The Beginning and the Ending

But that which ye have already hold fast till I come. Rev. 2: 25

I’ve always avoided the Book of the Revelation to John because I’ve known so many people who have gone off the deep end because of an obsession with the hidden – or so they say – prophecies in the book. In recent years, however, I’ve been reading the Book of the Revelation with my children. I wish I hadn’t neglected it for so many years, because it is a comforting book. What, after all, does it say? The Book of the Revelation tells us that Christ will ultimately triumph over the evil forces that we feel are about to overwhelm us. No doubt much of the book that is hard for us to understand was more understandable to the Christians of St. John’s time, but the central message -- that Christ and Christ alone is the answer to the riddle of existence -- is made perfectly clear, which makes it all the more troubling that the modern halfway-house Christians have chosen to ignore the warnings contained in Revelation, about fusing Christianity with other religions. The divinely inspired St. John tells us that Jerusalem, which is Judaism, will give way to the New Jerusalem, which is Christianity, and then Babylon, which is Rome, depicted as a marine monster, will be destroyed only to resurface in another form. There is also (merely my opinion) a warning that Judaism will blend with other faiths and continue to be a destructive, anti-Christian force. Am I reading too much into the Book of the Revelation when I say that we are being warned not to blend Christianity with paganism, Judaism, or any other religion? If Christ is truly the beginning and the ending, all religious blending should be avoided, should it not?

At the university I attended, one of my religious studies teachers, a lapsed priest of German extraction, was fond of calling Christianity the most syncretistic of all religions. There was nothing unique about it, he claimed, “except for the part about the God who entered historical time and rose from the dead; everything else was borrowed from other religions.” Nothing unique? Only an academic, the modern equivalent of the Pharisee, could be so blind.

Christianity has been virtually blended to death. Until recent times, the Roman Catholic Church preferred to blend Christianity with paganism, but now, as witnessed at Assisi I, II, and onward, “heaven knows, anything goes.” The liberal Protestants have followed the Roman Catholics and blended paganism with Christianity, while the more conservative, halfway-house Protestants prefer to blend Christianity and Judaism. The Roman Catholics are currently more ecumenically minded toward Islam, which is a blend of Judaism and paganism, then the halfway-house Protestants, who are hell-bent on pushing the Judeo-Christian mix to the ultimate extreme: the crucifixion of Christ.

Despite the assertion of St. Augustine, and the clerical theorists who followed in his train, that there could never be a Christian culture, we must maintain, based on reality, that there was a Christian culture and it was called Europe. I can’t help thinking of the scene from Miracle on 34^th Street in which the then-unbelieving Mrs. Walker denies the existence of Santa Claus when she is looking right at him: “Not only is there a Santa Claus, but here I am to prove it.” Or if you want a less frivolous analogy, I refer you to Pontius Pilate, who asked Christ, “What is truth?” as he looked at The Truth standing before him.

The point is that the blending of the European with other peoples is not a Christian attempt to spread the Gospel, it is a satanic attempt to kill Christianity by destroying the good soil, the European people, where Christianity grew and flourished. All the clerics of the past who screamed about the necessity of racial integration were destroying the distinctly Christian people who believed in the distinctiveness of the Christian God. When the Aztec blended with the Spaniard, was it a Christian faith that emerged? And when the white blended with the black, was the image of Christ enhanced or erased? Christ is now a lesser god in a pantheon of gods, which includes Martin Luther King, Jr., Gandhi, and Nelson Mandela.

Christian Europe is no more because Europeans no longer believe in the distinctiveness of their God. Led by clergymen who neglect Christ’s injunction to preach the Gospel to all nations, which implies that the races are to remain distinct, they choose (contra Christianity) to evangelize by mongrelizing. The first generation of the mongrelizing evangelists, the Francis Schaeffer types, do so with the best of intentions, but the second generation, the Franky Schaeffer types, do so with the worst of intentions. They take a maniacal glee in mocking “cultural Christians” and lauding secular, liberal causes. “Some are yet ungotten and unborn – That shall have cause to curse the Dauphin’s scorn.”

If we can picture for a moment the fairest garden in the world, which is the European garden, then let us suppose that we take the flowers from that garden to another land and leave the roots behind in the European soil. What happens to those flowers without their European roots? Correct -- they wither and die. Far better to show the people of the barren lands the European garden in all its glory and by doing so, encourage them to develop the soil that can sustain a garden rather than a barren waste.

The halfway-house Christian views things differently. He wants the European to share a barren wasteland with the people of the thorny soil. There will be no Christianity in the wastelands, but there will be universal equality. All will have an equal share of nothing, with the usual caveat that comes with all utopias: “Some are more equal than others.” The Europeans will of necessity have to self-destruct so that the barbarians of the wasteland can have their more equal share of nothing.

It was less than 100 years ago when the bulk of white Christians did not believe that a faith in Christ crucified, Christ-risen meant they had to support the extinction, through mongrelization, of the white race. What has happened in the last 100 years to make mongrelization and Christianity synonymous? Many white politicians caved in to political expediency, and many white pundits caved in to the fear of losing prestigious jobs. But that still leaves the majority of white Christians unaccounted for; the men and women who supported extinction by mongrelization despite the fact that they didn’t face the loss of a political office or a prestigious job. We must conclude that the vast majority of white Christians supported mongrelization because they thought it was the Christian thing to do.

Why did the European people abandon the faith of their fathers, who believed in a personal God that spoke to them through those intimate attachments formed with kith and kin, and adopt a universal faith in generic mankind in which attachments to kith and kin were denigrated? The simple answer is that the European laity apostasized from European Christianity because the clergy told them to. But then we are still left with two questions. Why did the clergy apostasize and why did the laity feel compelled to go over the cliff with the clergy? Intellectual pride is the answer to both questions. The clerics made Christianity into an intellectual system where they could confine God to whatever role they wanted Him to play. And in their system there was no room for the poetic of Christianity. In poetry, two seemingly opposing principles can be personal and particular, and general and universal, and still be united, but in an intellectual system that is not possible. In poetical Christianity for instance, the mystical union of all people in Christ can only be achieved if all people are loyal to their own breed and brood. In intellectual, apostate Christianity, there is only the mathematical logic of the impersonal syllogism. “If God calls all people to salvation, then all people must be one people.” It’s logical, as logical as death.

The laity followed their clergy because nobody wanted to admit they were stupid and racist (the “Emperor’s New Clothes” syndrome) by saying they preferred to remain with the old-fashioned “racist” Christianity instead of the new, intellectual, universal, non-racist Christianity. Can we blame them? Yes, we can. There should have been enough passion inside the hearts of the lapsed Europeans to help them prevail over the intellectual bullying of the clergymen. They should have girded up their loins and spoken from the heart: “Not while we live, or where we live, shall we permit the faith of our fathers to dissolve into a blended, universalist dew.” Shame, shame, and eternal shame to the men who accept halfway-house Christianity in place of the blood faith of the ancient Europeans. We won’t blend our race or our faith, because to blend either is to lose both. +

God gave all men all earth to love,
But since our hearts are small,
Ordained for each one spot should prove
Belovèd over all.

--Rudyard Kipling