For Hearth, for Faith, for the Light of the World

Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. – 2 Timothy 3: 7


A Scottish minister recently proposed that 100,000 Islamic ‘refugees’ should be placed on the Isle of Skye, an island that only has an estimated population of 10,000 native-born Scots. In better times, say 50 years ago, the Scottish minister would have been sent to a madhouse and that would be the end of it. But nowadays such proposals are commonplace, and they usually become a reality. A man who was not tainted with the disease of liberalism might ask the Scottish minister a few questions, such as:

1) Why would a professed Christian allow 100,000 Moslems to invade his homeland? The answer would be that the Scottish minister is a ‘new’ Christian, a Judeo-pagan Christian, which means that he believes Christianity is a fusion of Judaism and all the pagan faiths. Thus, he is being true to his faith by inviting the Moslems into his nation

2) Where, Reverend Blasphemer, are you going to put the Moslems? The answer – We shall put them where the white Scots live.

3) Where will you put the Scottish people? Answer: We will dispose of the Scottish people.

4) How will the ‘new’ Scots sustain themselves? Answer: The rest of Britain will sustain them with their tax money.

5) What happens when there are no white Britons left to pay taxes to support Islamic refugees? Answer: I’m a cleric, a great thinker, I don’t bother myself with such mundane things.

And please don’t tell me, if you are not a Presbyterian, that your church is exempt from such blasphemies. This demonic madness has taken hold of all the churches in organized Christendom, which has become Satandom. The devil entered our churches in the guise of a rationalist. He seemed like a nice fellow because he was well dressed and very articulate. As time went by he seemed a bit unusual — his horns were showing. But still, he was very rational, and reason, we all knew, was next to Godliness. So the clerics got used to having the devil around them. And then they began to take his advice on everything. They wondered how they ever got along without him. Now, in the 21st century, the first of the non-Christian centuries in Europe, the devil rules.

Let us segue from the Scottish minister to the flood in Houston, Texas. White people are behaving nobly. They are giving aid and comfort to the victims of one of the worst natural disasters in this nation’s history. How can this be? Are not white people the evil ones, the people who must give way to the colored heathens? White people are allowed to be heroic during such natural disasters because the liberals have not yet discovered a way to ensure that natural disasters happen only to white people. If that were the case, all relief efforts for victims of natural disasters would be banned. They’d be banned because the defense and or the aid and succor of white people is racist and therefore damnable. The whites are only allowed to serve Liberaldom, which is committed to the destruction of the white race, so whites can only aid whites when whites are suffering through the same natural disasters as the colored heathen. When there are no whites left, the colored heathens will perish, because they are incapable of charitable outreach to their own people or any other people.

Whites will continue to serve Liberaldom, because they have no leadership willing to contradict the ruling liberal ethos, which states: “The good man is pure intellect. He is the psychiatrist, the theologian, the doctor of medicine, the doctor of philosophy, and the man of science.” But if man is pure intellect, then who is his master? It is the Archangel Satan, that great intellectual giant. Who is more intelligent than Satan? The end result of reason unfettered from the human heart is the worship of Satan. The Scottish preacher is an apostle of Satan. And so are they all – the men in authority in church and state throughout Europe. St. Paul warned us about such men:

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. – 2 Corinthians 11: 13-15

Doesn’t that describe our modern day clergymen who have joined with their secular liberal counterparts to make war on the living God in the name of their demon gods? The flood in Texas should be combatted, but that natural disaster pales in contrast to the man-made disaster of liberalism. Who will combat the negroization and Islamization of the European nations? It isn’t just the people of Skye who are in danger of being exterminated, it is the entire white race. And they are being exterminated by “ministers of righteousness,” the righteousness of Satan. Everything is reversed in the new church – right is wrong and wrong is right.

In the plays of Shakespeare, the works of Scott, the works of Dickens, and the European fairy tales there is a reoccurring theme – the theme of a man on the periphery of great events because he is thought to be too inconsequential to have any significant influence. In other words, he is considered a simpleton. But the simpleton steps out of the shadows at a crucial point in the drama and turns the tide for the forces of good. In Shakespeare’s Much Ado About Nothing, it is the bumbling constable, Dogberry, who brings the villains to the bar of justice, causing one of the villains to remark, “I have deceived even your very eyes. What your wisdoms could not discover, these shallow fools have brought to light…” And in King Lear it is Kent and Edgar in disguise and seemingly only minor figures who do the villains and villainesses in. Likewise in Scott’s Quentin Durward and his The Heart of Midlothian. Jeannie Deans and Quentin Durward are like unto the third dumb brothers in the fairy tales. Seemingly of no consequence, even foolish, they step forth and win the day. And Dickens? The third dumb brothers walk through his novels in a glorious quixotic parade, but none are more exemplary than Wilkins Micawber, the king of the third dumb brothers. When Uriah Heep, that evil minister of Satanic righteousness, seems like he is about to destroy Mr. Wickfield, Wilkins Micawber steps forth and produces the evidence that can convict Heep and save Mr. Wickfield. He concludes his damning indictment of Heep with the following immortal words:

I ask no more. Let it be, in justice, merely said of me, as of a gallant and eminent naval Hero, with whom I have no pretensions to cope, that what I have done, I did, in despite of mercenary and selfish objects, For England, home, and Beauty. “Remaining always, &c. &c., WILKINS MICAWBER.”

That brief montage of third dumb brothers in our literature seems like a mere bagatelle of no consequence. But that is precisely the point. Shakespeare’s plays, the novels of Scott and Dickens, and the European fairy tales are mere fairy dust in the eyes of the world. But of what does our world consist? Shakespeare, Dickens, and Scott were third dumb brothers themselves. They saw a spiritual realm inhabited by men and women with immortal souls. That made their story, the story of the European people, a story worth telling. If we have souls, if we are not just vegetable matter, what we do in this vale of tears is of eternal moment. And what we fail to do is also of eternal moment.

The Bible is shunned by some of the organized churches because they fear that it will weaken the clerics’ power over the laity. And in other organized churches the Bible has been demythologized and made into a handy dandy guide book for ‘this world only.’ But if a man goes through the Bible as if he is reading a novel or a historical work he will find something of infinite value, something that the intelligent men have yet to discover, because they have hardened their hearts against it. That something is a Man. He is the third dumb brother who breathed life into the European people. He is the heart of our hearts and the summit of all our aspirations and hopes. The new Europe, which has been forged in hell, the Europe of Satanic clergymen and fiendish hell hounds in high places, is opposed to that Man of Sorrows who was the promethean fire of the European people when they were a people.

In de la Motte Fouque’s story, Undine, he tells how the Undine acquires a soul. She acquires a soul when her heart is pierced with love and compassion for a human being. The European people have reversed the process of the Undine: they have divested themselves of their souls by denying their humanity. If this sounds too dark, or too extreme, just look at the negroization and Islamization of the European nations. People with souls, people with hearts of flesh, do not allow that to happen. When we accept the intellectual Christians’ faith in pure intellect and deny the truth that was bred in the bone of our Christian ancestors – that our racial identity is an essential part of our soul – we lose our souls and become Undines.

The Light of the World is dependent — He has willed that dependence — on His people to make his Light shine. He works through us. Satan has willed, through his people, who are the liberals and the colored heathens, the destruction of the light shining in darkness. That is what the race war is all about. Will the ancient ‘image of God in man’ culture of the antique Europeans be eradicated from the face of the earth? Or will the people who saw a great light rise up and become Europeans, the people of God, once again? It seems ludicrous to even suggest that the Europeans will not be completely destroyed when you look at the naked horror of Liberaldom. Everything stemming from old Europe is proscribed. And what used to be the unspoken, underlying passion behind all the liberal clergymen’s and academics’ sermons and lectures, the destruction of the white race, is openly preached in the pulpits, taught in the classrooms and shouted from the rooftops of Liberaldom. What can be done in the face of such a monolith of evil? The European people should become like unto the third dumb brothers of European fairyland. With absolutely nothing but our faith in the Man of Sorrows we should step out of the shadows and fight for our racial hearth fire. Are we likely to succeed? No, we are not. But whether we win or lose in the temporal realm, we will have achieved a great victory, we will have reclaimed our souls. God’s people will once again be able to say that they have seen a great light. How can we be Europeans, how can we be men, without the light that shineth in darkness? +

Posted in Christ the Hero, Europe as the Christ-bearer, fairy tale of European civilization, Third Dumb Brother | Tagged , , ,

The Devils of Liberaldom

And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way. And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time? And there was a good way off from them an herd of many swine feeding. So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine. And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters. Matthew 8: 28-32


Trump is hated by the hard left because he is not proceeding according to the ‘Some are more equal’ doctrine of the Jacobin-Marxist left. And he is ‘disappointing’ classical liberals such as Ann Coulter and Ann Corcoran because he is not doing what they think is necessary to ‘restore’ our American republic. But the classical liberals do not understand what is going on. What they call the democratic process is an invention of the devil. Our nation was conceived by men determined to destroy the image of God in man, and was allowed to spread its Satanism through the world by classical liberals (now called conservatives) who thought that men only needed an abstract God that could be pulled out of a God-box on holidays and other special occasions, and then put back in the box during regular working days, because the classical liberals hold that it is self-evident that rational men can work things out for themselves without reference to a fairy-tale God.

Trump will never set the American republic right within the confines of democracy, because democracy is from the devil. But Trump has done much – he has slowed down the liberal juggernaut. Who else could have done that? Certainly not Romney, Bush, or Ann Coulter and Co.? And he has made it possible, by bringing all the liberals out of their lairs to spew their venom at him, for all those who have not been morally anesthetized to see the liberals for what they are – the spawns of Satan. Now, most Europeans have been morally anesthetized so they cannot see the liberals for what they are, but is that Trump’s fault?

The Christian Europeans have been completely routed by the liberals. They are fleeing the battlefield in disarray with a relentless enemy on their trail. Trump has volunteered to offer his services as a rear guard to cut down on the causalities. It ill behooves us to criticize anything he does, because whatever he does it is more than anybody else has offered to do for the European people. If we had a non-satanic government, if liberals were not spawns of Satan, we could write editorials and books in which we disagreed with Trump and told him he should do this rather than that. But this is war. Stop treating the rear guard as a failed general and commend him for his efforts. There can be no victory in rearguard actions, but we can take advantage of them to go home, lick our wounds, and prepare for another assault on the enemy. Actually, in the case of the modern Europeans, we have to say, ‘Prepare for a first assault,’ because they have not yet begun to fight.

Trump’s inauguration speech in which he said that we have one heart, one home, and one glorious destiny set him apart from the antique Europeans such as myself. But it placed him well within the confines of classical liberalism. Why then do the classical liberals dislike Trump more than I do? It is because the conservative-liberals think politics, like religion, is an abstract theory. They do not believe that there is anything in politics or religion that cannot be explained by a rational process. So whenever anyone, regardless of the fact that he is one of their own, goes against their abstract theories they attack him. From my standpoint, Trump belongs with Andrew Jackson and Teddy Roosevelt. They were men with a terribly flawed universalist ideal, but they had a remnant of white pietas. Which is not good enough to win a war, but it deserves to be acknowledged and respected when all the other classical liberals are completely devoid of white pietas. Of what does that remnant of pietas consist? On one issue, that of economic nationalism, Jackson, T. Roosevelt, and Trump broke ranks with the classical liberals. Jackson attacked the national bank, and T. Roosevelt broke the trusts. And now Trump is challenging North Korea and China, which makes the corporate socialists hysterical. Trump has infuriated the hard left for not honoring the ‘more equal’ doctrine, and he has infuriated the conservatives for not honoring the one world, one economy doctrine of classical liberalism. And if Trump is hated for opposing only one aspect of liberalism, then what must the liberals’ hatred be for a Christian European who opposes them in everything?

And this brings us to the real issue. The Trump-Brexit battles are skirmishes within Liberaldom. The real war is between those who adhere to Christian Europe and those who have chosen to align themselves with Liberaldom. On the one side, the liberal side, is the hard left, the classical liberals (conservatives), the alternative right, and organized Christian Jewry. On the right is – is there a Christian European right wing? Not at present. Most Europeans were once Christian and they were right wing – they wanted to preserve their people and the institutions that stemmed from their faith in Jesus Christ. But classical liberalism, which was created by Satan, allowed the European people to slide into liberalism. Hawthorne’s Mr. Smooth-it-away (see Hell on Earth) is the classical liberal. Without directly challenging Jesus Christ, classical liberals subvert Him by making Him subordinate to a rational process of their own devising. The process varies, which is why there are so many contending factions within Liberaldom, but it is always the process that men must adhere to; it is not the living God.

If faith consists of an adherence to an intellectual formula and not to a God who enters human hearts, then you can defend the Faith by defending an intellectual process while abandoning the people who took God into their hearts. ‘He isn’t there,’ the great intellectual Christians tell us, ‘He exists in our minds. If you trust us, we will bring you safely home.’ Of course the home that the classical liberals are taking us to is the same home that the hard left liberals are going to – it is called hell.

Burke pointed out that the French clergy, who were more concerned about their process than a man’s faith in Christ, helped pave the way for the French Revolution. Dostoyevsky made the same point 100 years later when his Grand Inquisitor accuses Christ of thinking too much of man. Man, the Grand Inquisitor insists, does not want to struggle toward the light by following the way of the cross, he wants to exchange the cross for earthly guarantees of bread and security. Will this always be the case with the European people? Will they always prefer the faith of the clerical Grand Inquisitors to faith in Christ? It seems so. But it was not always thus. The early European Christians did not shun the cross of Christ, they were like unto Thomas Nelson Page’s depiction of the heroic Goth:

On the instant stood revealed, as though he had blown down the ages, a pure Goth, unchanged in any essential since his fathers had left their forests and through all obstacles, even through ranks of Roman legionaries, sword in hand had hewn their way straight to the goal of their desires. He was a Goth in all his appetites and habits, a Goth unchanged, unfettered. True to his instincts, true to his traditions, fearing nothing, loving only his own, loving and hating with all his heart—a Goth.

-Thomas Nelson Page in Under the Crust

What happened to us? A hard stone can become a smooth pebble over time if a steady stream of water runs over it. For years our clergymen poured rationalist pap over the faithful until their souls were smoothed away. They are now reasonable human beings incapable of loving or hating with all their heart, but quite capable of following the injunctions of the clerical wise men who enjoin them, in the name of a rationalist God, to go beyond love and hate to…? To what? Paradise? Or is it to hell?

The hard left is incapable of love, but they can still hate, which is why they always defeat the classical liberals. Kipling wrote, wistfully, of the time when “The English begin to hate.” Would that were true of the white, Christian Europeans: To hate the devil and all his works. Are not the liberals and the colored heathen the work of the devil? Of course they are, but the classical liberal does not believe in the devil. He believes in reason. But our Lord did believe in the devil, and He enjoined us to fight the devil. When did rational men decide that Christ was a bad theologian?

I constantly hear classical liberals asking, when they look at what the radical left is doing, ‘What is going on — how can they do these things?’ If wishes were horses, then beggars would ride. I wish that the conservative-liberals would take the story of the demon-possessed swine seriously. It’s a curious thing: the best of our poets have a very immoderate, extreme view of life that is in line with the Gospels while the literary critics and theologians always seek to modify or condemn such ‘extremism.’ Thus, Burke is seen as ‘obsessive’ for saying that the French Revolution was from the devil. And poets such as Shakespeare, Scott, and Dostoyevsky are considered extreme and or fantastical when they take the devil seriously. But whose vision fits the reality of the world we see before us? Do we live in the classical liberals’ world of reasonable men working out their problems within some mind-forged, man-made process? Or are the Christian poets right – do we live in a world in which men and women, inspired by Satan, seek to strike God by destroying his image in man? The Satanism of modern Liberaldom and the insufficiency of reason to deal with that Satanism was brought home to me in my early twenties when I was involved in what was called the ‘pro-life’ movement. While passing out literature at malls and doing sidewalk protests at the abortion clinics, I came to realize the terrible insufficiency of the ‘Give them the information about the unborn children’ approach. That was not the issue; the women getting abortions knew what they were doing. They were acting according to the will of a spirit who was opposed to Christ’s reign of charity; they were acting according to the dictates of the evil one, who prowls about the world seeking the ruin of souls.

Christian Europe was not lacking in heroic men and women who dedicated their lives to the resistance of the evil one and the support of His reign of charity. Today we have no heroes willing to oppose Satan and support Christ. Why? Once Christendom became Satandom through the mediation of the ‘smooth it away’ rationalists in the church, the men and women of Europe had no star to guide them. Human beings respond to their leaders. When the European leadership bent their knees to Christ so did the European people. Heroism became commonplace, because the European everyman did not have to have exceptional vision; his vision was bred in the bone – it was part and parcel of his everyday life. But once the Christian leadership of a society is replaced by Satan’s minions, Christian heroism becomes very rare. There are still brave men and women, but lacking a moral vision they put themselves at the service of Satan. Nothing is more pathetic than the ‘support our troops’ occasions which take place on a regular basis. Support our troops? To do what? Are they going to place a Christian king on the throne? And shouldn’t we support our local police? Again, I must ask – why should we support our police? If I shoot an abortionist, will the police come to my aid? If I organize a vigilante committee to take care of the marauding bands of colored heathens, will the police come to my aid or will they come to the aid of the colored heathens? People, in the main, will reserve their heroism for respectable, state-approved heroism. When a nation state has a satanic government, your “heroes” will be heroes of Satandom.

What has been lost? A culture in which even the worst of sinners knew who was the cornerstone of their world. And the best of that culture were heroes who fought the heathens and supported His reign of charity. Once lost, can such a world be regained? Not from within Satandom. If we are true to our origins, if we don’t look to classical liberalism as an antidote to Jacobin liberalism, we will find the strength and the will to endure to the end in spite of the liberal armies that are arrayed against us. That is the promise of Europe’s morning star:

Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. – Luke 21: 26-28 +

Posted in Christian counter-attack, democracy, post-Christian rationalism | Tagged

The End of Classical Liberalism

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

-King Lear

Let us begin with Burke:

Men are rarely without some sympathy in the sufferings of others; but in the immense and diversified mass of human misery, which may be pitied, but cannot be relieved, in the gross, the mind must make a choice. Our sympathy is always more forcibly attracted towards the misfortunes of certain persons, and in certain descriptions: and this sympathetic attraction discovers, beyond a possibility of mistake, our mental affinities, and elective affections. –Letters on a Regicide Peace

My sympathy is with the young man who was attacked by the left wing Satanists. Whether his counterattack was in self-defense – the Marxists were throwing bricks – or whether the young man was launching a punitive strike against the liberals – they have been killing whites through their colored henchmen for over fifty years – the attack was completely justified. It is regrettable that he only killed one of the liberal protestors. And it is tragic that he will be prosecuted for murder, when he should be awarded a medal for courage under fire. As for the police officers? It is regrettable that they chose to serve the Satanic government of the United States of America instead of their own people. They are to blame for their own deaths, not the white nationalist protestors.

What do we make of the white “Christian” clergymen who vehemently denounced the white nationalist protestors? We should call them what they are – they are Judases, one and all. What are they defending? They are defending the incarnation of Satan within the heart of what was formerly Christian Europe. There are no words harsh enough to describe them.  No atrocities committed against whites are ever condemned; they treat the perpetrators of the atrocities with “loving forgiveness.” But there cannot be and there must not be any mercy extended to the whites who try to defend themselves against the liberal/colored barbarian onslaught. “Your children, your wives, and your people all must be sacrificed to the great gods of color.” So say our Judeo-Pagan clergymen. Do such creatures really speak for Christ? No, they do not. They speak for Satan.

When the alternative right first emerged on the Internet, I read a number of their writings and was saddened by the content. I was saddened because they were not attacking Liberaldom in the name of Christ, they were attacking Liberaldom in the name of paganism, which placed them solidly within the confines of liberalism. They opposed the new-age liberals as Hitler opposed communism – they were the nationalist lefties vs. the universalist lefties. Their movement must turn toward Christ if it is to have any hope of surviving and thriving. There is no sustaining faith in a mere reaction to the insolent, hate-filled system of the liberals. We need to see the Cross of Christ over Europe once again, not the various banners of the white pagans.

I once followed a young man who had all sorts of Nazi and neo-pagan bumper stickers on his truck. When he pulled into the super-market parking lot, I got out of my car and approached him. In a non-confrontational manner I asked him about his beliefs. Not surprisingly he had no beliefs that dove-tailed with the antique Europeans. He hated liberals, he hated Jews, and he hated Christians. I endeavored to point out to him that Christianity was not compatible with liberalism or Judaism, but he was not to be ‘taken in.’ I felt like I was talking to the dwarfs from C.S. Lewis’s The Last Battle:

“That’s right,” said the other Dwarfs. “We’re on our own now. No more Aslan, no more Kings, no more silly stories about other worlds. The Dwarfs are for the Dwarfs.”

There you have it. When will this terrible separation between the neo-pagan and his Christian ancestors end? Never? Or will the alternative right convert at the last trump (no pun intended)? They, the alternative right, have some good instincts: they hate the mad-dog liberal branch of Liberaldom, but they also hate our people, the men and women of Christian Europe. Maybe if we, the European Christians, stay faithful to our Lord and our people, some members of the alternative right might find their true home with the Christ of old Europe.

We have already, off this stage, established that there are no European conservatives; there are no Burkean conservatives who want to conserve the European people and their Christian civilization. The new conservatives are liberals. And their far-left cousins are the hard left, or if you prefer, the Marxists. The hard left have a tried and true battle plan that always defeats the milk-toast conservatives. Whenever they kill whites, they immediately blame the whites for bringing their own deaths upon themselves. “They were racist, therefore they deserved to die,” is the constant refrain of the hard left. Whenever, which is very seldom, the whites fight back and kill a colored heathen or a member of the Jacobin hard left, the Jacobins demand the heads of the white defenders, apologies from every “conservative” white, and more draconian laws designed to speed up the destruction of the white race. They always get what they demand, because the conservative whites are not conservative; they believe in the same liberal gods as the hard left. Their differences with the hard left are procedural, not religious.

If the conservatives were not of Liberaldom, if they were Christians opposed to the reign of Satan, they would not apologize to the liberals when a white man rises up against the liberal leviathan; they would tell the Jacobins that more violence was on the way and then act on their threat. That is what it will take for white people to halt the extermination process. The liberals preach, “By whatever means necessary.” The whites’ response must be, “By whatever means necessary, within the boundaries of Christian chivalry. And the defense of one’s kith and kin is within those boundaries.”(1)

The recent protests in Charlottesville highlighted the futility of white protest. When you protest, you must ask yourself to whom you are protesting. Are the powers that be likely to be receptive to your protest or are they going to use the protest to identify their enemies and take action against them? You know, or at least you should know by now, that liberal governments view any protest against their Jacobin governments as opportunities to crush their enemies. They videotape the protests and then either jail the protestors or find means to deprive them of their livelihood.(2) Does this mean that whites should give up? No, it means whites should change tactics. They should eschew public non-violent protests in preference for quiet, secretive, punitive raids. Peaceful protests are part of the democratic process. When the democratic process has become a totalitarian process, you can’t accomplish anything by protests. Witness the failure of the pro-life movement.

Whites will not meet the Jacobin’s violence with a violence of their own, because they have allowed the hard left to set the terms of engagement. These are the terms: “You, the white man, must never preach or practice violence against the Jacobin elite, because we are the true liberals, we are the arbiters of what is right and what is wrong.” And even when the conservatives accept those terms — actually it is because the conservatives accept those terms — the hard left continues to destroy them by any means necessary.

What we are witnessing in this assault, which well may be the final assault of the hard left against the white race, is the death of classical liberalism. The Tucker Carlsons and the Paul Joseph Watsons completely refute the hard left’s stances on every issue under the sun. But that does not make any difference to the lefties. They are not moved by reason. What will move them? Nothing. The young man with the truck is on the right track. The Jacobins will not be swayed by appeals to reason or appeals to charity. It should be done unto them as they are doing unto the white race.

Dostoyevsky’s Underground Man knew the deficiency of classical liberalism. ‘Suppose you build your perfect world in a glass palace and I come along and smash it just because I want to smash it?’ Classical liberalism presupposes that we are all reasonable people who can sit around and reason out our problems. The classical liberal gives a nod to Christianity as a religion, but he downplays the ‘irrational’ message at the heart of Christianity. He, like the medieval scholastic who spawned rationalism, does not think reason is tainted with original sin. How could it be, when it can do such wonderful things? We need to turn to the Gospels, to St. Paul, Shakespeare, Dostoyevsky, and the European fairy tales as an antidote to classical liberalism. It is there that we find depth. We find God, the devil, and “unaccommodated man” struggling against all the forces of hell, armed only with his vision of the Man of Sorrows to sustain him.

In most of the 20th century dystopian novels (Kipling’s story and Orwell’s novels excepted), the authors depict right-wing totalitarian governments that enslave mankind. But it was Kipling and Orwell who got it right. There has never, in the history of European man, been a crueler, all-encompassing, totalitarian control of mankind than the Jacobin’s control of the European people. Through the use of vast technological communication networks such as Google, the left has built a monopoly on thought. They exercise a mind-control more powerful than anything conceived by the fiction writers. With machine-like precision, the mills of Jacobin liberalism grind human souls into nothingness, and there seems to be no force on earth that can stop the great liberal machine.

Rapunzel’s tears restored her lover’s sight. Christ’s divine charity restored the sight of fallen man. It is in humanity, in the charity that is contained in the blood of our Savior and the compassionate tears of our loved ones, that we will find the strength to destroy the great liberal machine that bestrides the world like a mechanical Colossus of Rhodes. There is indeed providence in the fall of a sparrow. We don’t know how such things can be, but we know, through the faith that stems from love, that the great liberal world, the world of the Google monster, feminist harpies, colored heathen, and Jacobin diabolists will fall. It will fall when we believe what St. Paul believed – that “the foolishness of God is wiser than the wisdom of men.”

What is the foolishness of God? Those men on the Titanic who went to their deaths singing “Nearer My God to Thee” knew what the foolishness of God was. It was and is the Cross of Christ. It is only possible to believeth all things and hopeth all things if you possess the charity of honor that our European ancestors believed to be the all-in-all of existence. Burke wielded the sword of charity against the French Jacobins, and we should wield that same sword against the modern Jacobins. The moral beauty of Jesus Christ’s quixotic death on the cross inspired our European ancestors to love and hate with all their heart. They loved Christ and hated the devil. When we do likewise, forsaking the tepid waters of classical liberalism for the tempest-tossed waters of passion, a passion connected to His passion, we will not be borne down by the tidal wave of liberalism. We will rise again as a people, just as Christ rose again on the third day. +


(1) The liberals have a great advantage over the Christian Europeans in that their master, who is Satan, proscribes no boundaries. He has no honor, and he encourages his subjects to spit on all honor codes that stem from Christian Europe. Thus the liberal will fight without honor and extend no mercy to his white victims. The Christian European must fight with that charity of honor, which is a practical disadvantage. But that disadvantage is offset by the passionate intensity that is gained by an adherence to His code of honor.

(2) Many men have lost their jobs as a result of their participation in the Charlottesville protests. No protestor from the left lost his or her job. Only the white protestors lost their jobs. This is the same thing that happens in France, Germany, Britain, and every other European nation when whites try to seek redemption from the devil.

Posted in antique Christianity, Christian counter-attack, counterrevolution, Europeans and Christ, Jacobinism | Tagged , ,

The European Heart Renewed

O here, where late our little city stood,
And now this desolation darkens us,
Friends, with a rapid hand and heart renewed,
Building, once more uprear we root and tower,
And make ourselves a realm.

-George Francis Savage-Armstrong


The essential thing that Burke wanted his countrymen and all of Europe to understand about the French Revolution was that it was something entirely different from a European palace revolution. It was not a replacement of one Christian king for another Christian king, it was the enthronement of a new religion, a satanic religion, in what had once been a Christian nation. The forces of irreligion were always present in every European nation, but they were not embodied in an organized government until the French Revolution. Robespierre’s death did not halt the Jacobin revolution; it spread throughout Europe, and eventually every nation of Europe adopted the anti-Christian system of government of the French Jacobins. Until we do what the Europeans of Burke’s day failed to do – kill the Jacobin dragon – we will continue to live in the hell of religious and racial diversity.

Jacobinism is paganism writ large. Through the use of our natural reason we come to a belief in nature and nature’s god. The Israelites were Jacobins before the Jacobins when they returned to Baal when Moses went up to the mountain to speak with God. Every revolt against the living God is a return to paganism. Does man have a stronger inclination to rebel against God than to seek God? It certainly seems so. But we shouldn’t go with the Puritans who claimed that a sinful defiance of God is the all in all of man. There is the Europeans’ struggle as a people. Even if we must concede that their history is largely like the history of the Hebrew people, a history of a flight from God, we must, if we are seeking the truth, see that there was a genuine yearning for the living God, for Jesus Christ, in the hearts of the European people. We cannot sit in our study with our scholarly tomes and say there can never be such a thing as a Christian people, while we have proof to the contrary staring us in the face when we look at the European people and take them for all in all.

Ironically it was the missionary efforts toward the non-white people of the world that ushered in the demise of Christian Europe. The European missionaries set out to Christianize the colored races, but the colored races ended up paganizing the white race. The negroization and the Islamization of the un-United States of America and Europe is the result of the implantation of the natural, rational religion of the Jacobins through the medium of the natural colored races. When the missionaries came to evangelize the coloreds, they found that the colored people had gods, they were not atheists. So they sought to emphasize the similarities between Christianity and the heathen faiths, thus blurring the distinction between the religion of Jesus Christ and the religion of Satan. God did not say, “Do not be an atheist,” He said, “Thou shall have no other gods before me.” Solomon didn’t ruin the Israelites because he denounced God, he ruined the Israelites because he built temples to the heathen gods as well as the one true God. So it was with the European missionaries. They became the European conduits to paganism, because they failed to keep the distinctiveness of the religion that made the Suffering Servant its cornerstone before their eyes. They lost the vision of Christ in the mire of the natural religions. Today we have been entirely engulfed by the heathen faiths, and no one from the ranks of the Christian clergy will speak out against them, because to do so would indicate that the anti-heathen was a racist and therefore damned. “For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” Once the “Christian” clergy made racial diversity their top priority, they were consumed by the liberal leviathan. If your message is a mere echo of liberalism, why do you need to exist at all? The churches are now just an ‘Amen chorus’ for the rulers of Liberaldom. “Diversity is Godly, the colored masses are the people,” the liberals proclaim. “Amen,” respond the church men.

The liberals have a symbiotic relationship with the colored heathens. They, the liberals, need the colored heathens in order to return to paganism. Why can’t they make that transition on their own? They must have conduits to paganism, because when a European rejects Christ he has placed himself into a state of non-being. He has forsaken his God, and now he is alone in the universe. Twentieth century art, when it is not a paean to the gods of color, is an ode to nothingness. That is the key. An apostate European must cling to some God to keep him from the void, so he goes whoring after the heathen gods of color. Do those gods sustain him? The drug and alcohol-related deaths and the increasing suicide rate among white people indicates that the gods of diversity cannot sustain the European people. But still, they must have gods, so they will cling to them to the last gasp.

Do the colored heathen need white liberals? They might say they do not need white people, but they do need them. They need them as a predatory animal needs his prey. If there were no white people, upon whom would the colored heathen prey? Each other? Certainly, but there is not much to prey upon in the black and brown civilizations. Once the whites have done their jobs, once they have self-destructed, what will become of the colored heathens? They will have no worshipful whites to sustain them, and they will prey upon each other until they all perish.

The conservatives in church and state have not been able to conserve Christian Europe, because they failed to take into account the human factor. Which is truly astonishing and unforgivable considering that they claimed, at least intellectually, to believe in a God who became man. But if you view man as intellect alone, you will not know man nor will you know the God-Man. Man is deeper than his intellect. He has a heart that is capable, when it is stirred, of seeing more than mere reason can comprehend. T. S. Eliot, in his book on Christian culture makes a rational case for the necessity of a religiously based culture. But his rational case is worthless without that which must precede reason – faith in Jesus Christ. And how does one obtain faith? St. Paul tells us that “faith worketh by love.” And that brings us back to our mysterious human relationships, to our ties to our kith and kin. It is now a given in Churchianity that blood ties are antithetical to faith. That is a lie, a lie that is used to cover up the Europeans’ flight from God. Chateaubriand is right: man is much more tainted with the sins of the intellect than with sins stemming from the heart. The intellectual man seeks to avoid the passionate God of love, because passion is painful. And the way to avoid the passionate God is to avoid all things human – to avoid all ties to your family and your race. Thus white pietas, which leads to the love of the European Christ, is regarded as sinful, and the worship of the colored heathen and the hatred of the white race becomes the creed of the new fusionist Christian of the 21st century.

In the best of his mystery novels, The House of the Arrow, A. E. W. Mason’s protagonist, the detective Hanaud, asks who will speak for the woman who has been murdered. Who cares enough about her to hunt down the murderer? The answer is that he, Hanaud, cares, and he will hunt down the murderer:

“But—you will pardon me—I am not thinking of you”—and there was so much quietude and gravity in the detective’s voice that his words, harsh though they were , carried with them no offense. “No, I am thinking of a woman more than double the age of either of you, whose unhappy life came to an end here on the night of the 27th of April. I am remembering two photographs which you, Mademoiselle Harlowe, showed me this morning—I am moved by them. Yes, that is the truth.”

He closed his eyes as if he saw those two portraits with their dreadful contrast impressed upon his eyelids. “I am her advocate,” he cried aloud in a stirring voice. “The tragic woman, I stand for her! If she was done to death, I mean to know and I mean to punish!”

Our people have been murdered and no one cares about avenging their murder, because church and state have decreed that they were not murdered, they were legally executed for crimes against the religion of nature. They were racists, sexists, and non-intellectual Christians, which meant that they were against the fusionist Christianity of the intellectual Christians. But no matter what the powers of this world say against them, I do not see criminals when I look at the antique Europeans. I see men and women to whom I owe a debt that can never be repaid. They loved much, and as a result they were bound to Him in faith. “Bear but a touch of my hand, there,” pointing to his heart, says the Ghost of Christmas Past. And then Scrooge is able to see the past in a new light, in the light of Christ. When we touch their hearts, we touch, through them, the heart of the living God. We should never leave them, we should never seek to make peace with their murderers. Who will stand for them? I will.

If you stand with the antique Europeans against the principalities and powers of Liberaldom, you will be condemned as they were condemned. In that condemnation we hear the same voices that condemned our Lord. Can’t we, through our fidelity to Christian Europe, say, “Yes, I know that Man!” +

Posted in antique Christianity, defense of the white race, Jacobinism | Tagged

The Horror and Blasphemy of Liberalism

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord. – Luke 13: 34-35


Recently a friend asked me what I thought of the Adamite theory, which, according to my friend, is the theory that it is only white people who are direct descendants of Adam. The rest of mankind are non-Adamites, who are… I’m not quite clear who they are. And the reason I’m not clear on that point is because I never could plow my way through the various books on the subject. But I bring up the Adamite subject to come to the main point of conflict between a European Christian and the modern liberals, both secular and clerical: To me, as a European Christian, it seems obvious that there has only been one Christian people and that is the European people. There is such a difference between the people of old Europe and the people of the non-white cultures that it lends credence to the Adamite theorists. But it is not necessary to accept that theory in order to acknowledge that the living God was at the center of non-diverse, white Europe, and He was not at the center of colored heathendom nor is He at the center of modern Liberaldom.

Our Lord says, in St. John, chapter 15, verse 26, “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the father, even the spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me.” Why are the intellectual Christians who worship the negro not interested in the truth? Have they rejected the Comforter? It seems that they have. And without the Holy Ghost how can we know Christ? We must not rely on our abstract reason to guide us through life rather than the Holy Ghost. Our reason will always lead us away from the truth and toward the father of all lies. Look what has happened to European people once they made abstract reason their father, science their Holy Ghost, and the negro their Son of God. What then was my response to the question about the Adamites? I told my friend that all I know is that I see the face of Jesus Christ in old Europe. I do not see His face in modern Europe nor in the people of color at any time in their histories.

There is no mercy, no charity, no love, and no honor in the modern world, because the European intelligentsia in church and state persist in deifying the heathens of color while demonizing the antique Europeans. I don’t need to believe that the European people are the only descendants of Adam or the true Hebrews to know that they are the Christ-bearing people. I know they are the Christ-bearing people, because of the moral beauty of the culture they created in the name of Christ the Lord. Neither historical research, church documents, nor the Bible itself will convince the willfully blind, those who reject the spirit of truth, that the European Christ is the living God. Maybe that is why our Lord said that blasphemy against the Holy Ghost would not be forgiven. If we forsake the comforter we have forsaken Christ.

The creation of Christian Europe was something that St. Augustine said could never happen. There was the city of God, which was the organized church, and there was the city of man, which was the European people. In St. Augustine’s mind, the people, those who believed in Christ, could never be the true church. But he was wrong. The organization, the system, what Augustine called the City of God, can never be the true Church. Tennyson got it right:

Our little systems have their day;
They have their day and cease to be;
They are but broken lights of thee,
And thou, O Lord, art more than they.

Is He more than they? Is He more than the organized Christian Jewry of the Roman Catholic Church and its auxiliary Protestant branches? Yes, He is more than they. The Christian churches have gone over to the pagan faiths – they have made Islam and negro worship part of the Christian faith. And by doing so they have made it clear that they have sided with the enemy of mankind against Christ’s church, which consists of all those who have circumcised their hearts so that they can “receive Him still.” The 20th century existentialists such as Camus, Sartre, and Beckett proclaimed that, “God is dead.” But it was not the living God who died, it was a man-made system that died. The computer print-out God who was the product of the computations of great minds — that god died. But the Son of God? He still lives and He shall still be living after the new church of Islam and the negro has had its day. It only remains to be seen whether there will be any hearts of flesh left on earth, hearts that still adhere to His word. “When the Son of Man returns will He find faith on earth?”

It doesn’t appear that Christ will find faith on earth when He returns, but the age of prophecy is over; we do not know with any certainty that the European people will remain adamantly opposed to the Light of the World. We do know that the modern Europeans have left Christian Europe behind. The liberals show their hatred of Christ by their hatred of all things stemming from old Europe, and the grazers show their indifference to Christ by their complete indifference to incarnate Europe. The Europeans’ descent into hell has been a terrible thing to witness. And they seem determined to continue their descent until they reach the bottom-most level where they will embrace the devil in all his satanic glory. Will they feel any revulsion? No, I don’t think a feminist or a mad-dog liberal who takes such pleasure in our modern hell on earth can feel uncomfortable with the devil. Such individuals will have gotten what they set out to find, a world of darkness, devoid of light. And the grazers? Will their spiritually dead nerve endings suddenly revive at the sight of the devil? Will they cry out to the God of Mercy whom they ignored during their lives? I don’t know, but I do know that He will extend mercy to anyone who calls on Him by name. But can a man call on Him by name if He has rejected the Holy Ghost?

It is unfortunate that Christian mysticism has become a specialized study of Gnosticized Europeans who bid us look to a seven-point plan that we use to reach a higher level of mystical contemplation. Christian mysticism should not imitate the contemplative systems of the Asians. True Christian mysticism is unique, it is the better way that St. Paul describes in 1 Corinthians 13. It is charity, the charity that is at the center of old Europe, which inspired our greatest poets, artists, and musicians, and it is what our people saw, even if they only saw it through a glass darkly, as the mystical heart of existence. The European people rejected the esoteric systems of the pagans for the divine charity of Jesus Christ. His charity was greater than the magic of paganism.

I believe it was Blake who said that if mankind did not have the religion of Jesus Christ, they would have the religion of the devil. The modern European people are not unbelievers; they believe in the gods of Liberaldom. And belief in those gods precludes a belief in the God whose divine charity redeemed the world. We can’t get to Him by way of any system conceived by man. In point of fact, all our systems, which have their day, take us to hell. But we can get to Him through charity, the charity that is born and nurtured at our racial hearth fire.

Diversity is spiritual death, it destroys the image of God in man. The push toward diversity, which means the destruction of the white race, is the liberals’ religion. They must join, body and soul, with the colored races in order to eradicate the living God from the face of the earth. The mask is off. If the European people had not been morally anesthetized, they would not be able to look on modern Europe without a horror too deep for words. Conrad’s Kurtz said, “The Horror, the Horror.” What Kurtz saw was nothing compared to the Horror of modern Liberaldom, for modern liberalism is the continual reenactment of the crucifixion of Christ. (1) Everything stemming from Christian Europe is demonized, and every white European, even if they denounce Christ and most particularly if they do not denounce Christ, is crucified. That is a horror beyond horror, because it is the incarnation of Satan over the ruins of Christian Europe.

What is to be done then? Our Lord tells us to, “seek and ye shall find.” But what should we seek? Should we seek the wisdom that comes from special revelations of the blessed mother? Should we seek knowledge of the end times by parsing the Book of Revelation and merging Christianity with Judaism? Or should we seek the wisdom of liberalism and blend Christ with Islam and the negro? Almighty God, forbid it! There is a magic talisman, but it is not esoteric wisdom. It is to be found in charity. The men with hearts of flesh will find the one true God at their racial hearth fire where that charity of honor is born and nurtured. All other ways to God end in ruin. Look at the ‘conservative’ Joe Scarborough, who started his political career as an intellectual conservative, a man who wanted to conserve systems rather than his people. He ended up a mad-dog liberal who divorced his lawful wife in order to marry an unwoman, a feminist from hell. And then there is Francis Schaeffer. He was a great intellectual Christian, but he refused to defend the Christ of the European hearth fire, thus opening the way for a diverse God who gave his blessing to modernity. Schaeffer’s son Franky went from intellectual Christianity to mad-dog liberalism. And from that Olympian height he apologized to the feminist Rachel Maddow for the sins of his father. Every denial of the essential truth that was at the center of old Europe – that Christ entered into the heart and soul of the European people – is an assault on His reign of charity in the name of the evil one. So long as we are too worldly wise and too fearful of the racist label to ask Christ, the Christ of old Europe, to abide with us by our racial hearth fire, we will continue to be ruled by liberals and colored heathens who have no mercy. The former have renounced the God of mercy and the latter never knew Him. +

(1) Kurtz looked into his soul and saw the evil that he, as a man, was capable of. But Marlow, Conrad’s alter ego, said that it was something to have judged. Kurtz was a moral pariah, but he could still see the evil within his soul and call it evil. The liberal looks into his own satanic soul and sees sanctity. He is incapable of recognizing evil as evil. And that is a descent into the deepest pit of hell. The liberals have done it! They have become like unto Satan himself. The horror, the horror.

Posted in Charity, Europe as the Christ-bearer | Tagged ,

The Hatred of the World

If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also. But all these things will they do unto you for my name’s sake, because they know not him that sent me. If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin. He that hateth me hateth my Father also. If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father. But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause. But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.
John 15: 18-27

There was nothing unusual about the recent incident in Florida where a group of black youths stood by laughing as a black man drowned, screaming for help. Those black youths were not aberrations, some hideous offshoot of the sacred black race. No, indeed, those blacks were a microcosm of the entire black race. The decent black, the Uncle Remus black, is the aberration. The black youths’ cruelty is indicative of the cruelty of all the colored races. They are devoid of mercy. And those people, the people devoid of mercy, are the people that the liberals bid us worship and pay homage to by handing our nations over to them. The colored problem and the Moslem problem are from the same root. Islam, Hinduism, and the other pagan unfaiths are merely organized, merciless, colored heathenism. When liberals join their hearts with the colored heathens and put their science, their police, their military, their government, their doctors, and their educational institutions at the service of the colored heathen, they join the people who have no mercy. And they have joined the people who have not mercy, because they hate Jesus Christ. Let us keep that fact always before our eyes. While there are many varied groups within Liberaldom, many of which are opposed to each other, the one unifying passion of all the contending groups is their hatred of Jesus Christ. If you fail to understand that, you will be forever at the mercy of the liberals who manage to survive and thrive because of the spiritual blindness of the white grazers.

Our Lord said that we would be hated by the world and bid us take comfort in the fact that the world “hated me before it hated you.” What kind of comfort is that? Who wants to be hated by the world? Our European ancestors were not afraid to be hated by the world. If you tell me that it was easy for them to be Christians because they were in the majority I would disagree. Whites have always been a minority vis-à-vis the world. And even within European nations the white Christians were in the minority at first. They, the whites who bent their knees to Christ, held the pagan world at bay because they loved Christ and hated the devil. Our modern intellectual Christians tell us that we must not antagonize the liberals by defending the indefensible, which is the antique Europeans. But why are they indefensible? Because they were racist and sexist? Yes, that is what it usually comes down to. A people who loved their own and protected their own, while evangelizing the lesser breeds who never knew charity or mercy nor never knew that women were anything more than chattel until they came into contact with white Europeans, were condemned for being racist and sexist.

Secular liberals and intellectual, utopian Christians all spoke with one voice against the European people because of their racism and sexism. The secular liberals attack the antique Europeans because they hate Christ, and the intellectual Christians permit and often join in the attacks because they fear the censure of the world. But what good is a faith if it is not a fighting faith? If you claim you stand with Christ and against liberalism how can you stand by and do nothing while the liberals use the negro and the liberated woman as battering rams to destroy His reign of charity?

Every criticism of liberalism by Christians and conservatives is always prefaced with the obligatory worship of the black race: “I’m against abortion because it hurts blacks,” “I’m against Moslem terrorism, but I am not racist.” Well, if you are not racist, if you do not have white pietas, you are either a liberal or a coward who wants the comforts of the Christian faith without the cross. We are told by our Savior that we must love Him with all our heart, mind, and soul. How can we love Him if we flee from the channels of grace that connect us to Him? He comes to us through His divine humanity, hence we can only know Him through our humanity. A religion based on the hatred of Christ and His people, which is the religion of the liberals and the colored heathens, and a religion based on a denial of the natural ties to Him through our kith and kin, which is the religion of the intellectual Christians, are both cold, merciless faiths emanating from the cold, malevolent intellect of the devil.

Let me place Arnold Lunn, the author of Flight from Reason, and Francis Schaeffer, the author of The God Who Is There, against St. Paul, Shakespeare, and Dostoyevsky in order to understand the white man’s failure to fight back against negro-worshipping Liberalism. Lunn, in his book Flight from Reason, laments the fact that Christians allowed the secular liberals to claim that they were the rationalists. Lunn asserts that it is the Christians who are the true rationalists, and then he makes the rational case for Christianity based on St. Thomas Aquinas’s writings. Schaeffer makes a similar point in his book The God Who Is There. He doesn’t base his rational apologetics on St. Thomas Aquinas, but he does make the case for the rationality of Christianity over the irrationality of the secular philosophers. Schaeffer places Kierkegaard with the secular existentialists, because Kierkegaard asserts the irrationality of Christianity, but then makes his famous leap of faith into the hands of the Christian God. While granting that Kierkegaard’s leap exaggerates the gap between faith and reason, I still would assert that Lunn and Schaeffer have missed something. Where they go wrong, in my opinion, is that they equate analytical reason with thought. Is thought just in the mind or does it come from the visionary organ of the heart? Schaeffer claims to believe in the inerrancy of scripture, yet he fails to take into account St. Paul’s insistence that it is through the heart that we come to know God. And if we look at the history of the European people, we see that St. Paul was right. When we merely comprehend God through the mind’s eye instead of seeing Him in and through the heart’s eye, we lose God and gain a heresy. The Lunn and Schaeffer apologetics cut the Europeans off from their racial hearth fire and as a result the Christian God becomes an airy nothing, who has to make way for the natural savage, the negro.(1)

Shakespeare’s Theseus in A Midsummer Night’s Dream is unsettled by the lovers’ midsummer night vision, which lies somewhere between reason and unreason:

I never may believe
These antique fables, nor these fairy toys.
Lovers and madmen have such seething brains,
Such shaping fantasies, that apprehend
More than cool reason ever comprehends.
The lunatic, the lover, and the poet
Are of imagination all compact:
One sees more devils than vast hell can hold;
That is the madman: the lover, all as frantic,
Sees Helen’s beauty in a brow of Egypt:
The poet’s eye, in a fine frenzy rolling,
Doth glance from heaven to earth, from earth to heaven;
And as imagination bodies forth
The forms of things unknown, the poet’s pen
Turns them to shapes, and gives to airy nothing
A local habitation and a name.
Such tricks hath strong imagination,
That, if it would but apprehend some joy,
It comprehends some bringer of that joy;
Or in the night, imagining some fear,
How easy is a bush supposed a bear?

But Hippolyta observes that the lovers have seen something profound in their midsummer night’s vision:

But all the story of the night told over,
And all their minds transfigur’d so together,
More witnesseth than fancy’s images,
And grows to something of great constancy;
But, howsoever, strange and admirable.

And then Dostoyevsky tells us in his novel The Possessed that Stavrogin was rational to the end:

The citizen of the canton of Uri was hanging there behind the door. On the table lay a piece of paper with the words in pencil: “No one is to blame, I did it myself.” Beside it on the table lay a hammer, a piece of soap, and a large nail—obviously an extra one in case of need. The strong silk cord upon which Nikolay Vsyevolodovitch had hanged himself had evidently been chosen and prepared beforehand and was thickly smeared with soap. Everything proved that there had been premeditation and consciousness up to the last moment.

At the inquest our doctors absolutely and emphatically rejected all idea of insanity.

And later in The Brothers Karamazov, Dostoyevsky tells us how his hero, Alyosha, the third dumb brother, rejects the rationalism of Stavrogin and Ivan. He rejects it because his heart is circumcised as St. Paul’s heart was circumcised:

All this made Alyosha’s heart bleed and obviously, as I mentioned before, what hurt him most was that the one he had loved more than anybody in the world now stood “dishonored” and “disgraced.” Even if this rebellion on the part of this young man was callow and unreasonable, I repeat for the third time (and I admit that I, too, am perhaps being unreasonable) that I am very pleased to find that the young man did not turn out to be too reasonable at this juncture for everyone, unless he is a very stupid, acquires sufficient reason in time, but if a young heart shows a lack of love at such a critical moment, when will it know love?

Leaving aside the question of the liberals’ missing link, which they have never found and never will find, what is the missing link between Kierkegaard’s leap of faith and the Lunn-Schaeffer Christian rationalism? St. Paul, the man with the circumcised heart, provides the missing link in Corinthians 1: 13. Without charity, which is beyond reason, we are lost. One could place more credence in Schaeffer’s rational Christianity if the end result of his philosophizing wasn’t the denial of the European hearth fire. If we don’t have a racial home, how will we learn to give and receive the charity which begins at home and perishes without one?

The Europeans won’t fight for their survival as a people, because they have been left homeless by their Christian leaders. You can’t march against the liberals and the colored heathens under the banner of intellectual Christianity. You can’t ‘Socratic dialogue’ the devil and his minions to death, unless you plan on boring them to death. But even then you won’t have any followers to take advantage of the drowsiness of your enemies, because they will all be sleeping the sleep of the walking dead – “He did not die, but nothing of life remained.”

Lunn and Schaeffer believed themselves to be fighting against the liberals by criticizing the irrationality of the liberals, but isn’t that a trick of the devil? By entering into the world of the Socratic dialogue, haven’t you chosen to defeat the devil with the devil’s own weapon – detached, analytical reason? So much of Kierkegaard’s work is inaccessible to me; I don’t understand what he is saying. If he means, when he says that we must make a leap of faith, that there is a better way to know God than through abstract reason, I would agree with him. But if he means we cannot know God at all, because of the limitations of reason, then I disagree with him. We can know God. We do make a leap of faith, but that leap of faith is grounded in His promise that He will not allow us to fall. Schaeffer and the rational Christians fail to allow a place for the human heart in their equations. Philosophy, even if it is called Christian theology, will always leave us in the dark and homeless. Why is Lear left homeless? Because he banishes the daughter closest to his heart when she cannot “heave her heart” into an abstract expression of filial devotion that will please Lear, who sees with his abstract mind and not with his heart. The tragic events that result from Lear’s philosophic abstraction of his heart from his head mirrors the tragedy of Christian Europe. In the name of a mind-forged abstract God, the European intelligentsia issued divorce papers to the living God and His people. And the result of that divorce is all around us. Moslems rule Europe, the negroes rule America through their liberal devotees; and feminist harpies, the most completely demonic creatures on the face of the earth, hover over the corpse of Christian Europe like vultures.

The Socratic dialogue of the Christian theologians is the bridge between Christian Europe and hell. So long as the Europeans clung to their God in and through the people of their own racial hearth fire, they held their own against the hatred of the world. But as soon as that bridge went up, as soon as the great minds of Christendom dialogued with the devil instead of combating the devil, what was once Christian Europe became the devil’s Europe, and the people of God, the Christ-bearing people, became, in the case of the liberals, one with Satan, and in the case of the grazers, they became helpless in the face of the liberal and colored barbarian onslaught. The end of all this is that the liberals and the non-white races hate the white race with all their heart, mind, and soul. And the white man has no defense against the malevolent hatred of the liberals and the lesser breeds that have no mercy, because they have lost that intimacy with God that gives a man the faith and fortitude to face the terror by night and the arrow that flieth by day. How could it be otherwise when we have abandoned our racial hearth fire, our connecting link to the Man of Sorrows? Like a coward on the battlefield the modern Europeans have fled from God and man. Everyone wants the casual friend who will go to dinner and sporting events with them and give them financial support. But who seeks a friend who is ‘the heart of my heart?’ That type of intimacy only comes to those who live within His reign of charity. Depth speaks to depth, but if the Europeans accept the liberals’ reign of superficiality, they will never find intimacy with God or with any of their own people. That is a tragedy that surpasses Oedipus’s tragic blight – To live in the superficial slime of hell without any knowledge of His world, a world in which the one true God loves His own with a love that passeth the understanding of reason, and a world in which the God-Man inspires His people to love with a passion and a depth that passeth the understanding of reason. The world will continue to hate the European people whether they believe in Christ or not. They can’t escape their destiny as the Christ-bearing people. But is it really so terrible to be hated for His name’s sake? Those who love and hate with all their hearts will endure to the end and be saved. The rest will wallow in the slime of liberalism until they are consumed by it. +


(1) Every time I see a T.V. evangelist doing ‘good works’ he is ‘helping’ black children in Africa. Every time I see a preacher on television the cameras focus on the blacks in the congregation. And every organized church competes with the other organized churches to make their congregations more ‘diverse.’ The end result of intellectual Christianity, which lacks the poetic depth of European Christianity, is the paganization of the Christian faith. That paganization leads to the worship of the natural black savage, which is the religion of the modern, faithless, homeless Europeans.

Posted in antique Christianity, post-Christian rationalism, rationalism | Tagged ,

While Memory Holds a Seat

Seems, madam! Nay, it is; I know not “seems.”
‘Tis not alone my inky cloak, good mother,
Nor customary suits of solemn black,
Nor windy suspiration of forc’d breath,
No, nor the fruitful river in the eye,
Nor the dejected ‘havior of the visage,
Together with all forms, moods, shows of grief,
That can denote me truly. These, indeed, seem,
For they are actions that a man might play;
But I have that within which passeth show,
These but the trappings and the suits of woe.

-Hamlet the Dane

I got an unpleasant jolt from the past recently when I heard the song “Woodstock” by Joni Mitchell blaring throughout the supermarket where I was shopping. The song was included in my college poetry anthology right next to Andrew Marvell and Robert Frost, and you couldn’t go down the halls of the dormitory without hearing someone playing the song. Musically the song works. Joni Mitchell had a nice voice and her music does not jar your senses like so many of the rock songs. But nevertheless the song is offensive, because the song is so openly anti-Christian. Through the medium of Miss Mitchell’s melodious voice, we are invited into the brave new world of liberalism, a world without the Christ of Europe. If you never heard Mitchell’s anthem, you are lucky, but it is sometimes necessary to know the poetic of the enemy –

I came upon a child of God
He was walking along the road
And I asked him, where are you going
And this he told me
I’m going on down to Yasgur’s farm
I’m going to join in a rock ‘n’ roll band
I’m going to camp out on the land
I’m try an’ get my soul free
We are stardust
We are golden
And we’ve got to get ourselves
Back to the garden

Then can I walk beside you
I have come here to lose the smog
And I feel to be a cog in something turning
Well maybe it is just the time of year
Or maybe it’s the time of man
I don’t know who l am
But life is for learning
We are stardust
We are golden
And we’ve got to get ourselves
Back to the garden

By the time we got to Woodstock
We were half a million strong
And everywhere there was song and celebration
And I dreamed I saw the bombers
Riding shotgun in the sky
And they were turning into butterflies
Above our nation
We are stardust
We are golden
And we’ve got to get ourselves
Back to the garden

Mitchell, like so many of the sixties radicals, thought of herself as a rebel from the mainstream culture of war mongering, sexually repressed, unnatural, middle class whites. But she and her ilk were not rebels. They differed in style, not in substance, from their liberal parents. They, like their parents, had a different view of nature than the Europeans of pre-20th century Europe. Mitchell’s nature is a closed system; it is not the mirror of another transcendent world, it is the whole world. No matter that the free love, back-to-nature hippies denounced science, they still were and are part of the new scientific world in which nature is just biological nature. That new-old view of nature returned the European people to paganism. The ‘garden’ that Mitchell wants to go back to is a natural world, free from the redemptive grace of Jesus Christ. Why do children of nature need redemption? Are they not without sin? Of course, as the scientific worldview replaced the Christian worldview, the new morality was developed, and what was implicit, that whites were unnatural and therefore damned, became explicit. The conservatives, even social conservatives such as Weaver and Kirk, were unable to offer their people the leadership they needed to fight liberalism, because they were unwillingly (1) to link conservatism to the defense of the European people, and (2) to invoke the second person of the Christian trinity, Jesus Christ, in the war against the new natural religion of the liberals.

Why were men such as Burke and Thomas Hughes able to invoke Christ and defend their own race while the 20th century conservatives were not? I think it is the ‘pride of intellect’ temptation. Very intelligent men often become moral idiots; they betray themselves and others in deepest consequence, because they think they can storm heaven with reason alone. While making a theological affirmation of God, they proceed to quote Aristotle and Plato ad nauseam in order to defend what they vaguely call the Western tradition. This will not do. We are not Greeks – and by Greeks, I mean philosophers, not the Greek people – we are Hebrews. If we blend the living God with the universal mind of the great philosophers, we are heathens, even if we are very smart heathens. The smartest of the Christian heathens, St. Thomas Aquinas, was unable to figure out when ensoulment took place, thus paving the way for the theological justification for early abortions. The Bible makes it clear that ensoulment takes place at conception, but of course such an obvious conclusion is not acceptable to the philosophically trained mind. The ratiocination of the philosophical conservatives always fail, because, as Hamlet tells Horatio, “There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in our philosophy.” There is an appalling lack of passion and depth of soul in the 20th century rational conservatives. We can’t rely on them, we can’t go to battle with their philosophies; we need a spiritual armor and a flaming sword that mere philosophical conservatism cannot provide.

We need to ask ourselves why after thousands of years there have been no philosophers that can rival Plato and Aristotle in intellectual acumen, while there have been thousands of poets who have surpassed, in depth of soul, the Greek poets. It is because man cannot know God through the mind alone. The philosophers of the Christian era did not think with their hearts, hence they could not say anything that Plato and Aristotle had not said already. But the poets whose hearts were united to a people that had hearts connected to His sacred heart revealed to us the divine element of the human soul.

This is why the race war is a religious war. The church men have made Christianity an intellectual system that can be passed on from one universal mind to another universal mind. And what do universal minds need with hearts? Why do minds need a local habitation, a people, to dwell in? They don’t. But is the mind-forged world of the 20th and 21st century philosophers the real world? I say it is not. The old natural world, the world in which our human nature was a reflection (imperfect certainly, but still a reflection) of God was the correct view of nature. The repentant Katerina in Shakespeare’s Taming of the Shrew eloquently defends the Christian view of nature when she links what is natural to the transcendent virtues of the human heart placed there by our Lord –

Why are our bodies soft and weak and smooth,
Unapt to toll and trouble in the world,
But that our soft conditions and our hearts
Should well agree with our external parts?

The real human nature has been buried in biological nature in the modern world. The mad-dog liberals have presided over the burial while the philosophical minded conservatives have acquiesced to the burial. They made, as did Caiaphas, a practical decision. “Let the European people and their connection to the heart of Christ die so that the universal mind can live.” Because of that decision, we have “conservative” authors such as Peter Kreeft recommending (in Ecumenical Jihad) the blending of Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. Because of that decision, there are no leaders in the Western world who will defend the European people against the colored barbarians and the Moslem infidels. Universal minds do not need a people, nor do they need anything more than a generic God. The God of St. Paul, the Christ celebrated in Handel’s Messiah, has disappeared from the face of earth because of the satanic hatred of the Jacobin liberals and the Thomistic Buddhism of the conservative liberals.

The conservatives in church and state did not veer from the truth because they defended the old forms and rituals against the new forms and rituals. They went astray because they saw the forms and rituals as ends in and of themselves. They lost the heart of their forms and rituals. The liberals have replaced the old forms and rituals, which were merely outer crusts without a center, with their own forms and rituals. At the heart of the new throne and altar system of the liberals is the negro and the auxiliary gods of color, because Satan knows that mankind must have gods. As the Israelites returned to Baal when Moses went up to the mountain, so have the European Hebrews returned to nature and nature’s God, the natural black savage.

The liberals possess a poetic; they are of the devil, so they use the colored races as shock troops against the white, Christ-bearing race. The philosophical-minded conservatives do not possess a poetic. And without a poetic they are unable to combat the wickedness and snares of the devil. You cannot dialog with the demonically possessed. And the conservatives must dialogue, because they believe that reason is their salvation. So the conservatives remain in the first circle of hell endlessly discussing how to formulate a rational argument against their liberal brethren. The “conservative” pundit William Buckley had a show called Firing Line in which he would debate liberals. From my perspective his guests were from the devil, but Buckley considered many of them his friends and entertained them at his house. Is that the proper response to the devil and his minions? Was Christ merely being whimsical when he said that the tares, the bad seeds, were the “children of the wicked one”? Is the Socratic dialogue the essence of the West, or is Burke’s charity of honor the essence of the West? Men who believe in the charity of honor do not dialogue with the children of the wicked one.

In his poem, “The Second Coming” (1920), William Butler Yeats says that

Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.

But Yeats is not looking to the Second Coming of Christ, he is looking for a new god –

The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep

Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

Who is the rough beast that was within the womb of Europe? He is the natural savage, the end product of the new scientific view of nature, which is nothing more than the old paganism in a different form.

Yeats compared Zeus’ seduction of Leda and the subsequent birth of Helen of Troy as the annunciation that founded Greece (see A Vision and “Leda and the Swan”). He found no poetry in Christianity, so he sought to return to the pagan Greeks. But the European people rejected Yeats’ poetic for their own blend of pagan, scientized nature worship. Is our ancient faith really so uninspiring? Does Zeus and his pantheon of lecherous rapists and promiscuous goddesses touch our souls? Does the modern pantheon of colored gods and feminist harpies inspire us as the Man of Sorrows once inspired the antique Europeans? There is a seemingly impregnable, rational, natural wall that separates the modern European from the real world, the natural world of the antique Europeans. Only a passion that knows not seems can conquer that wall. A passion linked to His passion and His Sacred Heart. +

Posted in blood faith, Christianity is neither a theory nor a philosophy, rationalism | Tagged