That Other Realm

A kind providence has placed in our breasts a hatred of the unjust and cruel, in order that we may preserve ourselves from cruelty and injustice. They who bear cruelty, are accomplices in it. The pretended gentleness which excludes that charitable rancor, produces an indifference which is half an approbation. They never will love where they ought to love, who do not hate where they ought to hate…

That the Christian Religion cannot exist in this country with such a fraternity, will not, I think, be disputed with me. On that religion, according to our mode, all our laws and institutions stand as upon their base. That scheme is supposed in every transaction of life; and if that were done away, everything else, as in France, must be changed along with it. Thus religion perishing, and with it this constitution, it is a matter of endless meditation what order of things would follow it. But what disorder would fill the space between the present and that which is to come, in the gross, is no matter of doubtful conjecture.

-Edmund Burke, Letters on a Regicide Peace


The age of prophesy ended with John the Baptist, who stood in the long line of prophets that foretold the coming of the Lord. Once our Lord entered history, the age of prophesy was over. But there was a second tier of prophets, men of Christian Europe who told us what would happen if we abandoned the Christ of whom the prophets spoke. Foremost among those prophets was Edmund Burke. Burke, right from the beginning of the French Revolution, saw that the French Revolution was not a mere regime change; it was not an attempt by one faction of Monarchists to place a different monarch on the throne. The revolution represented an attempt to replace the Christian faith as the rule of law in order to facilitate the rule of Satan. Because of Robespierre’s maniacal consistency in that he did not attempt to dethrone Christ incrementally but all at once, Burke’s criticism of Robespierre was eventually accepted by the bulk of the European people, minus the liberals in his own party. But his criticisms of the anti-Christian nature of the underlying satanic ethos of the French Revolution – liberty, equality, and fraternity – did not have any effect on the European people. Once Robespierre disappeared from the scene, the Europeans embraced the American experiment in Jacobinism, which was and is an incremental implementation of the rule of Satan over the rule of Christ. Every single member of the new French Directory that deposed Robespierre had signed the death warrant of Louis XVI, and every single European nation that went democratic signed on to the death of Christian Europe. Prior to the American and French revolutions, the moral basis of the European governments was Christian; after those two revolutions the moral basis of the European governments was satanic.

Such an assertion, that the age of democracy ushered in the reign of Satan, seems outrageous because Satan did not immediately rear his head in the democratic nations of the West. But that is because of what Burke called “the unbought grace of life.” The ruling ethos of the democratic governments was based on the assumption that “Christ be not risen,” but the Europeans still largely adhered, until the 1960s, to the ethical code that came from a belief that “Christ is risen.” We now, in the 21st century, can see Satanism undiluted now that the unbought grace of life has been spent. There is no Christian ethos at work in the European nations because the belief that Christ be not risen has taken hold throughout the European nations. Dostoyevsky, who was a prophet as Burke was, has been answered. He posed the question, “Can an intelligent man, a European, believe in the divinity of Christ?” The reply of the “intelligent” Europeans is, “No.”

The European people have yet to come to terms, as Burke and Dostoyevsky did, with liberalism. Burke stated flatly that liberalism was from the devil: “The first liberal was the devil.” And Dostoyevsky, about 80 years later, echoed Burke in his novel The Devils, in which he warned the West about the satanic nature of the Bolsheviks. Most classical liberals, who are falsely labeled ‘conservatives,’ accept Burke’s criticism of the Robespierre Jacobins, but they fail to understand his warning that the democratic ‘ideals’ of the Jacobins, whether they were Robespierre Jacobins or incremental Jacobins, represented a flight from Christ in order to build a new European society based on the Satanic principles of the thing called liberalism.

All that was good in the democratic nations of Europe came from that remnant of grace left over from the Christian religion, which was confined to the private realm in the age of democracy. Tragically the European people mistakenly believed that democracy and science were responsible for what was good in their nations. Countries such as Denmark and Sweden seemed like paradises in the 1950s and early 1960s. They had avoided the capitalist excesses of the United States and the socialist excesses of the Soviet Union. But what happened to those nations when they spent the unbought grace of life? They lost their sense of pietas; they no longer loved their own in and through Christ, so they succumbed to the moral rot from within that accompanies sexual Babylon and the barbarian assault from without that is visited upon a people who have no faith. The incremental Jacobinism of the United States and the post-Robespierre Jacobinism of France became the ruling principle of the non-communist nations of Europe, and as a result they have all become satanic nations that worship the noble savage. The formerly communist nations of Europe, which now appear like paradises compared to the older democracies, will become like unto the Western democracies if they do not repudiate incremental Jacobin democracy. Listen to our prophets, men such as Burke and Dostoyevsky, men who had the prophetic fire of Isaiah and Jeremiah. They told us that there can never be a Christian democracy. The ethos of “Give us Barabbas!” can never be allowed to rule over our faith in the Man of Sorrows.

When Christ joined the two apostles on the road to Emmaus and heard of their sadness at His death, He gently upbraided them for their lack of faith: “Then he said unto them, ‘O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken. Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?’ And beginning at Moses and at the prophets he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.” Christ enjoins the apostles to do what St. Paul, after his conversion, enjoins us to do: search the scriptures with our hearts. The Catholic scholastics and then the Protestant scholastics who followed in their train, maintained a scholastic equivalent of “Dueling Banjos”: they sought to avoid the pitfalls of the passionate heart by appealing to reason. But reason, devoid of the passion of the heart, always becomes the servant of Satan. We can certainly fall from grace through misplaced passion, but we most certainly will fall from grace, as Adam and Eve fell from grace, if we make reason, divorced from the heart that loves, our sovereign Lord.

Strong passion under the direction of a feeble reason feeds a low fever, which serves only to destroy the body that entertains it. But vehement passion does not always indicate an infirm judgment. It often accompanies, and actuates, and is even auxiliary to a powerful understanding; and when they both conspire and act harmoniously, their force is great to destroy disorder within, and to repel injury from abroad.Letters on a Regicide Peace

The unbought grace of life must be defended by hearts on fire with that charity of honor that motivated the prophets, St. Paul, and the European people when they were a people and not a democratic herd of cattle. The wars within Christendom were horrible, tragic affairs. Men, even Christian men, are not angels, but the evil effects of wars between Christians were mitigated by the European people’s faith in Christ. The wars of liberalism have been so much worse than the wars between Christians ever were for the reason that there is no mercy in the liberals. A Christian will extend mercy to his enemy because he feels that he too is a sinner, but the liberal will not extend mercy to his enemy because the liberal does not believe in the beginning of the Christ story. He does not believe that liberals are the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve whose humanity is tainted with original sin.

The Southern people of the United States were the defenders of Christian civilization in the northern hemisphere during the American Civil War, yet they were forced to accept a Carthaginian peace, a peace without mercy, at the close of the war. Why? Because the Jacobin leadership of the North did not see themselves as men in need of Christ’s mercy. They, like Shylock, demanded their pound of flesh, for they believed themselves to be without sin: “What judgement shall I dread doing no wrong?” The liberals believe that all sin rests with their enemies. That is why the country least responsible for World War I, Germany, was forced to pay war guilt money to the nations that entered the war on the side of the assassins. The liberals of America, France, Britain, and Russia had no mercy on their enemy. Why should they have mercy? They were without sin and their enemy was the embodiment of evil. In World War II the liberal dynamic was at work again. This time Germany was equally at fault, but why did the Western powers side with the Communists? They sided with the Communists because communism and democracy both stem from the same Jacobin roots. Communism is Robespierre Jacobinism and modern democracy is incremental Jacobinism. Lincoln, Lloyd George, Clemenceau, FDR, and Stalin were one in their Jacobinism and one in their rejection of Christian Europe.

Melville asks the question in his poem Clarel, a Pilgrimage to the Holy Land, “Wherefore ripen us unto pain?” The spiritual life is painful. If we love deeply the death of our loved ones and the contemplation of our own death is unbearable unless we believe that Christ is who He said He was. But if there is no faith in Christ, how does a person face that terror of terrors? The liberals’ solution is to avoid the depths. They have created a whole civilization – I call it an anti-civilization – based on an avoidance of the spiritual realm of existence. They must emphasize, in church, academy, and government, the material realm and only the material realm of existence lest they come into contact with the spiritual depths of life. Then they would have to face the horror of horrors without any spiritual armor. Science, and its attendant religion, Negro worship, is not a faith that can sustain us in the face of death. Science offers us an anesthetized passage from life to nothingness, and the liberals’ materially based religion helps us to be eased with our nothingness in this world by blotting out the image of God in man.

The liberals’ hatred beyond hatred for Trump can only be understood through the eyes of a Christian European. Then we can see that Trump has transgressed against the basic tenet of liberalism: that incremental Jacobinism must always move forward. What was acceptable ten or twenty years ago within the confines of liberalism is no longer acceptable once the liberals have broken down a new moral barrier. Homosexual marriage is one example. Once you give your assent to that, there is no turning back. Border restrictions and legalized abortion are two more examples. Trump has shown a sincere desire to turn back some of the incremental gains of the liberals; therefore, they must destroy him. Incremental Jacobinism has advanced beyond the Robespierre Jacobinism of the Russian communists; the liberals have incrementally killed the Christian faith of the European people. Without that faith the European people have nothing inside of them that says, “We won’t accept your world.” They accept the liberals’ world because they don’t believe there ever was any other world. We desperately need a European Puddleglum.

“No. I suppose that other world must be all a dream.”

“Yes. It is all a dream,” said the Witch, always thrumming.

“Yes, all a dream,” said Jill.

“There never was such a world,” said the Witch.

“No,” said Jill and Scrubb, “never was such a world.”

“There never was any world but mine,” said the Witch.

“There never was any world but yours,” said they.

Puddleglum was still fighting hard. “I don’t know rightly what you all mean by a world,” he said, talking like a man who hasn’t enough air. “But you can play that fiddle till your fingers drop off, and still you won’t make me forget Narnia, and the whole Overworld too. We’ll never see it again, I shouldn’t wonder. You may have blotted it out and turned it dark like this, for all I know. Nothing more likely. But I know I was there once. I’ve seen the sky full of stars. I’ve seen the sun coming up out of the sea of a morning and sinking behind the mountains at night. And I’ve seen him up in the midday sky when I couldn’t look at him for brightness.”

Puddleglum’s words had a very rousing effect. The other three all breathed again and looked at one another like people newly awaked.

“Why, there it is!” cried the Prince. “Of course! The blessing of Aslan upon this honest Marshwiggle. We have all been dreaming, these last few minutes. How could we have forgotten it? Of course we’ve all seen the sun.”

-C. S. Lewis,
The Silver Chair

The venomous beast that must be killed before the European everyman can begin the journey back to the spiritual realm of existence is the great scholastic dragon. The churchmen had a choice. They could have chosen the way of the passionate heart, the way of St. Paul and those noble Europeans who followed in St. Paul’s train by holding Christ in their hearts. But the churchmen went the way of Hawthorne’s Mr. Smooth-it-away in “The Celestial Railroad” and the Grand Inquisitor in Dostoyevsky’s Brothers Karamazov. Was it ever supposed to be that easy? “Can wisdom be put in a silver rod, Or love in a golden bowl?” We do not need great intellects, we need hearts that love Christ in and through the people of Europe, whom the liberals demonize while simultaneously denying that they ever existed. Edgar’s words, “Men must endure their going hence even as their coming hither,” echo our Lord’s words, “He who endures to the end shall be saved.” The passionate heart, the European who loves much, shall endure to the end. +

Posted in Classical liberalism, Democracy, Faithful hearts, Jacobinism, Mercy | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Wheel of Fire

You do me wrong to take me out o’ th’ grave.
Thou art a soul in bliss; but I am bound
Upon a wheel of fire, that mine own tears
Do scald like molten lead


King Lear


There is a certain practical wisdom in many of the old adages such as, ‘A stitch in time saves nine,’ and, ‘You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.’ But some old adages are wrong. For instance, let’s take the old adage that I heard ad nauseum in my childhood, ‘Sticks and stones can break your bones, but names can never hurt you.’ Oh really? The slanderous word can and does hurt more than sticks and stones. Just look at what the word ‘racist’ has accomplished for the liberals. It has brought about the destruction of a civilization and created the most satanic non-civilization the world has ever seen.

All governing bodies, if they are truly governing bodies, must restrict free speech. If they allow the customs, manners, and morals upon which their authority to rule is based to become the constant subject for ridicule and contempt they will soon cease to be a governing body. Louis XVI did not lose his crown and his life because he was too oppressive and didn’t allow free speech, he lost his crown and his life because he did not suppress free speech. He let the pamphleteers in the press and the academy run wild with their criticisms of the customs, manners, and morals that were the foundations of the French monarchy, while refusing to suppress the Jacobin’s advocacy of liberty, fraternity, and equality as alternatives to the French monarchy.

Before the French Revolution the American Jacobins – Jefferson, Franklin, and Madison – engineered their own revolution. Prior to our “glorious” union of atheist states under the mantle of the Constitution, every single state had a denominational, Christian state religion. This is the way it must be. You cannot have a governing body that governs according to some abstract theory separate and apart from the religious faith of the people of the nation. But that is precisely what the American constitutionalists set out to do. They told their people that, “Your religion and the customs, manners, and morals that go with that religion are a private thing. What you must adhere to as your rule of law is a vague belief in the will of the people as determined by democratic procedures implemented by enlightened minds.”

So America — and all of Europe eventually followed America – became a nation governed by the principle of benign, religious indifference. “We won’t be Christian, but we will still be moral and virtuous.” But if the moral foundation of your nation is no longer the Christian faith of Alfred the Great, what is the moral foundation of your nation? Can “What is truth?” be a ruling principle? If we reject Christ, what “rough beast” will become our religious truth? The people, as defined by the Illuminati, are the ruling authority of the European nations. And who are ‘the people’? The noble black savage is the God of the descending race of the European un-men who once worshipped Jesus Christ.

The reason why the rulers of America did not suppress the 1960’s Phil Donohue Show-type of free speech – “Why not abortion? Why not gay-lesbian rights?”  etc. – was because there was no moral consensus against such things. Every society has certain boundaries that cannot be transgressed; you are not permitted to engage in ‘free speech’ on those boundary topics. For instance, the sanctity of the noble black savage cannot be challenged in our society because the noble black savage is the sum total of the European people’s faith. The belief in Christ’s resurrection from the dead and the civilization that was based on that belief can be challenged and spit upon. That tells us all we need to know about our anti-civilization and its rulers.

The liberals are not morally correct in any of their policies because liberalism is satanic, but the liberals are strategically correct. They should, now that they have absolute power, crack down on all free speech in order to retain their power. Why should they permit the slightest criticism of their regime? Who do they have to answer to? The churches? Certainly not, the churches are in the liberals’ back pocket. The white peasantry? Again the answer is no. There is no white peasantry. The Gnostic non-faith of the modern European people started in the churches, spread to the academy, and then was handed down to the masses. That new faith has killed the white peasantry. There are no integral white men left who will venture forth against the liberal leviathan, armed only with faith in Christ and David’s slingshot. Instead, white men with slide rules and calculators try to prove that it is illogical for liberals to destroy the white race.

The new liberal purges on the social media platforms of everyone to the right of Jane Fonda are happening because of the upcoming presidential election. The liberals don’t want a repeat of the last presidential election. Why don’t they just ban elections? They will ban elections in the near future if they don’t get the results they want. In the past they allowed elections to take place because the elections helped to perpetuate the myth that the people, not a liberal oligarchy, rule the nation. We all know the myth of the historical dialectic of the thesis and the anti-thesis, which is brought to a close when the people, whether they are the communists or the democratic Europeans, become the final synthesis. But the liberals will not continue with the subterfuge if they do not get the electoral results they want. If too many whites vote white, they will lose their voting rights. And they will lose their voting rights because whites are not considered to be ‘the people,’ and only ‘the people’ have rights.

It’s important to note that the liberals do not have to supply a reason for their suppression of whites. They might call the offending white a white supremacist, a hater, or an advocate of violence. All those ‘reasons’ are just subterfuges. The liberals are on a mission to build the kingdom of hell on earth, so they must crush all opposition to their regime. That is why it is futile for whites to seek fair play from the liberals. They are not committed to fair play or to any other outmoded ethical standard from the white era of the Europeans’ history. This is the new era, in which malice and hatred bear down truth and mercy. There is nothing benign in religious indifference, because people must have a religion. If they won’t have Christ, then they will be forced to worship the libearls’ savage gods of color.

The classical liberals, who are now called conservatives, are forever trying to seek redemption from the devil because they are proceeding according to the spiritual agenda of Dostoyevsky’s Grand Inquisitor, who bids us look to a man-made system rather than to the living God. “Christ’s plan for man, to the extent that we can understand it, is inefficient and impractical.” That is the substance of the Grand Inquisitor’s complaint against God. “You thought too much of men, they can’t handle their freedom. We gave them something better, we gave them a system.” The democratic system has become, for the white man, like unto the theological refuge that the Grand Inquisitors of Christian Jewry gave their parishioners. It is the armor that David rejected. But the systems, in church and state, are the devil’s snares. We have become thoroughly enmeshed in systems and lack the strength, which only comes from a faith in someone greater than the systems, to extradite ourselves from the devil’s snares.

The undergirding of the liberals’ new faith is the belief, articulated by men such as Rousseau, Diderot, Einstein, and Shaw, that the Christian faith belongs to that intermediary stage of human evolution, one step above the totem and taboo stage of mankind’s history, but well below the level of scientific man, whose religion is cosmic and intellectual in contrast to Christianity, which is provincial and stupid. But it is a curious thing – why does the ‘higher’ religion return us to the totem and taboo religion in which we bow down before the sacred negro?

At some point the European, if he is ever going to reclaim his spiritual manhood, must deal with the question of science. Can we believe, against the evidence of science, that Christ rose from the dead? If we can’t believe in that miracle then we must submit to the dictates of the men of science who bid us worship the man-gods, because there is no God-Man.

Burke in his opposition to the French Revolution articulated the alternative to the cosmic religion of humanity. He saw the old religion and its attendant code of ethics as the only religion for the European people. The new religion of humanity was a false religion without honor and without charity.

We know, and it is our pride to know, that man is by his constitution a religious animal; that atheism is against, not only our reason, but our instincts; and that it cannot prevail long. But if, in the moment of riot, and in a drunken delirium from the hot spirit drawn out of the alembic of hell, which in France is now so furiously boiling, we should uncover our nakedness, by throwing off that Christian religion which has hitherto been our boast and comfort, and one great source of civilization amongst us, and amongst many other nations, we are apprehensive (being well aware that the mind will not endure a void) that some uncouth, pernicious, and degrading superstition might take place of it.Reflections on the Revolution in France

And what is that uncouth, pernicious, and degrading superstition that has taken the place of the European people’s faith in Christ? You know what it is, because the liberals have taught us our catechism. “You shall love the sacred negro with all your heart, mind, and soul, and you shall hate the white man with all your heart, mind, and soul.” What is a white supremacist? We are never told exactly what that entity is, but those two words have the power to destroy the white race. Why do those words and the other word, racist, have the power to destroy us? They have that power because the Europeans have given liberals the power to destroy them with the devil words. If a man does not believe in the Word made flesh, he will be the slave of the devil words of the liberals. White men now spend their entire lives on this earth trying to prove that they are not racists, that they are not white supremacists, but they can never get out from under the racist-white supremacist label because when the libearls invoke those words, they mean whatever the liberals want them to mean, and they apply to any white man who impedes the liberals onward and upward march to utopia.

No appeal to the liberals’ sense of justice or their mercy will avail the white man who has fallen into their clutches. There is no justice in the liberals’ courts and no mercy in the liberals’ hearts of stone. They will follow the logic of liberalism to its ultimate conclusion. All non-illuminated whites – thee and me – must die for the sin of racism/white supremacism. Only when the white man stands up to the men with the devil words and refuses to be ashamed of white pietas will there be any relief for the whites living in the midst of liberal Babylon. Until that time the liberals will rule Liberaldom through the power of the devil words. Would the Europeans be afraid of those words if they had hearts of flesh? If they loved their God and their people, they would be fearless in defense of their God and their people. Perfect love casteth out fear. The love that once was there must once again become the animating spirit of the European people. But what are the chances that the European people can be stirred from within? Are they capable of seeing His blood upon the rose? It doesn’t appear so. There was still, in the latter half of the 20th century, a slight ethical remnant of the Christian faith left in the European people. But now even that ethical remnant has been destroyed. The love that once was there, for kith, kin, and God has been replaced by a hatred for kith, kin, and God. Through the power of his words – racism and white supremacy – Satan has severed the white European from Christ and His people. In the face of our death and the death of our loved ones we can only hold onto His promise that He has conquered death. So it is with the death of our civilization. We can only hold onto His promise that He will be with us always even in the face of death. Nothing eternal perishes! And the bond forged by the European people with Christ the Lord is an eternal bond that will sustain us in life and death so long as we refuse to sever that bond by adhering to the words of the devil instead of His holy word. +

Posted in Censorship, Christian religion, Classical liberalism, Negro worship | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The Parable of Europe

This world is a parable—the habitation of symbols—the phantoms of spiritual things immortal shown in material shape. May the blessed second-sight be mine—to recognise under these beautiful forms of earth the Angels who wear them; for I am sure we may walk with them if we will, and hear them speak! – J. S. LeFanu


We shall always believe a lie if we seek to understand existence through the eyes of the psychologists. Their eyes see only the material manifestation of a much deeper spiritual malady, which shall always remain outside the ken of the superficial minds of the psychologists. Thus when Malcolm Muggeridge coined the term, “the great liberal death wish,” to describe the liberals of the West, he was deceiving himself and his conservative readers and only scratching the surface of the thing called liberalism. Muggeridge accused the liberals of a yearning for death, because they seemed to have no desire to defend themselves against the communist threat from without and the moral threat from within — the Babylonian sexual revolution. But if we look at the liberals at that time in 1979 and the liberals of today, we do not see any indication of a desire to die. What we do see is a desire to live free of the restraints of the Christian faith bequeathed to them by their European ancestors. They were and are like unto the devils depicted in St. Matthew:

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

The liberals are in the process of drowning themselves in the sea of diversity, but that is not their desire; their desire is that thee and me shall be drowned in the sea of diversity, and that they will float above the rising waters on a celestial cloud of glory destined for the elect who have obtained, through the power of their exalted intellects, a mind purged from the evils of whiteness and freed from the burden of Christ, who bids us take up our cross and follow Him. Everything the liberals do is based on their desire to be free of the cross of Christ. What seems like a death wish from a Christian perspective is their life wish. Thus the liberals will continue to invite Moslems into the white nations, they will continue to exalt the noble black savages no matter how murderous they become, and they will continue to systematically destroy every last vestige of the Europeans’ culture when it was Christian. Any white who resists the disestablishment of Christian Europe will be destroyed.

Satan is not omnipotent, but he is much more intelligent than we are. However, he does have to work through human beings; he has to get them to buy into his agenda. How well has he done? It would seem he is doing quite well. Probably not as well as he would like, because he is never satisfied, but he certainly has accomplished something that our European ancestors never thought would have been possible: he has built Satandom on the ruins of Christendom. But it is one thing to take a fortress and another thing to hold it. We shall see how long Satan manages to hold onto his kingdom of hell on earth. It seems, now that he has conquered Europe, that he can reign in perpetuity, but there are always a few Hamlets that “know not seems.” It is those individuals that give the devil sleepless nights.

The liberals, inspired by the devil, are in the process of rooting out everything from a time when the Europeans were still ethically Christian and everything from an even more distant time when the European people were believing Christians. There is nothing too insignificant, too ‘small potatoes,’ to be overlooked. The liberals will eliminate everything from the Europeans’ Christian past. And they will eliminate our Christian European heritage in the name of eliminating racism. Think about that. If whiteness is evil, then everything white must be eliminated. But if we eliminate all whiteness, then we eliminate the only culture in which the Word took flesh and dwelt among us. That is precisely what Satan wants.

Of course it is very disturbing – no, it is much more than disturbing, it brings out an anger that is beyond anger – when the liberals hack away at everything decent and virtuous in our past in order to solidify their unholy liberal reign. The recent posthumous assault on Kate Smith was just one more liberal assault on our white heritage. The Kate Smith statue was removed from Philadelphia and her recording of “God Bless America” was banned because that kindly Virginia belle had once sung the songs, “And That’s Why Darkies Were Born,” and “Pickaninny Heaven.” Both songs, by the way, extol black virtues, as the Southern whites so often did in the spirit of noblesse oblige, but that makes no difference to the liberals. They simply look for whites who place blacks within the framework of an older white civilization and then they condemn the whites as racist, which of course means they are damned.

The banishment of Kate Smith and her recordings is reminiscent of the liberals’ ban of Disney’s Song of the South. The movie extolls what Donald Davidson called the “good darkies,” but it had to be banned because blacks were depicted in a setting in which they were subservient to whites. They were also depicted as Christians, not as drug pushers, pimps, and jive artists, but that didn’t matter to the liberals, the movie was banned as racist. I had to get my copy of it from a foreign country. But of course the damnation of Kate Smith’s recordings and Disney’s Song of the South are just two examples of the pillorying of whites by the liberal inquisition.(1) Our monuments, our art, our entire past must be eliminated in the name of “eliminating racism.” After Roxanne rejects Cyrano, he goes on a rant against everybody and everything. His friend, who knows him, says, “Say this to all the world, then whisper to me, ‘she loves me not’.” The liberals scream racism to all the world when they are pillorying white people and their culture, but what they really are saying is, “I hate Christ and His people.” Burke knew them inside and out:

The rebels to God perfectly abhor the Author of their being. They hate him “with all their heart, with all their mind, with all their soul, and with all their strength.” He never presents himself to their thoughts but to menace and alarm them. They cannot strike the Sun out of Heaven, but they are able to raise a smouldering smoke that obscures him from their own eyes. Not being able to revenge themselves on God, they have a delight in vicariously defacing, degrading, torturing, and tearing in pieces his image in man. Letters on a Regicide Peace

Christ, when He walked this earth, said that He had to go about His Father’s business. The liberals, so long as they walk this earth, must go about doing Satan’s business. That business consists of tearing in pieces His image in man. And sadly, as the liberals intensify their attack, the churchmen intensify their repudiation of all things Christian and European. Pope Francis speaks for that hideous breed of vipers when he praises the savage gods of the rain forests and sends money to the invaders of the European nations. Tell all the world you are being kind and compassionate, then listen to the truth: “You have betrayed your God and your people in order to court favor with the devil.” As the liberals become more uncompromising, the churchmen become more compromised. At first we, the European Christians, were advised to be compassionate and open to other races and other cultures. In the name of Christianity we were supposed to compromise. Now we are no longer told to compromise, we are told to surrender to the liberals in the name of a new religion based on the worship of the noble savages of color and the hatred of the white race.

It is now, after the European people have been systematically de-Christianized, that the liberals can take off their masks. We can look directly in their faces and see the sneering face of Satan, but who is to say what is satanic? The European grazer has no moral basis to judge anything. After over a century of indoctrination, the liberals have entered the European grazer’s inmost soul and convinced him that there is no God except the gods of the liberals. While the 20th century conservatives spent their time defending democracy, the mad-dog liberals spent their time tearing to pieces God’s image in man. Of what good is democracy when your people have lost their vision of the Lord God, Jesus Christ? It is of no use to the Christian, but it is a great weapon of the devil.

When the liberals openly tell us that violence against white people is “good violence” and call for the assassination of white politicians such as Trump and Orbán, white Christians cannot become Quakers in the hopes that the liberals will spare them while killing their white brethren. But the main battle is a spiritual battle. We cannot mount a counterrevolution without having made an internal conversion from liberalism to Christ. When that happens, we will know when we must be violent and when we must refrain from violence.

Most of the violence today comes from the liberals and the colored heathens, which is supposed to be the “good violence.” The violence of the New Zealand mosque shooter is bad violence, according to the liberals, because it was not violence against white people. But all the violence, the mass shootings, strike at the core of the white culture, the culture of the antique Europeans, because at the core of that culture is Christ. Does He enjoin us to fight without taking His charity of honor into account? The liberal, the colored heathen, and the neo-pagan are one in their superficiality. They see only with the material eye so they think that only material means can be used to “get results.” It is not the promised end that Christ wants us to pursue, but it is the end result of the pursuit of Satan’s kingdom of hell on earth.

The civilization of the parables, of which the prophet spoke, “I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world,” is the civilization of the antique Europeans. Their belief in our Lord’s parables compelled them to look past the worldly wisdom of the scribes and the Pharisees to the heart of God. There is the true wisdom, there is the love that passeth all rational understanding. When we eschew the parables of Christ in which He enjoins us to view Him as “He that soweth the good seed,” to whom shall we turn? The liberals have made it clear to whom they have turned. Must we also turn to Satan in order to combat Satan? No, there is a world that our ancestors entered, through faith, that is our world. Nothing has transpired in the 20th century and the 21st century that should separate us from the antique Europeans’ world of Christian parables. Christ’s crucifixion, death on the cross, and His resurrection from the dead is still the sign of our redemption. Neither science, democracy, nor the noble savage can serve as an alternative to that sign. Is it not better to trust in Him, to believe in the parable of Christ crucified, Christ risen, than to believe in Satan’s hellish world of diversity and multiculturalism, where there is no light, no mercy, and no God? +


(1) My favorite cartoons are the Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, and Goofy cartoons that Walt Disney created in the 1930s through the 1950s. But there are certain cartoons which cannot be seen in their entirety today. You can buy special “From the Vault” DVD copies in which a liberal commentator explains why the cartoons are evil (racist), and the DVDs are rigged so that you cannot fast forward past the commentary (I turn off the sound). Two cartoons that are particularly good (and therefore have been condemned) are Mickey’s Friend Friday, in which he battles, Robinson Crusoe style, black cannibals in order to save Friday. And in Spare the Rod, Donald Duck battles a liberal psychiatrist and pygmy head hunters who have escaped from a circus train. But of course the list goes on and on. The Dr. Dolittle books have been censored by Loftings’ own family because they were racist. The author of the Tin-Tin books repudiated his Tin-Tin in Africa book, and on and on it goes. There is a huge liberal bonfire raging into which the white grazers are told to throw every last remnant of our white past. And when they have completed that task, the liberals will tell the white grazers to jump into the fire themselves. Will they do it? Yes, they will, because once they have repudiated their past, they will have no way of discerning the truth. If the liberals tell them the fire is democratic, multicultural, and diverse, they will enter the fire in the belief that they will emerge from the fire cleansed of whiteness and ready to become part of Liberaldom. Of course the fire will consume them, but the grazers, having repudiated the miracle of Christ crucified, Christ risen, have decided to believe in the miraculous miracle of liberalism, which promises them a place in Liberaldom, which in reality is Satandom, if they will repudiate the one great evil – whiteness.


Posted in Censorship, Religion of Satan | Tagged | Leave a comment

The Outcast Europeans

Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him? And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee. And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him. And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind. John 9: 35-39


When the kingdom of Judah was destroyed a small remnant of Jews were sent as captives to the land of Babylon. And remarkably they remained faithful to their God while suffering through their Babylonian captivity. In the book of Psalms we read of their faithfulness:

By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion. We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof. For there they that carried us away captive required of us a song; and they that wasted us required of us mirth, saying, Sing us one of the songs of Zion. How shall we sing the Lord’s song in a strange land? If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy.Psalm 137: 1-6

The European people are suffering through their own Babylonian captivity, but they have not, like the ancient Jews, remained faithful during their captivity. Why haven’t they? One reason is that the European people refuse to admit they are in captivity. How can a democratically elected government be compared to Nebuchadnezzar? You’re right – it can’t: Nebuchadnezzar was much kinder to the Jews than the liberals are to Christians. The liberals permit state-sanctioned Christianity (which is not Christianity), but they crush any and every manifestation of a genuine, heartfelt faith in the Christ of old Europe. Yet the European people refuse to accept that democratically elected governments can be more destructive and more opposed to everything Christian and virtuous than the ‘tyrannical’ pagan kings of the Old Testament. Abortion is called ‘choice,’ white genocide is called ‘diversity,’ and the worship of the noble savage is called ‘respect for civil rights.’ Is that not tyranny? Is that not a captivity infinitely worse than the Babylonian captivity of the Jews?

The second reason that the exiled Jews remained faithful is that the Lord sent them prophets such as Jeremiah, Daniel, and Ezekiel so that they could hear the word of the Lord. Many, many times the Jewish people rejected the words of the Lord given to them through the prophets, but the Jews of the Babylonian captivity did not reject the words of the Lord.

Would the words of the Lord have had any effect on the remnant Jews if His words had not been presented to them by men with hearts inflamed with a love of the Lord? Daniel, Ezekiel, and Jeremiah were not theologians or philosophers. If they had been, they would not have been able to stir the hearts of their people. Like St. Paul, the prophets Jeremiah, Daniel, and Ezekiel were poets of God. They circumcised their hearts, and that circumcision allowed them to hear the word of the Lord God. We are not lacking philosophers and theologians in modern Christian Jewry, men who will tell us what their intellects have discovered about the nature of God. What we are lacking is men and women with hearts of flesh who know God feelingly, because their hearts are connected to Christ’s heart by way of a sympathetic connection to their people. The channels of grace are our familial and racial hearth fires; if we allow the liberals to reroute those channels of grace and direct them toward the people of other races and other faiths, we will become… We have already become, a non-people without a familial or racial home.

That which is essential to our faith, the love of Christ in and through our people, must be accepted as an unchallenged prejudice that is deeply embedded in our hearts. And we must act according to that prejudice without making it into a syllogism. A man cannot act if everything in his life must be figured out without reference to his prejudices. The church men have been neutered because their faith in Christ is a propositional faith, dependent on theology and philosophy. They place Christ outside the realm of the human heart, where all true knowledge of God dwells, and make our faith dependent on the human intellect, which translates to their intellects. And what have they come up with? Nothing that a man can believe in that will sustain him in the dark nights of the soul. The prophets and St. Paul loved much — they sought the knowledge of God through a heart to heart communion with the living God; consequently, they had something to give us – a certainty that Christ is the God who enters human hearts, that He is our Jesus who will abide with us in life and death. That prejudice took root in the hearts of the antique Europeans, and all those men and women who cling to that prejudice constitute the church of Jesus Christ. The church buildings, inhabited by men and women who have no contact with the God of the prophets and St. Paul, are the great liberal cleansing houses. They exist to purify the white Christians and make them receptive to the new Messiah, the Benamuckee of the liberals, who does not enter human hearts.

White people now take it as a given that they must hate every manifestation of white pietas. The Dalai Lama is able to see and say that Europe should belong to the Europeans and that refugees should return to their native countries, but no white man will dare to say that the European nations must be white. In fact the white Europeans now have an ingrained prejudice against white Europeans. Conservatives and liberals tell us that white nations must be diverse, which means they must be dominated, numerically and culturally, by the colored tribesmen. (1) If a white person even suggests what the Dalai Lama said openly, he is labeled a white supremacist (the label ‘racist’ has lost some of its potency due to excessive use) who must be punished either by economic disenfranchisement, imprisonment, or death.

The church of faithful hearts who love much, the church of the prophets and St. Paul, will not fail us, but the church of the scholarly minds, the really smart men, has failed us and will continue to fail us. As we sink further and further into the slough of despair, the church men still tell us not to worry, because soon they will come up with the answer to the God problem, and then all things will be set right. That will be the last word we hear as we slide into the mire of the slough of despair. But St. Paul bid us search the Scriptures with our hearts. There, in that communion of hearts of flesh with the Word made flesh, we can know our Lord.

I frequently reference the great hearts of Europe, men such as Burke, Rembrandt, Scott, Shakespeare, and Dostoyevsky, because they are part of that long line of Christian warriors who saw life feelingly, and as a consequence they bore witness to the living God. But there is an unnamed great heart who set the stage for the great hearts of Europe. He appears in John 9. I wrote about him once before in an article entitled, “The Gift of Sight.” His story is our story. And his response to the liberals of his times should be our response to the liberals, in church and state, of our times. The man was born blind, and Christ gives him sight. First, his neighbors question him:

The neighbours therefore, and they which before had seen him that he was blind, said, Is not this he that sat and begged? Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he. Therefore said they unto him, How were thine eyes opened? He answered and said, A man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed mine eyes, and said unto me, Go to the pool of Siloam, and wash: and I went and washed, and I received sight. Then said they unto him, Where is he? He said, I know not.

Then the Pharisees question him:

They brought to the Pharisees him that aforetime was blind. And it was the sabbath day when Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes. Then again the Pharisees also asked him how he had received his sight. He said unto them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and do see. Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division among them. They say unto the blind man again, What sayest thou of him, that he hath opened thine eyes? He said, He is a prophet.

When the Pharisees are unable to make the man born blind admit that he was not born blind, they decide to go to work on his parents:

But the Jews did not believe concerning him, that he had been blind, and received his sight, until they called the parents of him that had received his sight. And they asked them, saying, Is this your son, who ye say was born blind? how then doth he now see? His parents answered them and said, We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind: But by what means he now seeth, we know not; or who hath opened his eyes, we know not: he is of age; ask him: he shall speak for himself. These words spake his parents, because they feared the Jews: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.

His parents wanted no part of their son nor were they interested in the man who cured him. Why? The apostle tells us that they were afraid that the Pharisees would put them out of the synagogue. Think about that. They felt no desire to know the man who made the blind to see, their own son, but they were very concerned lest they be forced to leave the synagogue. Does not that sound very familiar? The grazers of modern Churchianity do not care to know the Christ of old Europe, the Christ who made the lame to walk and the blind to see, the God of Rembrandt, Handel, and St. Paul, because to adhere to the God of those people would stink of “white supremacy” — it would result in one’s expulsion from the modern Christian synagogues of diversity and multiculturalism. But we should leave those synagogues in order to experience what the man born blind experienced when he refused to betray the man who gave him his sight:

Then again called they the man that was blind, and said unto him, Give God the praise: we know that this man is a sinner. He answered and said, Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see. Then said they to him again, What did he to thee? how opened he thine eyes? He answered them, I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore would ye hear it again? will ye also be his disciples? Then they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but we are Moses’ disciples. We know that God spake unto Moses: as for this fellow, we know not from whence he is. The man answered and said unto them, Why herein is a marvellous thing, that ye know not from whence he is, and yet he hath opened mine eyes. Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth. Since the world began was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was born blind. If this man were not of God, he could do nothing. They answered and said unto him, Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us? And they cast him out.

From whence comes the courage to defy the Pharisees who have the power to make us leave the synagogue? It comes from the love of Christ who has given us sight. We were blinded by sin and the fear of death, and He gave us the sure and certain hope that through His cross we would be redeemed from sin and death. To have been nothing, as John Donne tells us, and then to be co-heirs with Christ is something beyond the ken of the human mind. Only the heart that loves can believe in that mystery.

The man born blind is willing to be cast out for Christ’s sake, but what he gains by his rejection of the Pharisees is something so much greater than what he loses by not being a member in good standing of their church:

Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him? And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee. And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him. And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind. And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also? Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.(2)

Does not every word in John 9 resonate with us today? The liberals in church and state are in the process of casting out all those men and women who profess an allegiance to the Christ of the European people when they were a people. If we cling to that God and those people, we will be cast out of the synagogues of the liberals. But what will we lose if we are cast out of the liberals’ synagogues? We might lose – no, we will lose – many of the material benefits that come with an adherence to the dictates of the rulers of the synagogues of modernity. But what will we lose if we abandon the faith of our people? We will lose that intimacy with Christ that the man born blind obtained through his fidelity to Christ and his rejection of the Pharisees. But of course there is a price we must pay for that intimacy with Christ.

Jeremias de Decker, the great Dutch poet, who was an intimate friend of Rembrandt, told us the price we must pay in two short lines from his poem, “The Passion of Jesus Christ (Good Friday)”: “Men cannot receive uncrucified, The fruit of the cross.” What is a constant source of amazement and inspiration to me is the way our people, the antique Europeans, took Christ into their hearts without flinching from the crucifixion: “Even though it is a cross that leadeth me.” Such courage, such fortitude, such faith only comes from an intimacy with Christ that the intellectual Christians can never know, and that the liberals spit on. Cannot we, the remnant band, the captives of Babylonian liberalism, take heart from the remnant band of Jewish exiles, the man born blind, and the antique Europeans, and stand up to the rulers of the synagogues? We can and we shall, because we have seen Him and because we know that it is He and He alone who speaks to our hearts. The darkness around us is deepening, but there is light. The man born blind saw that light: “And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.” +


(1) Our enemies have such contempt for us that they openly tell us how they will destroy us. I reference once again the Moslem mayor of London, who said that for the sake of diversity we must accept the fact that London is the murder capital of the world. He invokes that word, diversity, as he would invoke the power of a magic talisman. And it works. Whites will sacrifice everything, their wives, their children, and their heritage, on the altars of diversity. If the Europeans no longer believe in the Word made flesh, they will be destroyed by the word of Satan, “diversity.”

(2) The significance of the fact that Christ sought out the man born blind when He heard that the man had been cast out of the synagogue cannot be overemphasized. We all, because we are spiritually weak, fear to be cast out of the synagogues of the principalities and powers of this world. But if we love much, if we love Him, He will seek us out. The grace of God is a living reality: the man born blind is our exemplar.

Posted in Faithful hearts | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The Darkness Deepens

Please see To My Readers

But let us take care. The moral sentiments, so nearly connected with early prejudice as to be almost one and the same thing, will assuredly not live long under a discipline, which has for its basis the destruction of all prejudices, and the making the mind proof against all dread of consequences flowing from the pretended truths that are taught by their philosophy. – Edmund Burke, Further Reflections on the Revolution in France

The blood of man should never be shed but to redeem the blood of man. It is well shed for our family, for our friends, for our God, for our country, for our kind. The rest is vanity; the rest is crime. – Edmund Burke, Letters on a Regicide Peace


Let me begin with Edmund 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.

The liberals are holding all sorts of sympathy ceremonies for the victims who were killed in the New Zealand mosque. In my area there was a huge ecumenical ‘religious’ ceremony in which all the female clergy and most of the female laity wore some sort of Moslem headgear. Do the liberals really feel pity for the Moslems who were killed by Brenton Terrant? No, they don’t, because the liberals have separated themselves from the font of pity and mercy, they have separated themselves from Christ. Men and women who kill babies in their mothers’ wombs and then throw them on the trash heap are not, I repeat, are not full of pity for the victims in the New Zealand mosque. What the liberals are doing, laity and clerical, is showing the liberal world how virtuous they are. When white Christians are murdered by Moslems and/or black barbarians, there is no outpouring of sympathy for the victims, because when the victims are white, they are justly killed for the sin of whiteness, according to the dictates of liberalism. And when dark-skinned Christian Nigerians are killed by Moslems, there is no outpouring of sympathy for those victims, because they are considered Uncle Remuses, who have adopted a white man’s religion.

Brenton Terrant was responding to the merciless assault on his people by a merciless enemy. Where he went wrong was in responding to a merciless enemy with the same tactics used by his enemies. When Rogers, of Rogers’ Rangers fame, attacked the Abnaki Indians, this is what he told his men: “You all know what these Indians have done to New England. For near a hundred years they’ve been sneaking up on our towns and farms, cutting folks to pieces while they were still alive, roasting ‘em alive, torturing ‘em every way a sick mind could think of. Well, we’re going to put an end to that. Remember our orders – kill every fighting man among ‘em, but let the women and children alone even though they’ve killed and captured ours.” When the Christian kills, his actions must be motivated, as they most certainly were in the case of Rogers and his men, by love. And the killings that must be done in defense of those we love must be done within the confines of chivalry: “let the women and children alone.” From a purely pagan, pragmatic standpoint, it is good policy to kill the children, because they are savage warriors in the making, and it is good practice to kill the women, because they are the breeders of savage warriors. But the code of chivalry forbids pagan pragmatism. (1) The Christian does not advocate the abortion of black babies because there is a good chance that they will grow up to be black murderers, nor does he advocate the indiscriminate killing of Moslems regardless of their age, sex, or degree of culpability in the Moslem invasion of the West. I do not believe that any good can come from a response to Islamic terrorism rooted in neo-paganism, because neo-paganism, like liberalism, lacks that “charity of honor.”

Who is to blame for the shootings in New Zealand? First and foremost it is the liberals. They are allowing the Moslems to enter the white nations in the hopes that the Moslems will kill off the whites. And secondly I blame the Moslem invaders. I am against bombing them over there, in their own countries, but I am in favor of banning Moslems from the white nations. I find it astounding that the pro-Israel ‘Christians’ throughout the European nations, especially in this country, are adamantly opposed to violence against domestic Islamic terrorists and liberals who defend the terrorists, yet they have no compunction about bombing innocent Moslems over there. And they are relatively innocent when they are over there, unless you think a Christian can kill a Moslem just for being a Moslem.

It shouldn’t be hard to see that any killing that does not stem from pietas — “I will defend my own” – is evil. But the modern ‘Christians’ have reversed that simple Christian precept — It is all right to kill if the killings are state-sanctioned wars of conquest, but it is wrong to kill in defense of our loved ones. The end result of that kind of twisted theology is that white Christians have become hypocritical Quakers. They will not fight the colored barbarians or the liberals, who have ordered the destruction of the white race, but they will fight, through the state, to destroy all enemies of atheistic, Jacobin democracy.

The magnificent hymn “In the Garden” speaks of an intimacy with Christ that can only come when His heart unites with our hearts. “He walks with me and He talks with me and He tells me I am His own.” Yes, we are sinful, yes, we are imperfect, but He felt that we had something inside us worthy of redemption. The intellectual Christian puts God ‘out there,’ because ‘out there’ he can control God by keeping Him away from human hearts. That Semipelagianism has destroyed Western man. “Our intellects are pure, but our hearts are sinful.” The European Christian rejects that Gnostic perversion of the faith:

Now with zeal we must search our breasts shrewdly, the vices within, with the eyes of the heart. With the other eyes, the jewels of the head, we cannot at all see through the spirit of the thought, whether good or evil dwells beneath, so that it may be pleasing unto God at the dread time. – Anglo-Saxon Poetry

We are creatures of the heart. If we are not allowed to come to the garden alone to commune with the living God because our hearts are impure, but must only approach Him through the great wizards of the intellect because their minds are pure, then we are lost souls. We have no touchstone of reality. The non-whites still have a reality, they have never left their nature gods. But the white man cannot go back. He must have a heart-to-heart connection to the God above nature, or else he must be an outcast man, doomed to wander through the arid wastes of a mind divorced from the human heart. (2)

And in order to fortify his dried-up soul, he will worship, second-hand, the gods of nature. The liberal worships the gods of color while the neo-pagan tries, like Hitler, to revive the pagan gods of the ancient Europeans. The liberals have been more successful than the neo-pagans because their ‘noble black savage’ has a contemporary historical presence that the ancient Vikings lack. If and when the European people come to see Christ, once again, as a God who enters human hearts, they will be renewed as a people and will not acquiesce to their own destruction because the wizards of intellectual Christianity have turned them away from the living God.

Something very old and something very new has become institutionalized in the European nations. The something old is paganism, and the something new is post-Christian paganism. The old paganism was cyclic, it did not progress, it simply, like nature, repeated itself over and over. But post-Christian paganism, which is liberalism, views the historical process as an ever-evolving, ever-advancing process. History is moving, under the guidance of the liberals, toward something magnificent:

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

In the fullness of time, the fusion of liberalism and paganism has given birth to the Prince of Darkness. He has become the ruler of the European nations by luring the churchmen away from the Christ whom we encounter in our hearts, and toward the Christ that can only be known through the minds of the philosophers and theologians. It wasn’t necessary for Satan to attack the laity directly, because once he turned the clergymen away from the living God it was only a matter of sitting back and letting nature, and nature’s God, the noble black savage, take its course. What have they, the clergymen, wrought? They have given us darkness where there was light – they have taught us that the highest form of love is the abandonment of our kith and kin, they have taught us that only great minds can know God, and they have taught us that there never was a Christian people, it was all a lie. But it was those people who said, without qualification or equivocation, that Christ rose from the dead on the third day. If those people were not Christian, if they were the source of all evil, to whom do we turn to in this world? To the modern clergymen who have blended liberalism and paganism? To the liberals who bid us worship nature and nature’s god, the noble black savage? Or do we turn to the neo-pagans who bid us worship our white genes? (3)

The conservatives in church and state, who are not conservative, have joined with the liberals in that which is essential – our apprehension of the living God. They have both placed God out there and have forbidden access to Him except through them. That is paganism:

From these things, I began to instruct him in the knowledge of the true God; I told him that the great Maker of all things lived up there, pointing up towards heaven; that He governed the world by the same power and providence by which He made it; that He was omnipotent, and could do everything for us, give everything to us, take everything from us; and thus, by degrees, I opened his eyes. He listened with great attention, and received with pleasure the notion of Jesus Christ being sent to redeem us; and of the manner of making our prayers to God, and His being able to hear us, even in heaven. He told me one day, that if our God could hear us, up beyond the sun, he must needs be a greater God than their Benamuckee, who lived but a little way off, and yet could not hear till they went up to the great mountains where he dwelt to speak to them. I asked him if ever he went thither to speak to him. He said, “No; they never went that were young men; none went thither but the old men,” whom he called their Oowokakee; that is, as I made him explain to me, their religious, or clergy; and that they went to say O (so he called saying prayers), and then came back and told them what Benamuckee said.Robinson Crusoe

The ‘conservatives’ tell us that Benamuckee is Christ, but we must wait till they do more research and study before we can know anything about Him. And the liberals tell us that Benamuckee is the noble black savage, the Messiah, whom the prophet Jesus Christ prepared the way for. Thus the mad-dog liberal branch of the new paganism trumps the classical liberal branch of neo-paganism because the mad-dog liberals have a flesh and blood savior that they can call their own. But that god is a false God; his dethronement will come about when the European people fight their way through the wizardry of the experts and return to the God of their people. Until that time, they will be at the mercy of the liberals’ god, a god who has no mercy.

The editor of National Review magazine recently published a rousing defense of Google’s internet monopoly. Isn’t that a betrayal of the magazine’s original intent? No, it is not. National Review was always a modernist, liberal magazine just as 20th century conservatism was always a modernist, liberal movement, Gnostic in origin in that it championed a process over the reason for the process. Mary fell down at her Savior’s feet and was upbraided by Martha for a lack of respect for the process of hospitality consisting of kitchen work. For what end was kitchen work intended? It was for Christ, who bid us come to Him in the garden. If the system is all, we shall end up with Benamuckee as our god, because Benamuckee only requires external assent and sacrifice. But if we step away from the systems and seek Him in the garden, we will understand with our hearts and we will serve the living God of mercy and love. That is not a little distinction – the distinction between the gods of sacrifice and the God of mercy. It was our people who made that distinction crystal clear, and it is the modern church men and their secular partners in crime who want to blur that distinction. To what end? To go with the demon-possessed swine who went over the cliff. +

_______________________

(1) I have learned since I wrote my first article on the subject of Brenton Terrant that he did indeed target women and children along with Moslem men. We must, as Christians, condemn such actions. But that should not make us become hypocritical Quakers. And let us not be too sanctimonious. In my mid-twenties I went to visit a Roman Catholic conservative writer whom I admired. He was of Eastern European extraction and he had suffered much under the communists. During the course of a long conversation, he asserted quite casually that you had to target the communists’ women and children because they were targeting your women and children. I went away from that conversation in a state of shock. This was not the Walter Scott ethos that I expected to hear from my idol. When I had time to think over what my idol had said, I asked myself how I would have felt had I been under the communist yoke and/or I had members of my family killed by the communists. It becomes a messy business, doesn’t it? Still, in the end, my idol was no longer my guiding light. I don’t believe in going outside that charity of honor, which the best of our blood adhered to.

The Moslem mayor of London has told us that the soaring murder rate in that once peaceful city is the price we must pay for diversity. In the face of that hideous ideology of violence, and now that the major cities of the United States have become like unto Africa, we should look at how a Christian people once fought heathenism without becoming like unto the heathens.

To the credit of the British soldier be it said, that infuriated as they were by the thirst for vengeance, the thought of the murdered women, and the heat of battle, not a single case occurred, so far as is known, of a woman being ill-treated, insulted, or fired upon—although the women had been present in the massacres, and had constantly accompanied and cheered on the sorties of the mutineers. To the Sepoys met with in Delhi no mercy was shown; every man taken was at once bayoneted, and the same fate befell all townsmen found fighting against us. The rest of the men, as well as the women and children, were, after the fighting was over, permitted to leave the city unmolested, although large numbers of them had taken share in the sack of the white inhabitants’ houses, and the murder of every Christian, British or native, in the town. It would, however, have been impossible to separate the innocent from the guilty; consequently all were allowed to go free.–In Times of Peril by G. A. Henty

Let us reject genocidal policies of the liberals and the neo-paganism of Brenton Terrant for the faith and courage of the European people when they were Christian in spirit and blood.

(2) The countries of Eastern Europe and Iceland still have a chance, if they reject diversity and democracy, to avoid the bloody consequences of diversity and democracy. But they must return to their non-democratic Christian roots. That is a warning from a man who lives in the hellish pit of diversity to the men and women who are at the top of the pit: “Don’t enter the pit.” As for the rest of us? We must remain faithful while suffering through our Babylonian captivity.

(3) I realize that when a Christian European rejects the fusion of liberalism and Christianity in the organized churches and also rejects neo-paganism, he has no place to lay his head. I suppose that is why there are so few Christian Europeans. But the Son of Man also had no place to lay his head.

Posted in Chivalry, Muscular Christianity | Tagged | Leave a comment