The Mau Mau Who Would Be King

An Interview with the Young Drummer from the World of the Brothers Grimm, in Which We Discuss the Marxist Mau Mau Who Has Become King of Satania

Interviewer: Thank you for consenting to an interview on such short notice.

Young Drummer: That’s all right. I don’t get many requests for interviews. The Europe of the Brothers Grimm is out of fashion these days.

Int: But that is why I want to interview you. I want to see the modern world through the eyes of an antique European.

YD: And I’m that antique European?

Int: Yes.

YD: Go ahead with your questions.

Int: My country, which is a branch of Europe, recently elected a black man President. I don’t know that he will be any worse than the PCR (Post-Christian Rationalist) candidate he defeated or the PCR President he will be succeeding; however, I can’t help but be concerned at the symbolic aspect of a black man’s presidency. The sons of Ham are not supposed to rule over the sons of Japheth.

YD: It is one step closer to the incarnation of Satan when you actually install a black man as the head of your nation. But you must realize that the white man must have a religion. He has rejected Christianity, so what is there left for him? He must revere something. He feels he can’t revere Christ, but he can revere the black man.

Int: It wasn’t black men who elevated a black man to the Presidency of the United States. It was white people. How can anything good come out of a people that could do such a thing?

YD: Nothing good will come from such people. They are beyond the ken. You can only work with the tiny scattered remnant of Israel, the last Europeans. They aren’t going to announce themselves – it wouldn’t be safe – but there are a few left.

Int: Do you place much hope in the ‘Great Awakening’? Some of the more conservative white people have told me that the election of a black man to the Presidency will mobilize white people into action.

YD: Why, if the vast majority of white people stood by and watched blacks occupy their schools, their churches, and their homes, would they suddenly awaken when a black man occupies the Presidency?

Int: It doesn’t make much sense, does it?

YD: No, it doesn’t.

Int: So if there will be no awakening, what will there be -- mere oblivion?

YD: Looking at it rationally, yes, the white man is facing oblivion. But faith is beyond reason. The European who is still connected to sacred Europe feels with certainty that Christ's Europe cannot die any more than He can die. The white man believes the people of Christian Europe will triumph over black-worshipping Satania as long as they don’t break faith.

Int: It is my contention that the white-hating liberals and their colored minions have not faced any opposition since the days of “Reconstruction.” The ‘write letters and vote’ crowd does not constitute an opposition.

YD: I would agree with that. The problem with the right-wing, conservative opponents of Satania is that they have no religion to counter the liberals’ black faith. They talk about democratic institutions and respecting European values, but they don’t do the one thing that is needful. They don’t swear on the Holy Rood that such things shall not be and then proceed to act like integral men. An integral man is not just a violent man; he knows that wars are won primarily with spiritual weapons, but he doesn’t eschew violence when it is necessary. You can’t always petition and vote your way out of a quagmire. I'm not talking about political assassination here, but I am talking about defending white people against the violent acts of the 'get whitey' savages who stalk the new diversified streets of the U. S. and Europe.

Int: Writing in 1887, Thomas Hughes expressed concern about the triumph of democracy. But he thought it could be turned to good account if the practitioners and advocates of democracy still held the Christian God to be sovereign over nations:

Are we, then, to rest contented with this ultimate regal power, to resign ourselves to the inevitable, and admit that for us, here at last in this nineteenth century, there is nothing higher or better to look for; and if we are to have a king at all, it must be king people or king mob, according to the mood in which our section of collective humanity happens to be? Surely we are not prepared for this any more than the Pope is. Many of us feel that Tudors, and Stuarts, and Oliver Cromwell, and cliques of Whig or Tory aristocrats, may have been bad enough; but that any tyranny under which England has groaned in the past has been light by the side of what we may come to, if we are to carry out the new political gospel to its logical conclusion, and surrender ourselves to government by the counting of heads, pure and simple.

– from Alfred the Great

Mobocracy could only be avoided if the purveyors of democracy acknowledged that “... there is one throne which they cannot pull down—the throne of righteousness, which is over all the nations; and one King whose rule they cannot throw off—the Son of God, and Son of Man, who will judge them as He has judged all kings and all governments before them.”

But they have dethroned Him, and the right-wing conservatives don’t even suggest enthroning Him again as a part of their “Great Awakening” program.

YD: The right-wing conservative who wants to restore European culture by returning to the Greeks is in the position of Jonah before he was thrown overboard in the storm. Like Jonah, he is trying to hide from his destiny. God made him the Christ-bearer. If he hides in the hull of the good ship Democracy or the Greco-Roman ship, he will not fulfill his destiny.

Int: I think any person who voted for McCain-Palin is a disordered human being, but I would not say he is devoid of grace. It was possible for a person to be deceived by them. They did put a veneer of religion and patriotism over their ideologies. But it was not possible for a person to be deceived by Obama or Biden. Their Satanism was completely out in the open. If a person voted for Obama-Biden, he is satanic.

YD: I agree.

Int: Then our young people, who voted in the vast majority for Obama-Biden, are satanic?

YD: Yes, they are. How could it be otherwise? Your schools, your churches, and your mass media have been preaching ‘Tower of Babel’ race-mixing for the last sixty years.

Int: There is a small little church in our town, with the preacher’s house right next to it. Now, you would think that the pastor would not want to alienate his congregation by choosing one candidate over another, but the pastor has a large Obama-Biden sign in his front yard.

YD: That’s not surprising. It is Obama, the black man, who can provide the PCR with the faith he lacks. Do you remember when Pope Benedict XVI, then Cardinal Ratzinger, said that the next Pope should be black? They have all lost their faith, but they are still white men. And a white man needs some faith that transcends, at least in the articulation, mere self-interest. The black man is content with an openly selfish faith, and so is the Oriental and the men of the other non-white races. But the white man, because he once held the Christian faith, cannot be content without a faith that at least outwardly mimics the Christian faith.

Int: But why doesn’t the white man simply hold to the Christian faith? Why should he forsake Christ for Obama and his ilk?

YD: Because the European no longer believes in the divinity of Christ. The scholastic revolt against God has come to fruition. Reason was left alone to defend the field against the onslaught of science, and he was not up to the task. Divorced from the wellsprings of the heart, he withered and died.

Int: The churches did not die, but faith in Christ as true God and true Man did die?

YD: Yes. And once faith in Christ dies there is no longer any reason to do the arduous things that such a faith demands.

Int: For instance?

YD: It is no longer necessary to refrain from, or feel guilty about, such sins as adultery, abortion, or a lack of charity. If one simply loves the black man with all one’s heart and soul and mind, he need not worry about hating his fellow white man, murdering babies in the womb, or sleeping with his neighbor’s wife. All actions that were once called sins, even sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance, are washed clean and even rendered virtuous if one simply loves the black man.

Int: Ten years ago I probably would have told you that assessment was too extreme, but I’m afraid I agree with you, particularly after witnessing the hysterical adulation that a two-bit Marxist Mau Mau has received from white people in my country and from people throughout the Western world. Even before he was elected President, he was received by European heads of state as if he were a god.

YD: He is a god to them.

Int: Well, he is not my God.

YD: Nor mine.

Int: Then let every white man who is still white, be he Saxon, Celt, Dane, and so on, say with one voice, “The white man will not bend his knee to the great black god. Christ and only Christ is my King.”

YD: Amen to that.
_________________

Postscript: I think a traitor like McCain is worse than an outright enemy like Obama. So it is with no sympathy for McCain I mention that he probably won the election. There was unbelievable voter fraud, at least unbelievable for a country that prides itself on following the rule of law.

This should tell you why liberals always win and conservatives always lose. The liberals do not care about the rule of law when it involves their faith. “By any means necessary” was their only law when it came to electing Obama President. The liberal-conservatives are incapable of combating that type of zealous faith. They’ll form a think-tank somewhere and prove that rigging elections is against the express wish of the Founding Fathers. That will fix those liberal-liberals!

The liberal-liberals, and the conservative-liberals for that matter, must be forced to deal with men who will also use any means necessary, within the European Christian tradition, to enthrone their God. Blake was right: man needs, at least the European man, a religion. The liberal-liberal has chosen Satan. The conservative-liberal, by not choosing Christ, has also chosen Satan. The real right-wing -- the European, Christian right-wing, has chosen as well. “Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more...”

Eternal Europe

The fairy tales that were collected and recorded by the Brothers Grimm are such an important part of our European heritage. It is no more possible to separate the fairy tales from the European people than it is for a leopard to change its spots.

I often interview the Young Drummer, whose deeds are recorded in the Grimms’ tale called “The Drummer.” In that story, he travels through the forest of Giants and ascends a glass mountain in order to rescue a fair princess. I have always been impressed by the fact that he embarked on his rescue mission in spite of the fact that it is impossible to climb a glass mountain. Integral men of Europe do not live their lives according to the rules of science.

_______________________________________

Interviewer: Thank you for consenting to the interview.

Young Drummer: It’s no problem. I enjoy our discussions.

Interviewer: I don’t feel particularly connected to my country on any given date, but I always feel particularly unconnected on the fourth of July.

Young Drummer: It seems to be a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing.

Interviewer: Yes, that’s it exactly. I don’t think that a white man should be celebrating the demise of the white man, do you?

Young Drummer: Of course not. But the white-hating liberals are not celebrating their demise. They believe that they have transcended the barriers of race, sex, and family. What they celebrate when they celebrate cultural diversity on state-sanctioned holidays such as the 4th of July is your demise. They celebrate the death of the old Europe and the men and women who are loyal to it.

Interviewer: Is there any hope of winning the white-hating whites back to the fold?

Young Drummer: No, there isn’t. Their hearts are stone. They are wedded to Satan and the colored races.

Interviewer: Is the final conflict about to begin then?

Young Drummer: That’s more than I know. Many of the signs are there, but it would be presumptuous of me, or anyone, to claim they know the day or the hour.

Interviewer: Europe will never come back then?

Young Drummer: The real Europe, His Europe, is still there, it simply is no longer visible to most Europeans.

Interviewer: It’s almost as if Satan has imposed his vision of Europe over the old Europe.

Young Drummer: That is correct. From my standpoint, the standpoint of eternal Europe, you live in Satandom.

Interviewer: I don’t dispute that. And we must, while residing in Satandom, keep the vision of the old Europe before our eyes. But aren’t we ultimately supposed to turn Satandom back into Christendom? Isn’t having a vision of the old Europe only a first step?

Young Drummer: I wouldn’t put it that way. You are thinking too much like a modern man when you talk about first and second steps. That implies that vision is something passive and separate from the man. Vision is the man. When European man saw Christ, true-God and true-man, he acted on that belief and built a civilization of “incomparable symmetry.” Vision and love are inseparable. We see with the heart, and we act according to what the heart sees.

Interviewer: I don’t quite follow you.

Young Drummer: Let me put it this way – when you first met your wife-to-be, you fell in love because of what you saw in her heart. From that love flowed all those masculine impulses that the liberals sneer at: the desire to protect your love, to raise a family with your love, and to grow old (the best is yet to be) with your love.

It was the same way with the Europeans and Christ. They saw something in Christ that they loved. From that love came Christendom. Imperfect by divine standards, just as our love is imperfect compared to His love, nevertheless it was a love and a civilization as different from your modern Satandom, and every other civilization on the face of the earth, as heaven is from hell.

Interviewer: The modern European has issued divorce papers to Christ?

Young Drummer: Yes, he has ceased to love Him.

Interviewer: Is there someone else?

Young Drummer: Yes, modern man has returned to the second oldest faith, faith in man.

Interviewer: Is there any difference then between the barbarians of color and the post-Christian whites?

Young Drummer: There is a difference in degree, not in kind. The difference in degree consists of the different aspects of the religion of man. The colored races worship the blood. Their deities reflect “virtues” that the barbarians see in themselves. What an antique Christian would call savagery the barbarian calls faith.

The post-Christian white also worships himself. But the post-Christian does not worship his blood, he worships his mind. The reason white liberals get so upset when the people you call Kinists mention things like race, blood, and hearth is that such notions challenge the liberal’s faith. He believes all wisdom comes from the mind of man and not from the blood of European man united to the Spirit of God.

Interviewer: So the white techno-barbarian and the colored barbarian are united in their hatred of the incarnate God but not united in their reasons for the hatred.

Young Drummer: Yes. The white techno-barbarian, as you call him, worships rationality, which of course becomes the worst type of rationality when it is divorced from His spirit and blood. And the colored barbarian worships only the vital power of his blood, which of course becomes inhuman barbarism without the humanizing influence of His spirit and blood.

Interviewer: What is the result of the union of the technocratic white with the barbarians of color?

Young Drummer: Death for one’s civilization and death for the individual souls that adhere to the Christless religions of deified man.

Interviewer: You seldom mention the Jews or the Jewish conspiracy. Is that because you don’t believe the Jews are the main threat to Christian civilization?

Young Drummer: First of all, there is no longer any Christian civilization. So I take it that you mean to ask, “Are the Jews the major reason for the demise of Christendom, and are they the main obstacle to the rebuilding of Christendom?”

To both questions, I answer, no. The Jews represent an organized body of people who were and are opposed to Christ’s reign of charity. As such they will always be a danger to Christ’s church and His followers. But the Jews could not have undermined Christian civilization nor could they stop the rebuilding of it if it were not for an organized body of post-Christians who have steeled themselves to resist the light even more fiercely and maniacally than the Jews.

Interviewer: The Roman Catholics?

Young Drummer: Not just the Catholics. The Catholic Church is the worst of the anti-Christian churches because it has the most formidable organization, but all the Protestant churches, like the Catholic Church, have institutionalized the idea that God lives only in the mind of man.

Interviewer: He exists or doesn’t exist according to the whims of man?

Young Drummer: Yes, that is their idea.

Interviewer: I grant that there is no reclaiming the techno-barbarians, but isn’t there a small segment of white people who could, if they saw the Christ you see, be brought back to the European fold?

Young Drummer: There are. Although I don’t see how they will get a chance to see Christ. He exists in the European past as chronicled by the European poets. But the poets are not allowed to go directly to the potential converts. Literary critics and psychologists filter out their contents.

And the Gospels suffer the same fate as the poetic chroniclers of the soul. The content of the Gospels is distilled into a faithless vapor by Roman Catholic theologians and Protestant Biblical exegetes.

Interviewer: You don’t paint a very encouraging picture. There seems to be no hope.

Young Drummer: That’s not what I’m saying. Christianity is the religion of “when hope seems nearly gone, God’s relief by us is surely won.” Look to the European forest. Fight your way through the barbarians. And ignore the white rationalists who tell you that you are childish and racist to look for God in a forest. Then venture into the dark woods. You will meet witches and dragons there, but you’ll also find Him, and He will sustain you in all your battles.

Interviewer: You come from the forests of Bavaria and the world of the Brothers Grimm. Aren’t you just a little bit prejudiced in favor of forests?

Young Drummer: Yes, I am prejudiced. And I intend to stay prejudiced in favor of the European forest, in the sure and certain hope that my ‘prejudice’ will lead me to the King, who sanctified that forest with His blood.

Interviewer: Your faith is my faith and your blood is my blood.

Interviewer and Young Drummer (holding up their swords and crossing them): To eternal Europe, and death to Satandom.

Another Interview with the Young Drummer

Interviewer: I’ve stored up a lot of questions for you, so if you don’t mind I’ll skip the preliminaries and just start firing away.

Young Drummer: Go ahead.

Int: I had a conversation with a relative the other day that mirrored hundreds of similar conversations I’ve had throughout my life. They always trouble me. My kinsman is a member of the Methodist Church. He has a woman pastor who believes that homosexual marriage is completely compatible with Christianity. But that is not what I find disturbing. I’m used to lunatic clergy; what I find disturbing is my kinsman’s reaction to the minister. He himself doesn’t think homosexual marriage is sanctioned by Christianity, but he is glad that he and his minister agree on the essentials, namely, that Christ is Lord. A Catholic priest once said a similar thing to me in regard to a debate he had with a pro-choice Lutheran. He said he wasn’t pro-choice himself, but he didn’t view the Lutheran’s pro-choice stance as an obstacle to their concelebrating the Mass. (I might add, by the by, that the same Catholic priest thought I was not a Christian because of my views on segregation.)

YD: What is your question?

Int: My question is this: Is everyone who cries, “Lord, Lord” a Christian? Can someone really say – well, of course, they can say it – but can someone really be a Christian and be pro-choice or in favor of gay rights? And what can you say about the faith of someone who can disregard such “minor” differences and still agree on the “essentials”?

YD: There is no exact line separating the Christian from the pagan and the post-Christian, but one can still discern the different sects. There is an instinctive sympathy that exists between Christians, and an antipathy that exists between Christians and non-Christians. Your kinsman is, at heart, with the post-Christians because he does not want the Christian creed to have any connection to reality. If the creed is true, certain principles flow from it. If you deny those principles, you deny Christianity. It is one thing to fail to live up to the principles of one’s faith – we all do that – but it is another thing to deny the principles altogether.

Int: To paraphrase Long John Silver, “Those are mighty harsh words, Captain.”

YD: You did ask for my opinion.

Int. But are there issues that are too muddled in which we cannot discern a clear Christian cause?

YD: Of course there are, although it is often the case that the issues are more muddled in theory than they are in practice. But, yes, there are such issues. Let’s take two examples, very similar in many respects.

First, let’s consider the war for the restoration of James III as King of England, Scotland, and Wales. Now, there are circumstances when a King steps beyond the pale of Christian civilization. In such circumstances he should be removed; Richard II and Richard III both fall into that category. But James II was not lawfully deposed. He did nothing as egregious as Richard II and Richard III. Hence, the attempt, by Bonnie Prince Charles, to restore James II’s son to the throne was a just cause. But there was room for doubt. Some time had elapsed and stability had been restored. Was it worth the bloodshed to restore the Stuart monarchy? My heart belongs to the Stuart cause, but I can certainly see that there could be Christians, real Christians, on the other side of the issue.

Your own un-Civil War is another example. My heart is with the South – they were in the right – and the North’s leaders were most certainly post-Christians, but I think it was entirely possible for a Northerner to participate in the war, fully believing he was doing his duty as a Christian.

Int: So far you’ve only used examples from wars between Europeans during the Christian era. What about the modern era and wars between Europeans and non-Europeans?

YD: For instance?

Int: The current immigration war. All the Christian churches support immigration. As a matter of fact, they equate a pro-immigration stance with Christianity. It is only the pagan groups who oppose immigration.

YD: I think one can say with certainty that the Christian Churches supporting immigration have entered into the post-Christian stage of Christianity. They have abstracted Christ out of existence. Nothing exists for them outside of their own narrow minds. They’ve killed the wellsprings of humanity from which genuine religious feelings come. There are no longer human beings in their world; there is only humanity in the abstract.

Int: What about the professed Christians supporting the war in Iraq?

YD: They are a different breed from the post-Christians; they are pagans whose hearts belong to Thor.

Int: But it is the outright pagans who, along with the left, oppose the war.

YD: Yes, which is why one is better off being an outright pagan than a man with a pagan heart who cloaks his pagan desires in Christian phrases.

Int: Let me shift topics and ask about the ‘born again’ experience. There is a fundamentalist Baptist preacher who has been making the rounds of my neighborhood. Every time he comes to the neighborhood, I invite him in. I’m afraid, however, that I’m a big disappointment to him. I listen to him, I ask him questions, but I do not tell him that I have been born again and that I am assured of my salvation. We are at an impasse when it comes to the born again experience. It boils down to this: I think he definitely has had a very real conversion from heathenism to Christianity, but I do not believe it happened in one blinding moment as he, obviously, feels it has. But I do not question the reality of his conversion as I would question the reality of the conversion of someone like George Bush, for instance. But the Baptist minister does not accord me the same courtesy. He does not accept the validity of my conversion to Christianity in my mid-twenties because I did not have the necessary ‘born again’ experience. I am still among the unredeemed, which quite possibly is true, although not because I have not had the born again experience.

YD: I think the Protestant born-againers, such as the minister that came to your house, err; but they err by an excess of emotion which, although an error, is a better error than that of over-intellectualism, the error of the Catholic heathens.

Int: If the born-againers could turn down the ‘born again’ experience a few notches, I would be in agreement with them. I know there are what I would call ‘white moments’ in one’s life where one feels connected to Him and sees “His blood upon the rose,” but these moments do not seem enough for the born-again types. But maybe it is just a question of semantics. I was a long distance runner long before it became fashionable. When it became fashionable, I started hearing something about a “runner’s high.” “Strange,” I said to myself, “I’ve never experienced a runner’s high.” I had often felt a certain buoyancy or effervescence after a long run but never something as dramatic as a “high.” What do you think?

YD: I think that’s part of it. They have added an enthusiastic element to what you would call a “white moment” and elevated the white moment to the status of an ecstatic vision. But there is a very definite religious difference there that cannot be brushed away by saying it is only a difference in semantics. They bypass the human element. Your white moments occur when you see, in the hearts of His creatures, a vision of Him. Their born again moment comes direct from God, sometimes via a human conduit, but still direct from God. That experience is nothing like the experience you are talking about when you talk about white moments.

Int: You’re right; I want desperately to have something in common with a group professing to be Christian, but I guess one can’t force something like that.

YD: No, you can’t.

Int: But you don’t completely negate the Protestant’s ‘born again’ experiences?

YD: The word, “Protestant,” takes in a large group of people. No, certainly I don’t negate every single ‘born again’ experience. I negate those that seem to produce slimy individuals (for how can contact with the living God produce slime?) such as George Bush and Billy Graham. But I do think the process is more as St. Paul describes it, and he had a truly born again experience, when he says we see through a glass darkly. We have communion with the living God, but it is imperfect. And I think we go from an imperfect, but nevertheless genuine communion, to a non-existent relationship when we try to comprehend God with our minds alone. Then the abstraction game that the Catholic theologians are so fond of comes into play and we have lost God entirely.

Interview with the Young Drummer Boy

Interviewer: I'm grateful to you for coming here on such short notice.

Young Drummer: I'm happy to come, and it wasn't that short.

Int: I need to talk to a pre-medieval man, a man without that modernist taint.

YD: Fairyland does pre-date the medieval era. I come from the era that your age calls the 'Dark Ages.'

Int: Please don't hold that against me. I think the 'Dark Ages' was an age of light and our age the dark one.

YD: I won't disagree with that.

Int: In this dark age, I've been groping toward the light, and I've been surprised by where it is to be found and where it is not to be found.

YD: Explain please.

Int: Well, in our age, parents do not teach their children, strangers do. I was brought up to believe in something called science, progress, and the American way. What I learned in Sunday School, also taught by strangers, couldn't stand up to what I was taught the rest of the week. By eighteen I was an indoctrinated member of the 'enlightened' masses. But life, real life, intervened. The Shakeaspearean-Dostoyevskian inferno pointed to a different reality. That was my first surprise. There was no light to be found in the self-proclaimed light bearers, only darkness. One man born in Bethlehem had the light that all the electricians of science and progress went about proclaiming they had, but in reality, could not produce.

The second surprise came, as I've talked about with you before, when I discovered the organization I thought was responsible for preserving the light was not only in darkness but was in fact a dark pit filled with poisonours vipers.

YD: I aprpeciate the passsion behind those words, but are you sure you don't overstate the case against the Catholic Church?

Int: No, I don't. Let's look at the Novus Ordo church first. They have faith all right; they have faith in everything, which translates to faith in nothing. You can't believe in Budda, Christ, Muhammed, Kwanzaa, and Sesame Street all at the same time. The Novus Ordo Catholics are worthless. And the traditionalists are worse. They believe that whatever is cruelest in thought, in word, in action is divine. Their God is Tash, the devil god depicted in C. S. Lewis's book, The Last Battle. Every time I see a traditionalist priest, I feel as if I'm in the presence of Satan.

YD: I can't disagree with that assessment, and I find it astonishing that the Church officials in the Novus Ordo and the traditionalist camps have managed to keep any adherents at all. I suppose it is another indication of the sickness of your age.

Int: But was the Church ever really anything but sick? Are the Protestants right? I find it hard when I see the organized Church of Faithlessness in front of me (in the Novus Ordo) and the organized Church of Satan next to it (in the traditionalist church) to believe there ever was a true church of Christ. One can believe in Christ but not know where He is to be found on this earth.

YD: "They have taken away my Lord and I know not where they have laid Him."

Int: Yes, that's it exactly.

YD: Well, it is difficult (and I realize how inadequate the term 'difficult' is) to see any light at all when facing the modern Catholic Church. but if one shifts one's persopective, as I notice you have started to do, one can see a different picture besides a mere tangle of poisonous vipers. If one stops looking at modernism as a 20th century development or even a 16th century development, one can get some sort of perspective on what your modern writers call the 'crisis of Faith.'

When the Church was at its strongest, which is always when an organization is most vulnerable, the shift was made, ever so slightly at first, toward reliance on the analytical eye of the experts rather than on the wise blood of the faithful. Stop thinking of Leo XIII, the collective Pius popes, and the Sheed/Belloc type of writer as antique Christians and regard them instead as carriers of the modernist disease, and you will be on your way to the true Church. The Devil did not try a frontal assault on the medieval citadel; he came in the back door, disguised as a well-meaning friend called "Theology." "Let us leave no stone unturned in our defense of the Faith," he lied, "and let us show that pure thought and pure religion are one and the same."

Int: I think I follow you. Let me give a mundane example. A fellow English major once told me, while we were both still at university, that he no longer read any of the literature in the courses. It wasn't necessary to read the literature, he claimed, because all one had to do was to read the literary criticism in order to find out what it was about. And from the standpoint of grades, he was quite right. One was better off reading the literary criticism of the works than the works themselves. But if you read the works without reference to the critics, you often found yourself tranpsorted to a different place, a place where academics never went and never knew about. It was kind of the spiritual equivalent of Br'er Rabbit's Laughing Place. But one had to read the works with the proper spirit to get to that place.

I think you can see where I'm going with this. If reason is our only pure and untainted faculty, then the Faith must be taught and passed on only through the reasoning process. And each successive genreation of the faithful becomes more and more isolated from the Faith. They know the theory of God, but they don't know God. They don't have that taste for God which Lubac wrote about, because they have never been allowed to know Him with their hearts.

YD: I don't think you need me anymore.

Int: Yes, I do, because the path is lonely and dark, and I'm afraid.

YD: We are all afraid.

Int: Except Him.

YD: Yes, except Him.

Int: Stay with me then?

YD: I will.