he no longer believes Christ died on the cross for our sins and rose from the dead in order to assure us of eternal life. If the European doesn’t think he needs forgiveness for his sins and he doesn’t believe that Christ conquered death, he will not feel any filial love for Christ, and as a corollary he will feel no love for the civilization that was built by a people who loved Christ.

The European people from the days of Alfred the Great to the last days of Queen Victoria’s reign felt that they were a people with a special destiny. They were Christian when the word meant something. Their faith in Christ gave them a respect for their culture which had been created out of love for Him. That type of faith makes a people determined to survive as a people. They have something to pass on to their children, and they know that they serve as a beacon light to the nations still shrouded in the dark night of heathenism.

We have seen the result of the European’s flight from the “agony of Christianity.” He no longer sees the European people as a distinct people with a special destiny. He no longer sees the need to keep faith with the past. Not only does he no longer want to keep separate from the heathens and show them the light emanating from His culture, he wants to be absorbed by the darkness of heathenism. The European’s headlong rush to the black abyss all stems from the transfer of his affections from Christ to the barbaric 'isms, technological and primitive, that Satan has created for the ruin of souls.

There has not been nor will be any manly Christian response to Satan’s bold conquest of the Europeans coming from the ranks of the halfway-house Christians. They are content to rummage around the ruins of Christian Europe and call the ruins an improvement. The Christian’s answer to Satan’s destruction of Europe will come, as it always has come in the past, from the Europeans who never ceased loving Christ as the warrior God who came down from heaven to lead them in battle against the forces of evil. The first Europeans got it right: Christ the Hero, Christ our Brother, not Christ the endpoint of evolution or the founder of a philosophy, is the source of the spiritual force that enables a man to hurl his defiant ‘no’ at Satan and all the forces of hell. The Christ story was accepted and believed by the Europeans because they had not completely forgotten the source of their being. The twilight of the gods was not the end of the gods:

Deep in the wood two of human kind were left; the fire of Surtur did not touch them; they slept, and when they wakened the world was green and beautiful again. These two fed on the dews of the morning; a woman and a man they were, Lif and Lifthrasir. They walked abroad in the world, and from them and from their children came the men and women who spread themselves over the earth.

The neo-pagans are a disgrace to the world ‘pagan.’ Our pagan ancestors bent their knees to Christ because they recognized Him; He was the God above the Gods who would fight for and with them against Satan. They had hearts to love, and then when they heard of the coming of the Christ, they had a God worthy to love. From that love came the European people.

Tricks and gimmicks from the halfway-house Christians will not restore the civilization that has been burned to ashes. Only the love, which passeth all understanding, that Christ has for His people can rekindle a fire in a civilization that has turned to ashes. The Great Heart is waiting to set our hearts on fire. The European hero of old, who we are all called to be, was not afraid to approach the living God, because he knew with the unerring instinct of love that he would not be consumed by the divine fire; he would become a man strengthened and nurtured by divine charity.

The European civilization is not like any other civilization, and its destruction is not like any other destruction. “So long as the blood endures” -- and it does endure in some European hearts -- there is hope that Europeans will see the God of Europe which the antique Europeans saw, then fall in love once again, and rebuild Europe over the ashes of Europe. +

Liberal Theocracy

“I have some rights of memory in this kingdom…”

-- Fortinbras in Hamlet

The liberal and homosexual community is up in arms over an incident at Rutgers University. Apparently a heterosexual student secretly videotaped his homosexual roommate having sex with another male student. When the heterosexual student uploaded the video to the Internet, the homosexual student committed suicide. Now the liberal and homosexual community wants the offending heterosexual student to be prosecuted for a hate crime.

What the heterosexual student did, namely putting the private vices of another person on public display, was not the act of an honorable man. I think most of us would agree that videotaping and subsequently broadcasting the video was worse than a theft or some kind of illegal financial transaction, but should the act be subject to legal prosecution? In every society there are acts which are subject to the moral opprobrium of society but are not viewed as criminal by the same society. For instance, the man who donned women’s clothing in order to be permitted on the lifeboats of the Titanic was treated with moral opprobrium, but he was not criminally prosecuted. Most Christian societies make practical distinctions between morally reprehensible acts that elicit the scorn and censure of all good men and the criminal acts against the body politic that need to be punished to the full extent of the law. There are exceptions. In a theocracy the private vices, if they become known, are subject to public prosecution. It should not surprise us when liberals demand the prosecution of homophobes and whites who use the n-word. They have set up a theocracy that is much harsher than the much-maligned Puritan theocracy of New England. At least the Puritans, being Christian, tried to punish the private vices that really were vices! I agree with Hawthorne’s compassionate condemnation of the Puritans, but I would much rather fall into their hands than into those of the modern liberal theocrats, because the theocracy of the liberals is not a Christian theocracy. I’m not so naïve as to believe that everyone who professes the Christian faith does so out of love for Christ. Many sick individuals cry ‘Lord, Lord,’ but when Christianity is the professed faith of a whole society there is always a chance that some individuals within that society, maybe even some individuals in positions of power, will temper justice with mercy and put truth above expedience. Such can never be the case in a liberal theocracy. Founded on the principle that everything Christian is evil and whatever is opposed to Christianity is good, a liberal theocracy can only produce evil fruits.

On a daily basis we hear roundtable discussions about the economy: “Will it stage a comeback?” or “Is this a recession or a depression?” The Christian European knows as sure as the turning of the earth there will be no recovery from the moral depression of the white race so long as there is a liberal theocracy.

By the 1950’s the European people had left the full-blooded Christianity of their forefathers behind, but they still retained the values that stemmed from a “Christian hangover.” Now that the hangover is gone, nothing will deter the modern liberal from implementing a liberal theocracy. It is no coincidence that 'hate crime' legislation has been enacted to punish even verbal opposition to Negro worship, and abortion protestors are now subject to the same criminal prosecutions as mobsters. It won’t end there. Liberalism is devoid of all the values that the Europeans of the past held dear: piety, loyalty to kith and kin, faith, hope, and charity. The totalitarian regime of the liberals will be a hideous blend of colored barbarism and liberal techno- barbarism. Translated that means the liberals will continue the mass slaughter of babies and they will sanction murder and rape by the colored tribes so long as the colored violence is directed at white people.

At present there is virtually no resistance to the liberal theocracy. Halfway-house Christians resist certain aspects of liberalism, but they do not resist liberalism in its entirety. And the neo-pagans accept the anti-Christian basis of liberalism. Only an integral Christian people acting as a people who believe in a personal God who created distinct races and distinct individuals can resist liberalism. The dagger of abstract thought was dangled before the eyes of halfway-house Christians, and they eagerly seized upon it and slew their lawful king and feudal Lord. Every type of devotion is permitted in the Catholic Church so long as it is framed to support liberalism, which is diametrically opposed to Christianity! And what is behind the evangelical Protestants’ obsession with Israel? We constantly hear how the Jews are the people of God. If such is the case, that Christianity is Judaism, then Christ is not risen, and He is not our Lord and Savior. What separates the modern Catholic and the modern Protestant from the liberal theocrats? The answer: nothing.

There is an old saw about a traveler who stops and asks a farmer how to get to Centerville. The farmer replies, “Well, if I was going to Centerville, I wouldn’t start from here.” Of course the point is that we are here. We are white Europeans who are lost in a dark wood that is ruled by monsters (sometimes called ‘liberals’) in semi-human form who are more loathsome and terrible than any monster ever created by Ray Harryhausen or Edgar Allan Poe. We are pilgrims who have lost sight of the reason for our pilgrimage.

If we believe that God became flesh and dwelt among us, then we must believe that faith in the God who came to us through the blood is passed on through the blood. We should not ask 'what does the latest church document say about Christ', nor 'what does the latest Bible exegete say about Him'; we should look at the God our ancestors considered their Holy Father and their sacred Savior, who mixed His blood with theirs. The putrid Harry Potter fantasies are the end result of a sick, degenerate people who have forsaken their blood connection to their people and their God. The European has fled so far away from the blood wisdom of his ancestors that he can now be satisfied with the superficiality and banality of a two-bit magician from a carny show.

Does the modern European ever react to anything first-hand? Does he see the blood of innocents being shed in the abortuaries by techno-barbarians and on the city streets by colored barbarians, and then cry havoc and let loose the dogs of war? No he doesn’t because he feels nothing; he has no touchstone of reality. The halfway-house Christian must first check with his clergyman, who tells him how he feels, and the neo-pagan is incapable of heartfelt action because he has denied Him who is the source of all heartfelt righteous indignation. “This shall not go on,” is the response of the Christian hero to any attack on his race or the innocents of any race. And it is the heroic impulse of the European that has been buried by an avalanche of speculative musings of intellectual something-or-others, who wanted to make God conform to the narrow parameters of their brains.

Stevenson wonders in his preface to Treasure Island if the “wiser youngsters of to-day” can be pleased with an “old romance.” The answer was yes, there were still Europeans when Stevenson wrote Treasure Island who realized that all pure romances – and Treasure Island is a pure romance – stem from the romance called the Christian Faith. In that other world, the world of the old romance that the clever have left behind, is everything of value: home, hearth, and God. If the European’s memory of that world is completely gone, he will remain lost in the dark woods of a liberal theocracy. But if there is just some remembrance of things past the European is not permanently lost. He will make his way through the dark woods and slay the dragon of techno-barbarism and the multi-racial hydra. It is not the work of one day or of one century even, but all things are possible to Europeans when they listen to the call of their blood, which bids them rise and ride.

A different species of man has emerged in place of the Europeans of the past. One of the consequences of a man’s believing himself to be a descendent of the apes seems to be that he becomes more like an ape than a man. If we did not have a historical record of a different kind of European we could simply blend with the colored races and wallow in the indistinctiveness of our shallow lives. But we do have an historical record of the Europeans of the olden times. We were not born to wallow in the pigsties of modernity. One strand from the garment of the European past is worth more than the whole insubstantial pageant of modernity. The incorporate, Christ-centered Europe was not a dream. It is still our true home. If, and when, we remove the blinders from our hearts we will hear the harp of the ancient minstrel, who is waiting for His people to take their part in the divine Romance, and leave the liberal theocracy in the dustbin of history.

With a gleam of swords, and a burning match,
And a shaking of flag and hand:
But one long bound, and I passed the Gate
Save from the canting band. +

Resisting Institutionalized Negro-Worship

“The heart that has truly loved never forgets” – Thomas Moore

I’m not sure of the exact date – I think it was somewhere in the late 1960’s, when blacks and liberals started using the term ‘institutional racism.’ The term was used like a hydrogen bomb to destroy whites in great numbers. The bomb was used because it was becoming harder and harder for the black and liberal coalition to convince whites living outside of academia that the U.S. was filled with ardent Klansmen (oh, that it were true!) getting ready to rise and ride. So the liberals developed a new gamut. “It doesn’t matter if most white people do not hate blacks; back in the days when all whites hated blacks, they institutionalized the hatred of blacks; therefore, even if individual whites within an organization do not hate blacks, the institution as an entity has an anti-black agenda. The whites in that organization, despite professing their lack of prejudice, are still supporting racism by being a part of an organization which has institutionalized racism.”

We can see the advantage of the new, now old, strategy. You can damn all white people with the ‘institutional racism’ ploy. Even the most Negro-loving, white liberals will still stand condemned because they are working for some organization that has institutionalized racism. There is no way to avoid the ‘institutional racism’ charge, but the liberal tries to avoid it by screaming about the racism of whatever organization he belongs to. By doing this he hopes, like all liberals hope, to become an Atticus Finch figure, but the hydrogen bomb of institutional racism is no respecter of persons; even good, old Atticus Finch will be destroyed.

Racism has been institutionalized in the United States and Europe, but of course it is anti-white racism that has been institutionalized. White people dutifully fulfill their equivalent of the Sunday mass obligation by refusing to condemn black violence and mayhem and by allowing their sons and daughters to go to school and cohabit with black people. Kierkegaard once predicted, long before the invention of television, that someday the government would put little mechanical boxes in our homes and tell us what to worship. Hasn’t that come true? We are constantly told by the liberals on television that we must worship black people. There is no escape from one’s moral obligations. In the work place, there are blacks to be worshipped; in the churches, there are blacks to be worshipped; and in the home, via the electronic media, there are Negroes to be worshipped. “Come and worship, come and worship, worship the Negro, our new-born king.”

When Christianity replaced the old pagan religions, the Christian churchmen used many of the old pagan forms to support the new Christian doctrine. The Christian calendar of holy days was made to coincide with the old pagan rites, and even the names of the days of the week were taken from the pagans. Whether it was a wise policy or not, I can’t say; however, much can be said against such a policy. It seemed, in the short run, to be an efficient way to ease the pagan convertite into Christianity, but in the long run it blurred the distinctions between Christ and Thor.

The liberals have grafted Negro-worship onto the old Christian faith; let us hope that in the long run the grafting process will undermine Negro-worship like paganism undermined Christianity. Not that I recommend sitting passively by, hoping the fact that our churches still display pictures and images of Christ means that Negro-worship will eventually be supplanted by Christianity. It is not quite the same now as it was in the halcyon days of Europe. Christianity was new then; it had not been found wanting. Now, after the demise of the Christian faith, it will take a moral force greater than the racist hydrogen bomb to restore Christian Europe. (1)

The propaganda for the institutionalized worship of the Negro is unrelenting and all-pervasive. The opposition to it must be as unrelenting and pervasive as we can make it. Obviously the few remaining Europeans cannot institutionalize their opposition to black racism because all “respectable” institutions in Europe and the United States are Negro-worshipping institutions.

When my mother died a few years ago, my father told me to never forget my mother. There was no need to remind me of that. What son forgets his mother? We few, the remaining Europeans, should never forget our mother, Europe. If we only feel bound to present and future Europe, we will be bereft, we will be orphans who have never known a mother’s or a father’s love. The unbought grace of life existed in the homes and churches of old Europe. Having forsaken that Europe, the modern European is “as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.”

Institutionalized faiths are vulnerable to passion. Fat, complacent, Negro-worshipping liberals are ripe for a drubbing if enough Europeans could be found who love Christ and hate Negro- worship. I’ve been told that even a pig won’t eat vomit, so maybe the white grazer and the halfway-house Christian will tire of a steady diet of pure, unadulterated, liberal vomit and begin to take some baby steps back to the God of Europe.

I must admit that I see no signs in my own anti-nation nation that white people are turning from Negro-worship to Christ. Just the opposite seems to be the case. Every day a new Negro shrine is unveiled, and every day a new Negro icon is added to the pantheon of gods. But we seldom see God’s grace at work. Do we need a sign? No, we don’t. We know that we have immortal souls and what we do on earth is of eternal moment. The refusal to worship Negroes is a counter-revolutionary act. When there are enough European refusals, the reign of the Negro-worshippers will end. We know neither the day nor the hour when that blessed day will arrive, but we do know that a man’s refusal to worship the heathen gods of the liberals makes a difference in the unseen, but very real, realm of the spirit.

Every good thing a European does can be traced back to Christ, and every evil he does has its origin in a bastardized version of Christianity. In Walter Scott’s poem “The Lay of the Last Minstrel” an evil dwarf learns enough of the conjurer’s art to take the form of a young prince.

“Although the child was led away,
In Branksome still he seemed to stay,
For so the Dwarf his part did play;
And, in the shape of that young boy,
He wrought the castle much annoy.”

By a similar conjurer’s trick, the liberals have grafted Negro-worship onto the fabric of the Christian churches. But in Scott’s poem, the young prince’s closest friends and relatives know that something is amiss. In the Christian churches the guardians of the faith, whether they are liberal, conservative, or traditionalist, do not see that the worship of Christ has been replaced by the worship of the Negro. And I think the failure of the church men and the failure of their loyal adherents in the ranks of the laity, to recognize the difference between Christian worship and Negro-worship is the result of an essential disconnect in both the Protestant and Catholic churches between the ecclesiastics and the European people. The church hierarchies put all their faith in their own abstract systems. All they cared about was putting the greatest number of generic human beings into their particular system. They didn’t care about what was inside a person’s soul. The entire European cultural experience, the European peoples’ struggle to the light, was set at naught. “Just keep jamming those troublesome people into the machine and everything will come out right.” But nothing comes out right if Christianity is made into an abstract system to satisfy the egos of a few warped intellectuals. That type of Christ-less Christianity is a reed for every liberal wind that blows. The Europeans succumbed to the windblown doctrine of Negro-worship because they no longer had what David Balfour called the “good Christianity” in their hearts. They had an abstract Christian faith that they held at arms’ length away from their hearts, but they didn’t have the good Christianity. Thomas Moore is correct: “The heart that has truly loved never forgets.” Have we forgotten the European Christianity that appears in the pages of Scott, Austen, Le Fanu and every honest chronicler of the European people? Never!

As we stated at the onset, Negro-worship is the institutionalized faith of the European people. It has replaced Christianity, the traditional faith of the European people. The faithful heart, the heart that truly loves Christian Europe, will not let the Christ-less Christian churches parade Negro-worship as the true faith. Make the godless churches fight in the open with their liberal brethren. You can’t have Christ and liberalism, even if liberalism comes in the guise of a new and better Christianity.

Carl Sandburg wanted to be an impersonal cog in the machinery of capitalism. The ancient Christian European wants something diametrically opposed to Carl Sandburg’s nightmarish dream. He wants to feel himself connected to a personal God, not to an impersonal system. The liberal and his allies in the Christian churches will always present the impersonal, the systematic, as improvements on the personalized, non-systematic faith of the antique Europeans. The institutional worship of the generic black man is Satan’s latest attempt to destroy the humanity in man by depersonalizing and systematizing his God. The European’s answer to Satan is the same as Christ’s on the mountain: “Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and Him only shalt thou serve.” +
________________________________
(1) There is a moral force in the world greater than the racist hydrogen bomb; it is called the grace of God.