The Sign of Our Salvation

Virtue might be rarer than vice, but it exists, especially in the hearts and souls of our European ancestors. Where the liberals see nothing but evil in our European ancestors, I see a roll of honor, a charity of honor. In the collective face of the European people of the days gone by, I see faith, hope, charity, and our Lord Jesus Christ. If we let “our ancient hearts” unite with theirs, we can be as they were, staunch in defense of our people and our God and unrelenting in our hatred of the liberals, who have loosed the dogs of color upon us and institutionalized blasphemy. It would be morally reprehensible to attempt to compromise with such creatures. Nor would it be realistic. Those people who have turned their hearts from the God of mercy will not be merciful to His people.

All seems cheerless, dark, and deadly on the European front. A sneering, satanic liberalism pervades what was once called Christendom. Living in Liberaldom is like living with the death of a loved one: there is an agony in the heart that can only be eased by a contemplation of Him and His promise that nothing eternal dies. That is our hope. If ancient European hearts unite with Christ through His people, then the liberals will not prevail. Ancient Europe will triumph over modern Babylon, even more surely than the turning of the earth. + —CWNY

__________________________

In Dostoyevsky’s novel The Brothers Karamazov, the Grand Inquisitor hurls a number of accusations at Christ. Among those accusations is the charge of desertion: “You said you would come back to earth, but you didn’t.” That is a serious charge. When a father deserts his children, he is not a good father. To his credit, Alyosha does not give a rational defense of God. He points to Christ and lets Ivan win the debate.

Why do I applaud Alyosha’s non-defense of God? Because Alyosha’s non-defense is the only proper defense. The rational defenses of Christ’s ‘failure’ to return to earth, along with the rational defenses of the suffering we must endure on this earth, always end up supporting the Ivan Karamazovs of the world: “Case closed: the Christian God has been found guilty. Let us look to another God.” That is precisely what happened in the 20^th century. Christ was found guilty of desertion; He left his children to suffer and die alone while He went off to… Where did He go? And where is the Comforter He promised?

The colored heathen can say with pride that they, like the dwarves in C. S. Lewis’s Chronicles of Narnia, were not taken in by Christ; they remained faithful to their heathen deities. And the small minority of colored heathens who adhered to the white man’s code, the Gunga Dins who “were white, pure white inside”? They were and are regarded as traitors. The liberals’ worship of the colored heathens does not include them, the Uncle Remuses of the heathen world who serve the white man and worship the white man’s God.

The liberals’ hatred of all things white and Christian stems from their belief that they were tricked. They gave up the fleshpots of Egypt to champion Christ, and He turned out to be a fairy tale. While the colored heathens were enjoying themselves, the white people suffered through centuries of sexual repression and cruelty because of their adherence to the will of the Christian God. The unshackling process that began in the 20^th century and was completed by the 21^st century has set the European people free from Christ. But what are they doing with their new-found freedom? They are recreating Heathendom. For what is liberalism in its essence? It is a synthesis of all the heathen faiths; feminism, Islam, and negro worship are reincarnations of the cruel nature religions that preceded the Christian religion. In his poem Clarel, a Pilgrimage to the Holy Land, Herman Melville tells us that science cannot umpire the feud between heathenism and Christianity. But the modern Europeans decided science could umpire that feud. And science decided in favor of nature and nature’s gods. The colored heathens won the debate. They were real, they were pure, and they were natural, while the white man was not real, he was not pure, and he was not natural.

There is no appeal from the liberals’ supreme court. The white man has been found guilty of foisting a false and unnatural religion on the world, the penalty for that crime is death. The church-going, white ‘Christians’ seek to avoid the death penalty by blending their Christianity with liberalism. “We are not racist, we are not sexist, we are not Europhiles.” By betraying his race, the moderate white ‘Christian’ hopes to save himself and his church from the wrath of the liberals. But that will not work. Only the white illuminati, the whites who have transcended whiteness and the Christian faith will be allowed into the liberals’ utopia.

When the apostles met the risen Lord on the road to Emmaus, they asked Him to, “Abide with us; for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent.” And then – “When it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.” Our people knew Him, through the testimony of the apostles and the Holy Ghost who dwells in the human heart. Ah, there’s the rub. Does the Holy Ghost reside in the human heart and did the apostles really see the risen Lord? Everything centers on one essential point: Do we see with the heart or with the head? The apostles on the road to Emmaus, after their encounter with the risen Lord, did not say, “Now we see things clearly, we understand the dialectic expounded by the wise man.” No, they said they understood because their hearts burned within them. How do we test the veracity of the apostles’ testimony? Is our heart drawn to the Christ story, does it make us say, “My life is like this tale, so I’ll keep it for sympathy’s sake”? Or do we reject it as unscientific? George Bernard Shaw, who, more than any other writer, painter, or composer, managed to take upon himself the attributes of the devil, used to point out with glee that it was science that had turned the European people into a non-people in search of a new faith. The incarnation of Christ and His resurrection were scientifically unverifiable, so they must be false. That simple 2 + 2 = 4 logic is correct from a purely scientific viewpoint. And since Christ never came back to earth to refute the scientists and the Shaws, it must mean, from the liberals’ standpoint, that Christ be not risen. Liberaldom could not have been built without the European peoples’ tacit acceptance of Shaw’s and the scientists’ assertion that Christ be not risen.

God will judge the intent of the scholastic theologians, Catholic and Protestant, who attempted to scientize God, but we can judge the results. God cannot be scientized, He cannot be probed and dissected like a laboratory specimen. The end result of such a process will be the creation of a false, mind-forged God who does not make men’s hearts burn within them. It’s very easy to become a complete sceptic about Christianity when one wades through the various theological wars of the church men, each one trying to hand God to us in a golden, scientized bowl, but it is very hard to remain skeptical when one encounters the Word made flesh in the hearts of the men and women of Europe who loved Him. It is their testimony, the testimony of hearts that loved much, which we must cling to when the darkness of Liberaldom makes us feel that God has forsaken us.

Cyrano de Bergerac, after discovering that his beloved Roxanne loves another, very eloquently expresses his complete defiance of the world. His friend cuts to the heart of the tirade: “Say this to all the world, then whisper to me, ‘She loves me not.’” The scientizing of God in the churches has killed the European people. Unlike the colored heathens, the European people staked everything on Christ. They were not deterred by suffering or by His seeming desertion, because they had that which was essential: they had charity, the charity that hopeth all things and believeth all things. That charity is missing in our scientized world, because the ‘pride of science’ men, the scholastics of Christian Jewry, the Rousseaus, the Voltaires, the Darwinians, the Einsteins, and the Shaws placed a wedge between God and man by declaring that all thought stemming from the human heart was false while all thought stemming from the abstracted mind contemplating the natural world was true. When that scientized view of existence takes hold of a man’s soul, he says, “Christ loves me not, I shall look for another God.”

Christ is the cornerstone of our faith. If we lose Him, we lose everything. And where does He reside? He resides with the Master Humphreys of Europe, the men and women who see Christ through their kith and kin. Theirs is a continuum, a spiritual connection, between the apostles on the road to Emmaus and the European people when they were a people. If we take the scientized veil from the eyes of our heart and see the risen Lord as the apostles saw Him, as the first European tribesmen, the men who conquered Rome, saw Him, we can touch Him and we can know Him intimately through the charity that begins at home and ends with His heavenly home of many mansions. It is very easy to become unbalanced, to allow our analytical minds to overrule our hearts, and accept Ivan’s Karamazov’s indictment of God: “He lied to us, He did not return, and He permits us to suffer and die without hope.” But I ask you, when the European Christ stands before us, the Christ of the Gospels, the Christ of St. Paul, the Christ of the European poets who expressed the heartfelt faith of their people, does not our heart burn within us?

In his autobiography, Francois Mauriac says that we all are given the chance to say what St. Peter would have liked to have said (and subsequently does say, even though it leads to his crucifixion) on the night of Christ’s crucifixion. We can say, “Yes, I know that Man, He is Christ the Lord.” The race war, which is so one-sided because the European people have lost the heart to fight, is about the Man of Sorrows. The liberals say that He was a fraud and a liar. They cannot punish Him directly, but they can attack Him through the people who championed Him. The grazers seek to avoid the liberals’ wrath by claiming “We do not know that man!” That is what the statement, “I am not a racist,” means. When a white European makes that statement, when he leaves his racial hearth fire, he is leaving the European Christ behind. Is there any other Christ? No, there is not. That Christ is the Christ who entered the circumcised hearts of the people of Europe. He piped to our ancestors’ hearts and they responded. Now, once again, Christ has been dragged before the Sanhedrin and found guilty. When a white man washes his hands of the European people and tries to save Christianity by abandoning the European-centered vision of Christ, he is behaving like Pontius Pilate, who knew Christ was innocent but still consented to His crucifixion. And when a white man becomes a liberal, he is joining the Jews who screamed, “Crucify Him!” The race war is part of the eternal conflict between God and the devil. Satan currently holds the field; by appealing to the Europeans’ pride of science, he has killed their hearts. All the rational apologetics ever conceived by the minds of men cannot restore the Europeans’ faith in God if they haven’t the heart for God. And without a racial hearth fire, they have no heart.

Whenever I think of the scientizing of the European people, a sad, lonely, despairing face appears before me. It is the face of a Roman Catholic priest I knew when I was an undergraduate. I had come, through the good offices of the European bards, to a trembling faith in the God-Man, Jesus Christ and thought that a course in the Gospels might help strengthen my faith. I chose Father _____’s course because I had read a book he wrote some twenty-five years before, which suggested that he believed in Jesus Christ. The first day of the class was quite a disappointment. Father _____ subjected God’s word to the same scrutiny the literary critics subjected Shakespeare to. I found such critical scrutiny offensive when applied to Shakespeare and blasphemous when applied to the Gospels. And after class, in his office, I told Father _____ what I thought of his class. I also asked him about his faith, namely, what had happened to it. First, he defended his approach to the Gospels: “We can’t presume that the Gospels are the word of God in an academic classroom.” In response to my second question about his loss of faith, he said, “There are so few signs.” That is when I saw the sadness, the loneliness, and the despair on his face that has stayed with me all through my life. It was the sadness and loneliness of a man who has lost contact with our Lord, and it was the despair of a man who had no idea how to reestablish that contact. How many souls have gone through the same tragedy, the tragedy of the scientized soul, and how many Europeans are currently living that tragedy? Needless to say, I dropped the course. I didn’t want to go down Father _____’s lonesome road. A scientized faith is not a faith. It promises us paradise and gives us hell. Do we reject the devil and all his works? If our answer is, “Yes, I reject the devil and all his works,” then we must reject the pride of science. Then, having circumcised our hearts, we will be able to see our Lord and Savior through the people who loved much. +