Against the Jackals

As Christian – man, I needs must
keep the vow which I have plight...

--Scott

Simply being born in Europe or becoming a citizen of a European country does not make an individual a European. One must have white skin in order to be a European. Our skin color is part of our body, which houses our soul. Body and soul are not separate entities; they are inextricably linked. Prior to the 20th century, the great bulk of the European people believed as I do -- that one’s skin color is part of a man’s soul, which is a thing eternal. There certainly were Gnostic exceptions, but in the main the pre-20th century Europeans regarded skin color as an integral part of man’s spirituality. Now, in this 21st century, the century of the Jackal, the exception has become the rule, and the European who still believes that a man’s skin color is part of his soul is a tiny minority. Let’s look at the Gnostic jackals.

1) Religious, conservative-liberals
From the Catholic side, the Gnostic attack is best exemplified by a remark of a famous Thomist: “Western civilization has nothing to do with race.” The gentleman in question was quite a defender of Catholic Europe, particularly Catholic Spain, but he didn’t think it mattered one iota whether Spain was inhabited by white people or by black people. Actually, that is not quite correct: the pro-Western, anti-white writer actually had great hopes that blacks would come to the faith in droves and create a new earthier and “sexier” Catholicism, so presumably he preferred a black Spain. Only an academic could nurse such fantasies.

Of course the cause of the academic’s delusion was his Thomism. God is a disembodied idea to the Thomist, so it follows in the Thomist’s mind that individual human beings are also disembodied ideas. And even though the Novus Ordo Catholics have denounced Aquinas, the main architect of idea-religion, they have not renounced idea-religion itself. This is why the most vehement anti-white hatred comes from the pulpits, from those who believe in an idea of God and in an idea of man.

Occasionally I have observed puzzled, white Kinists trying to figure out what the problem with Pat Buchanan is. Well, the problem with Pat is the problem with an idea-religion. Buchanan will always throw individual white men under the bus whenever individual white men get in the way of his propositional faith in generic, idea-democracy and generic idea-Christianity.

The same obsession with ideas about God rather than with God himself, which we find in medieval scholasticism and in modern Catholicism, has spread like wildfire in the Protestant churches, too. The clergy in those churches regularly hurl anathemas at anyone who dares to suggest there is any connection whatsoever between skin color and spirituality. But who is flying in the face of reality—the anti-white churchmen or the last Europeans? On the side of the churchmen is a Gnostic theory about God. It does not come from Scripture, nor does it come from the Church Fathers. It stems from the scholastic tradition, which came to us from the Greeks. But there is no concrete reality to buttress up the “Western-civilization-has-nothing-to-do-with-race” theory. If the colored races can show us the face of Jesus Christ in their cultures, why have they not done so? Why are they unable to take even the smallest baby steps toward the light unless they are guided by white people? In contrast to the unreality of the churchmen stands the reality of Western civilization.

Few people live up to their creeds for good or ill. Many Marxists, for instance, who were opposed to Christian marriage, have been married in Christian churches. But a man’s stated creed still must be taken seriously. “Ideas have consequences.” And at the core of the pro-Western, anti-white Thomists and churchmen is pantheism, the worship of nature. While priding himself on his rejection of the bloody pagan religions, the modern, thinking churchman has reverted to the nature gods. With a mind untainted by contact with genuine human beings of flesh and blood, the modern “Christian” contemplates the natural world and sees in it natural savages who long to be controlled and enlightened by the Gnostic white man.

A European is not different from a pagan because the pagan has bloody sacrifices and the European uses his mind; the European differs from the pagan because he believes that God’s spirit dwells in the blood and not in nature. The pagan propitiates the gods of nature with his blood, and the conservative churchmen and Thomists worship their own minds through the good offices of the natural world.

2) Mad-dog liberals
The conservative-liberals still retain a respect for Western civilization while denying that the white man is necessary to Western civilization. They are liberals because they go against the traditional faith of the European people who thought their race was part of their very soul. But the spiritual children of the conservative-liberal take things a step further, which is why I designate them as mad-dog liberals.

The mad-dog liberals do not love Western civilization, they hate it. They find racism and sexism everywhere they look. So they hate the race that gave the world Western civilization. They are more consistent than the conservative-liberals who professed to love Western civilization while hating the white man. But before we award the mad-dogs the consistency ribbon, let’s look at their inconsistency. They feed off the fruit of the civilization they say they despise. They have their operations at hospitals started by Europeans who believed: “In so much as you have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, you have done it unto me.” They listen to music written by white men in tribute to the God of the white man. And on it goes. If they were consistent, they would all go to dog fights with Michael Vick and call it the apotheosis of their mad-dog lives.

While still being inconsistent in their use of the fringe benefits of Western civilization, the mad-dogs are taking what was implicit in the faith of the conservative-liberal Christians and making it explicit. The conservative-liberal still expressed his new faith in nature and the scientific method using old, Christian terms. The mad-dog has abandoned most of the old Christian terminology and has created a new faithless faith, a hodge-podge of Asian religions, Greek philosophers, and African voodoo cults. The old liberal-conservatives often clash with the new mad-dog liberals over such issues as abortion, but they are birds of the same feather. Their hatred for the older, flesh-and-blood faith of the European people is what unites them.

3) Neo-pagans
The neo-pagan hates white people in the same way that Hugh Hefner hates women: Hefner loves women as biological entities, but he hates femininity. In fact, Hefner denies that there is a spiritual, feminine component in a woman’s makeup just as he denies a spiritual, masculine component in men. Likewise the neo-pagan; he professes to love the white race, but he hates the spiritual essence of the white man, that which makes the white man distinct and unique. The neo-pagan would have the Christ-bearing race abandon Christ and simply look into the mirror above the computer or in the DNA lab when they want to worship. What a pathetic, soulless fate for the people who walked with God.

4) The colored hordes
The colored races share the liberal’s hatred of the white European. But the colored races do not believe, as the white liberal believes, that skin color is not a significant part of a man’s identity. The liberal, vis-à-vis the coloreds, is in the same position that Stalin was in with his own people during World War II. Stalin didn’t believe in Christianity, but a great portion of his people did believe in it, so he had to let a handful of Orthodox priests out of prison in order to bless the troops and rally the people to fight for good old Mother Russia.

The liberals invoke race when they want to rally their people (the colored tribes) to fight against their enemies (the recalcitrant Europeans). But it is always dangerous to stir up hatred against your own race, trusting that your colored allies will be satisfied with just the blood of your white enemies. Why should the coloreds be satisfied with only the blood of the old Europeans? If white is evil and whites are weak, why should any white people be left alive? The liberals' faithless faith will leave them defenseless before the colored hordes.

White conservative-liberals and mad-dog liberals hurl the pride of race accusation at Christian Europeans of the old school. Let me throw that lie back in their faces. The old “racist” Europeans did not have the pride of race, which all other races have; instead, they accepted the burden of race, and that burden was a cross, the same cross that He carried on His way to Golgotha. The superiority of the European, his complete dominance throughout the world, came about because the European’s heart burned within him. He saw something more than nature in the person of Christ, and he felt compelled to enflesh, in his culture, the vision he saw with his heart. Can one see with one’s heart? Ask Gloucester: “I see life feelingly.”

The conservative-liberal, the mad-dog liberal, and the neo-pagan have replaced the burden of race, a sacred burden, with the pride of intellect. They flee, like Jonah, from their duty to God and take refuge in the belly of the liberal leviathan. From inside that whale, they hurl anathemas at the white people who are still listening to the call of the blood. “Never abandon the white cross,” that quiet, gentle voice tells us, “because that cross is your salvation.” Pride of race? No, a humble and grateful acceptance of the awesome responsibility of race. That is what I see in the lives of the old, racist Europeans. It is better to live in exile, with the vision of their Europe in our hearts, than to move one single infinitesimal hair in the direction of the anti-white, anti-Christian purveyors of Satanic, one-world, one-race atheism.

The Face of Jesus Christ

“But of what use is a sound currency if the people are lost? And what would be the point of defending the country against foreign attack if the people themselves had become foreign?” – A. Jacob

I want to focus on the recent apology for the “sin of segregation” by the Fundamentalists at Bob Jones University. They apologized for the sins of their fathers, which is always the easiest type of apology because you can condemn someone else while appearing humble and holy yourself.

Let us be clear about what the Bob Jonesers are saying. They are saying that the pro-abort, pro-sodomy, anti-Christian liberals are wrong about those three moral issues, but they are right about the morality of race-mixing. And their ancestors, who were anti-abortion, anti-sodomy, and Christian, were wrong about segregation. Is that possible? No, it isn’t. You must choose, Mr. Backsliding Fundamentalist. Either the faith of your ancestors is wrong and Satanism is right, or your ancestors were right: sodomy, abortion, and race-mixing are wrong and Christianity is true.

At least the liberals are consistent. They condemn all the white man’s heritage and make it clear the world will be a better place when there are no white people left on the face of the earth. The Fundamentalists at Bob Jones University want to hold to part of the white man’s heritage, whatever part of that heritage that makes them feel good about themselves, and jettison whatever part of the heritage that makes the liberals angry. “Please, Mr. Liberal, tell me I’m being good.” And what do the liberals tell such fawning sycophants? They tell them, “That’s a beginning, but keep on jettisoning.” And eventually the Born-Again Integrationist can be seen wandering aimlessly through the desert, sighing wistfully and asking, “Whatever became of me?”

Of course things are even worse on the Catholic side of the coin. There we are forced to listen ad nauseum to creatures like Thomas Fleming explaining to us why we should hate our ancestors and subscribe to the new theology of Thomas Fleming.

What is the fatal flaw in the Bob Jonesers’ and the Catholic partisans’ way? The Fundamentalist says, “Give me my Bible and let the rest go. I don’t need the cultural heritage of the European.” The Catholic says, “Give me the Church documents and a traditional way of looking at the documents; everything else is dross.” What is missing, when we subscribe to either way, is the face of Jesus Christ. Without the cultural heritage of the European, we do not know who or what God is. He doesn’t come to us through parchment; He comes to us through humanity. We see His face through His people who joined their blood with His. It is when men give flesh to Holy Scripture and the Church documents that we come to know Christ. If we never saw a charitable act, could we believe in a charitable God? If we never knew a loving father, could we believe in God the Father who loved so much that He gave His only begotten Son?

This idea that the white man and his heritage can be eliminated and the Gospel of Christ maintained is an international phenomenon, not limited to the Catholic and Protestant churches of America. Wherever there are white clergymen, the new gospel that abominates the white and worships the black is proclaimed. And it is nothing more than a cowardly capitulation to the powers of this world. “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s.” Surely the sacred heritage of a people who saw the face of Jesus Christ is not something that Caesar has a right to dispose of at his whim. That heritage comes from God and belongs only to Him.

This worldwide (and by worldwide, I mean the European world) black-worshipping frenzy runs directly contrary to everything white Christians used to believe. A friend, who is not a believing Christian but is very interested in the survival of the white race, recently asked me if I was in agreement with those who cited some medieval theologians that stated the black was not fully human, in order to justify abortion for blacks. My answer was that I didn’t see why the matter was so difficult to understand. The Bible story of Noah’s sons seems to be theologically sound and in accord with the realities of life. The sons of Ham are part of the human family, but their extreme proclivities toward the baser things of life must be held in check. They must be ruled by a more responsible and Godly race. So of course they are human, and of course they shouldn’t be allowed to abort.

Whites shouldn’t support the murder of black infants in the womb; they should build a society in which blacks are held in check by a dominant white Christian culture. The banned Disney movie (that is, the real Walt Disney) The Song of the South, which is admittedly highly idealized, demonstrates the way blacks, when subservient to a white Christian culture, can become decent, God-fearing individuals. If that movie were made today, Uncle Remus would have a white wife and go around molesting small children of both colors.

In this country prior to the Civil War, white liberals talked about liberating the black man so they could elevate him. And maybe some of those deluded souls believed such nonsense. But now it is apparent that the white liberals wanted to “liberate” the black in order to eradicate Christianity. They don’t want to end the sex and blood orgies of the black man, they want to join in.

It’s important that we don’t let the white clergymen and their followers rest content in their palatial half-way houses. If they want race-mixing, then they, not us, should be forced to take the consequences. They should live without the sure and certain hope of the Resurrection. They should live without seeing the face of Christ in His people. And above all, they should live with the black man in the hellish nightmare world in which he feels quite at home.

The white man who still cherishes his heritage has spent the last fifty years trying to win the liberal whites back and convert the blacks. That strategy hasn’t worked. And most whites whom I encounter that are not liberals have embraced suicidal despair because they think there is nothing left for the white man but death. But I think there is life for the white man if the remnant would stop buttressing up the black-and-white cookie civilization of the West. The black-and-white Church is not our church, because it is not a Christian church, and their nation is not our nation, because it is a multi-racial nation that belongs to Satan. Let Satan support his church, and his minions support his nation. It’s time for the white liberal and the black man to worry about the white counter-revolutionary, and not for the white man to sit cowering in his house wondering when the multi-cultural police will come for him.

Every Thanksgiving Day my family and I watch the movie, A Miracle on 34th Street (1947), with Edmund Gwenn and Maureen O’Hara. The New York City that magically comes to life when Santa Claus walks among them is a white city. It is a city of almost every crime and every sin known to man, but there is redemption and grace in that city because there are white people there. And the one sin they are not guilty of is race-mixing. What does the poet say? “Say not that the struggle naught availeth.” If we give up on the white race, we will never again see the face of Jesus Christ. He will become a phantom that haunts our nightly dreams but fades away in the light of day.

White-Hating Whites

Humanity must perforce prey on itself,
Like monsters of the deep.

--King Lear

In the older westerns and jungle pictures of the 1930’s, 1940’s, and 1950’s, the white men who sold guns to the Indians or betrayed the whites to the black cannibals were portrayed as morally reprehensible individuals. But in the 1960’s the movies started depicting whites who betrayed their fellow whites as moral giants, far beyond the ken of ordinary, sinful whites. The treacherous, evil gunrunner became the dedicated social worker, and the traitorous white hunter (see Tarzan and the Lost Safari) became the self-righteous cleric damning all whites who opposed integration.

The Hollywood movie moguls are always slightly in advance of the average American, but not by much, because they want to make money. If they were too far away from the mainstream, they wouldn’t make money. The new movies of the late 1960’s reflected the change in the way white people viewed themselves and other cultures. Movies of the ‘30’s, ‘40’s and ‘50’s, by and large, show us a people who were tolerant of the “lesser breeds” but still holding on to the belief that white civilization and the whites who created it were the right sort of people who deserved to be emulated, not demonized.

Of course from the late 1960’s on, the constant, unrelenting theme of our popular movies has been the evil of whites and the goodness of the non-white. Given the enormity of the propaganda against the white race, it is surprising that a black wasn’t nominated for President even sooner. Maybe the forty years from 1968 to 2008 were needed in order for the old “racist” whites to die out.

I don’t know if it’s true that rats flee a sinking ship, but humans certainly do. From the late 1960’s on we have been treated to the disgusting spectacle of whites trying to disassociate themselves from white culture by pinning the racist label on other whites or by claiming victim status for their white ethnic group. Thus, the editors of Southern Partisan magazine spent all their time writing about the evils of segregation and the hypocrisy of those damn Yankees who were, after all, “a lot more prejudiced than we are.” Take for another example my parish priest who regularly told his black parishioners that being Irish he considered black people to be his people and not those hideous white WASPs.

With all the white backstabbing going on, one gets the impression he is in a Grade B horror film. One minute, you are standing next to a normal-looking white person and in the next moment, that normal-looking white person has a mouth full of fangs and is trying to bite you in the neck. Just the other day, for instance, I was having a perfectly normal conversation with a man named Patrick Buchanan, when suddenly, without warning, he sprouted fangs and tried to bite me. I quickly got out of range of his fangs and ran home to try and find a suitable wooden stake. Must it be a wooden stake? There simply is no telling who will turn next!

Using the colored races to defeat a white enemy is not something new. The French used Indians against the British in the French and Indian War; Franco used Moorish troops against the communists; and the North used black troops against the Southern whites. But with the exception of our own Civil War, the use of non-European people against Europeans was not an admission, on the part of the European country using colored troops, that the European and the colored were equals. It was simply a breach in the honor code. “I’ll use any tactic to defeat my enemy!”

In the later half of the 20th century, something quite different than a breach in the honor code was taking place. The issue of the colored races became a religious one. It was not a case of “The colored can be used to give us victory over our white enemies.” It was not a case of “We must convert the heathen.” Nor was it a case of “We must grant the colored races the same rights and privileges which we accord to the whites.” None of those cases express the late 20th and 21st century reality. The reality is that it is now required that the colored races, particularly the black race, the race most antithetical to the white race, be worshipped and the white race be demonized. That is the reigning orthodoxy. If a white man wants to remain viable in politics, religion or society in general, he must demonize his own race. Patrick Buchanan is a classic example. It is sad to see a man so desperate for media air time and publishers that he rushes to join in with the demonizers of the white race.

The deifying of the colored and the demonizing of the white was codified in the late 20th century, but it has been a lurking little devil of an idea, waiting to come to fruition, for many centuries. The root of it is to be found in Satan’s intellectual temptation of Adam and Eve. And its formal entry into the heart of the church came with the advent of scholasticism, which reduces Christianity to a propositional, dialectical faith, in which the personality of God and the personality of man are rendered subservient to the idea of faith. Thus, with genuine sincerity and zeal for his faith, James II of England, Scotland, and Wales, could elevate a black man to a status above all the white Protestants of his realm:

Indeed the King’s rage for making converts was driven to such a height by his obsequious ministers, that an ignorant negro, the servant or slave of one Reid, a mountebank, was publicly baptized after the Catholic ritual upon a stage in the High Street of Edinburgh, and christened James, in honour, it was said, of the Lord Chancellor James Earl of Perth, King James himself, and the Apostle James.

-- from Walter Scott's Tales of a Grandfather

Is faith that simple? Does it only entail the acceptance of a few intellectual propositions and a subsequent ritual purification to make one a Christian? Or is there something else that is necessary? A tradition that predates the scholastics, the tradition of the Gospels and the first European converts, stresses the need for a deeper, more intense involvement with the deity than can be obtained by mere acceptance of whatever official party line is ruling Christendom at the particular moment. Theology changes with the weather, but a deep-seated, heart-felt faith, based on a spirit and blood relationship with one’s kith and kin and one’s God does not change. It endures.

I view the Protestant Reformation, at its deepest level, as a longing to hold on to an unchanging faith. The faithful felt that the Hero God, whom the apostles saw on the way to Emmaus, whom St. Paul saw on the road to Damascus, and whom their Germanic ancestors saw and rescued from the maze of Greco-Roman theology, was in danger of becoming a vague theory about God rather than the living God. Of course, the Protestant theologians quickly returned to theory and away from faith. That is the curse of Adam: we are indeed, as Chateaubriand points out, “more deeply tinctured with the pride of science than with the pride of love.”

I think the phrase, “pride of science,” is very apt. It conjures up images of a man in a lab coat, studying his fellow men, and God as well, as if they and He were insects in a jar. It is in Satan’s best interest to keep Western man focused on the things he can quantify, calculate, and collect rather than on the things he intuits when the poetic flame is blazing.

And since that poetic flame only blazed in the European hearth, Satan’s main task is to keep that hearth fire extinguished. Satan knows what the European once knew when the hearth fire was ablaze: The spirit of God comes to man through the blood. Without that conduit, all white men become soulless, bloodless zombies, worshipping the blood of the coloreds in an attempt to reclaim their lost vitality. But the attempt is always futile because the blood of the barbarian has no animating spirit in it. Yet the swinish white men rush headlong over the cliff in their frenzy to worship at the altars of the colored races.

American, pride-of-science whites are not alone in their frenzied rush for the abyss; the European whites have joined them, but it is in America that we can see two very striking examples of the coalition that has destroyed European civilization. In Presidential candidate McCain, we see the white-hating white who has embraced the soulless, bloodless faith of the pride-of-science men. In Presidential candidate Obama, we see the personification of the soulless faith of blood. Blacks love him because his faith is their faith, and whites worship him because he has the blood that they have denounced.

Liberaldom does not just consist of those who are pro-choice and in favor of immigration ‘reform,’ it also includes all those whites who see no animating spiritual presence in the blood faith of the antique Europeans. When they tell us that we must renounce those “infantile” ties of blood which bind us to a higher civilization than the modern liberal could possibly know, we must renounce them and realize that we are involved in a religious war, not a minor disagreement.

Christians who spout race-mixing propaganda and hurl jeremiads at Kinists are not Christians. They have become Jews, a people hardened against Christ’s reign of charity. You cannot argue or debate with such people; you can only war with them.

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:

--The Merchant of Venice

We can expect more defections from white people who either give up fighting because of cowardice or give up fighting because the white liberals have converted them with their unrelenting propaganda. But the white European of the old stock will never betray his own blood, because he is still connected, through his blood, to the older Europe whose people were united in spirit and in blood to Him. And in that Europe He still is the only King with rights of memory.

The Racial Divide

In a truly sickening age one of the most sickening spectacles to witness (at least for me) is that of a white man using the race card against a fellow white. There is black solidarity, there is brown solidarity, there is Asian solidarity, there is Aztec solidarity, but there is no white solidarity.

There are two ways that whites betray whites. The first way was illustrated recently by some liberal, white, degenerate government-something-or-other during a debate with Pat Buchanan. Buchanan, who is a milquetoast on the subject of immigration, was simply making the point that the Mexican immigration was coming too fast and that the U.S. was not going to be able to absorb the Mexicans. He was not even claiming, as he should, that we should close our borders to all Mexican immigration. The degenerate white liberal sneeringly played the race card, stating that Pat hated all non-whites and that he would not object to the immigration of people of the white race. Just once I would love to hear a white man respond to that sort of bullying with, “Yes, I would prefer that America restrict immigration to white people because they are my people and because they created this country.” But of course Pat would never say that. He very patiently stated that he was simply in favor of a slower Mexican invasion than was envisioned by the liberals. But the sneering liberal won. Pat was a racist. Case closed.
The white race needs to defend itself. But we do not have to become like the colored races to fight them. One does not have to hate, to the point of seeking their annihilation. One only has to love one’s own race.

The second way a white traitor betrays his own is by taking refuge in his ethnicity in order to betray his race. This allows the cowardly white to claim minority and victim status along with the people of color. The Irish and the Italians often are guilty of this form of betrayal.

The late Graham John, former head of the New Christian Crusade Church, had ethnicity and race in the proper order when he stated that he was European first and Welsh second. But it is very hard to resist claiming special victim status. The Scotts and the Welsh, though Celt, are lumped with the hated Anglo-Saxons and are therefore never granted victim status. And the Germans? Well, we know about those Germans. They are the only European group that is hated more than the Anglo-Saxons. Interestingly enough, the Spaniards, who are often lumped with the Puerto Ricans and Mexicans, are proud of their white European heritage and seldom claim victim status. The list goes on; you can fill it in as easily as I can. I personally agree with Thomas Dixon Jr., author of The Leopard’s Spots, when he lumps all whites together:

“Hear me, men of my race, Norman and Celt, Angle and Saxon, Dane and Frank, Huguenot and German martyr blood!

“The hour has struck when we must rise in our might, break the chains that bind us to this corruption, strike down the Negro as a ruling power, and restore to our children their birthright, which we received, a priceless legacy, from our fathers.”

Yes, that is how it should be. It is the white European against the colored hordes. And if you claim you don’t like that and you think I’m a racist, then I must tell you that you need to look at the world as it is and you will see that it matters not whether one likes it or not; this racial divide is reality. For the cultures of color certainly hate the white race and seek to destroy it. The white race needs to defend itself. But we do not have to become like the colored races to fight them. One does not have to hate, to the point of seeking their annihilation. One only has to love one’s own race. That should be motivation enough to fight for it. When will this white self-hate end? I don’t know. But it certainly would be a great blessing if we, the whites who still love whites, could dismantle the white-hating Christian churches, which are not Christian anyway, and dismantle the white-hating schools.

It is significant that the most anti-white organizations are church and school. Both those organizations are concerned with thought. And it is the mind of the white man that has gone so horribly astray. He issued divorce papers to his blood and is now a mind in search of a home. And where is home for the white man? The white man’s home is Europe, but not the Europe of Greece and Rome. This is the great and overlooked aspect of the European acceptance of Christianity. There was very little resistance to Christianity among the European tribes. When they heard the word, they embraced it. This was in marked contrast to the Greeks and Romans who clung to their pagan deities, giving only a nominal nod to the Christian God when the Roman emperor happened to be Christian. The Christian faith penetrated more deeply into the soul of the bardic Europeans than it did into the soul of the Gnostic Greco-Romans. If the European is ever to find his true home, he must purge his culture of the Greco-Roman accouterments and return to his bardic European way of perceiving existence. The village church containing the humble suffering servant represents the authentic Europe. The Sistine Chapel and the great cathedrals are magnificent and inspire awe, but they do not inspire the love that the simple chapel does. It is always to the meek and humble that the God-Man appears. And is not that the one constant theme of the European bards? Shakespeare’s forest of Arden, Scott’s heart of Midlothian, and Dostoyevsky’s tale of three brothers all point to the European way to God.

It may be that some day the colored cultures will see the virtue of European culture and convert, but before that can happen Europeans must appreciate the value of their own culture. It is not the accumulated wealth or any particular philosophy that distinguishes Europe from the colored cultures, it is the blood-relationship, which even the Greeks and Romans lacked, with the God-Man that makes the old Europe unique. And it goes without saying that meekness and humility do not exclude a fierceness in the face of evil.

I know it seems highly unlikely, when looking at the white children with green hair and rings in their noses walking home from the public schools, to believe there was once something called sacred Europe. But if one could only feel, even if just for a moment, what the older Europeans felt, then something might begin again, namely that painful and yet joyous pilgrimage that the old Europeans made from Odin to Christ. And once that journey is completed, the Europeans will rebuild the wall between the European and the cultures of color.