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