Category: Christianity

The good bishop and the killing of God

Never let it be said that Richard Williamson was cowed into submission by his January 2009 encounter with Jewish power.  The SSPX’s most politically adventurous bishop is back, via a circular to his email list, with a fresh perspective on the papal perspective on our Elder Brothers in Faith:

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Saturday, October 15, 2011 at 05:58 PM in Christianity
Comments (27) | Tell-a-Friend

WN and the Christianity problem

by Karl LaForce

The story so far …

Alabama governor and Baptist deacon Robert Bentley speaking at the Dexter Avenue King Memorial Baptist Church, Monday 17th January 2011, shortly after taking his oath of office at the Alabama Capitol:

“Anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I’m telling you, you’re not my brother and you’re not my sister, and I want to be your brother.”

Alabama governor and Baptist deacon Robert Bentley speaking to reporters after meeting “Jewish leaders” on Wednesday 19th January 2011:

If anyone from other religions felt disenfranchised by the language, I want to say I am sorry.  I am sorry if I offended anyone in any way.

Alabama governor Robert Bentley is just another genetic-European whose head and heart have been captured by a Jewish ideology.  There’s no shortage of Jewish ideologies, of course, or of captives.  There are probably somewhere around one hundred million white Americans in a similar condition.  Bentley is not at all an exception in terms of belief, not even among bible-belt state governors, though he is possibly ahead of most in the willingness, as a high ranking public official, to enlighten the public about the in-group status he believes Christians share.

As shown by his statements, he is not merely a victim of the fertility of Jewish macro-religious thought and modern-day Jewish ethnic activism but he busies himself promoting both victimhoods.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Thursday, January 20, 2011 at 09:01 PM in Christianity
Comments (121) | Tell-a-Friend

Kinism: The One and the Many

This piece is authored by my friend DanielJ, who is someone I am proud to say I have met and like, and regard as a brother in the cause if not, as he might regard me despite myself, in Christ (or perhaps he wouldn’t!)  The article appeared yesterday in the Summer 2010 edition of The Kinist Review.
GW

KINISM:THE ONE AND THE MANY

DanielJ

And He has made all nations of men of one blood to dwell on all the face of the earth, ordaining fore-appointed seasons and boundaries of their dwelling … (Act 17:26)

Adam was created directly by God in the express image and likeness of God. The Godhead conspired to create, and after naming man, declared that the express purpose in their creation of man was the ruling, classifying, dominance and administration of creation. Although God created man in His own image and His own likeness, Adam has left to us—his children—a legacy of death and a fallen nature. After the fall, Adam and Eve gave birth to children that were born in their own image and in their own totally depraved likeness rather than the direct likeness and image of God.

This is an account of the births of Adam: In the day of God’s preparing man, in the likeness of God He hath made him; a male and a female He hath prepared them, and He blesseth them, and calleth their name Man, in the day of their being prepared. And Adam liveth an hundred and thirty years, and begetteth a son in his likeness, according to his image, and calleth his name Seth. (Gen 5:1-3)

We are, therefore, born into a covenant of death under a covenant head who has passed unto to us nothing but sin, death, and decay. We are all, by virtue of this inheritance, corrupt and headed for perdition. We, the many, of every tribe on Earth, are of the Adamic kind and in need of the one—represented in Scripture by Seth—to save us from our sins. Scripture tells us of the battle between these two seeds: “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He will bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel.” (Gen 3:15) Furthermore, Scripture states:

“Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, being made a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone having been hanged on a tree”); so that the blessing of Abraham might be to the nations in Jesus Christ, and that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. Brothers, I speak according to man, a covenant having been ratified, even among mankind, no one sets aside or adds to it. And to Abraham and to his Seed the promises were spoken. It does not say, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, “And to your Seed,” which is Christ. (Gal 3:13-16)

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Wednesday, August 11, 2010 at 09:20 AM in Christianity
Comments (53) | Tell-a-Friend

God and the West?

by The Narrator

There continues to be debate about the pros and cons of religion, specifically Christianity, around pro-Western and semi pro-Western blogs and sites. Does religion help? Does it hurt? Is it a bulwark against multiculturalism and diversity or is it their foundation? The following will address some of the points which often come up in this ongoing discussion.

A recent article at Takimag.com put forth the (somewhat common) theory that part of The West’s problems in regards to the promotion of multiculturalism and immigration is one of fertility as it relates to theist vs. atheist influence. The theory goes that as Whites drift away from theism (usually specifically Christianity) they cease having children in sufficient numbers.

Now the problem with this theory is obvious. Namely, there are actually very few atheists in the world or the West in particular.  (And for the clarification of the uncertain here, a theist is not a Christian. A theist is someone who believes in a deity or deities or the supernatural in general. In other words Julian the Apostate and Martin Luther were both theists.)

This article at Wikipedia sources a Eurobarometer Poll from four years ago informing us that France has the highest percentage of those who “do not believe there is a spirit, God, nor life force” at 33% (within the European Union 18% fell into this category).  In America the percentage of atheists is even fuzzier with various polls suggesting somewhere around 4% to 9%.  Further problems are created when agnostics are lumped in with atheists.

At any rate, when it comes to numbers, theists seem to hold a firm majority.  So much so that to contrast theist vs. atheist fertility rates may be impossible as the later could easily fall into the ‘margin of error’ on most polls in many Western nations.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Monday, November 30, 2009 at 07:28 PM in Christianity
Comments (88) | Tell-a-Friend

Why European Christianity cannot ever accumulate to potency

by PF

1. Foreign texts don’t point us to our essence. Our spiritual birth as a nation is built on imitation of foreigners.

2. Texts have to be ‘translated’ mentally by those reading them into European thought forms, making “our” sacred texts essentially a form of Orientalist scholarship from the beginning. However, scholarship is often critical of its sources, whereas our sacred traditions view these oriental texts as completely authoritative and really the last word on spirituality.

3. The text alienates the common reader because the unique mindset for culturally co-opting this oriental religion is only shared by a few, who become priests. There is little or no resonance for the common man in the stories of the Bible. Unlike the Homeric stories, which we know to be widely disseminated and enjoyed in ancient Hellas, the sources of our religious tradition have belonged from the beginning to the few Orientalists who would submit to their foreignness and teach it authoritatively to the rest of us. Those who viewed the adoption of oriental thought forms as the purest access to spirituality became the fathers of our traditions.

4. The alien nature of our Jewish religious texts means that they cannot be added to in a similar style; there was necessarily a complete stylistic break when they were imported. This means that we cannot add to them or treat them as living documents, but rather as relics to defer to as over and above ourselves. This kills the possibility of building a pre-rational, living tradition within our own lands. The most a British man can hope for, spiritually, is to become an obedient antiquarian for the inspired Jews of the Hellenist Levant.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Sunday, November 22, 2009 at 06:36 PM in Christianity
Comments (127) | Tell-a-Friend

Faith no faith

As happens sometimes here, a thread given over to one subject has been rudely assaulted by another ... the perennial, insoluble, irresistible problem of ... well, God.  So with belated apologies to Soren, whose thread God offended against, I’m relocating the unequal struggle here.  Just in case the Blighter has any fight left in Him.

In danielj’s intellectual armoury lies the following by no means rusty and unsharpened assertion:

Belief in empiricism isn’t merited by the plain fact ... Why should I accept the debate on your terms?

Now, this way of looking at the empirical enemy recognises the hard and unpalatable fact that ever since that night in Oxford when the Bishop was slain by a mawnkey, religion has been in full and undignified retreat.  We all know the story.  I don’t need to reproduce it here.  The reverberations of that night, and of the publishing event that preceded it, still reach down to us today, a century and a half later.  Although evolutionary science has won every battle since, the faculty of faith is nothing if not enduring.  It doesn’t give up.  It can’t.  It is as much a part of the human genome as the strict and methodological intellectualism it disdains.

So we have daniel’s response to all the long years of being told that Christians are dealers in self-deception.  It is to assert that the scientific method - the pursuit of the predictive - is predicated on belief no less than belief itself.  Now, I am not much interested in how this conclusion is reached.  It must, after all, only be a matter of faith.  It cannot, by its own admission, be true.

And there is the little local difficulty.  Daniel’s stratagem has the effect of rendering all truth hollow and meaningless, though this probably isn’t his intention.  We are not taken back to some sweet life of the mid-Victorian past, filled with simple and good, hi-fidelity hearts.  We are transported to a truthless world, and Man cannot live without truth.  Truth is more necessary, more visceral and humane, more of our lives than faith or beauty ever was or, most certainly, ever will be.

But that is what happens when the terms of the debate are dictated by Christians, and all categories are reduced to mere belief.

Well, let’s keep them separate here, at least.  The committment to ontology and the committment to teleology are separated by qualitative differences.  They employ the qualitatively different methods of, respectively, proof and prayer, and journey along qualitatively different lines.  Ontology predicates experience > hypothesis > predictiveness > truth.  Teleology predicates thought > idealism >  faith > beauty.  Truth and beauty are not equals.  Truth leads to enlightenment.  Beauty leads only to itself.

To make truth and beauty both matters of belief is disingenuous and rather unEuropean.  It has something in common with the semitic attraction to postmodernism, and the equally semitic promulgation of the Sociobiology Wars of the 1970s, 80s and 90s.  It is inappropriate for us.  Let the faithful reflect, if they can possibly bring themselves to, on the spirituality of superfice which eschews the subtle and difficult, the psychological, and grasps instead at bibles and prayers, salvation and eternal life, and all the beautiful exordia of self-deception and moral frailty that once cost “witches” their yet more beautiful lives and brought destruction to the sons of men in a way that blood and soil never did.  Let them reflect on the responsibility they all share of bearing a powerful psychological driver through life without visiting harm upon others, as one would with the sex drive or with male aggression.  Let them learn to withhold it from the world, keep it private so public life, public progress and intellectualism can proceed, naturally enough, not on daniel’s relativistic terms but on their own.

Posted by Guessedworker on Saturday, September 26, 2009 at 07:32 PM in Christianity
Comments (225) | Tell-a-Friend

Towards a God that can save us

A review of ‘The Language of God’ by Francis S. Collins

‘I am convinced that a change can only be prepared from the same place in the world where the modern technological world originated. It cannot come about by the adoption of Zen Buddhism or other Eastern experiences of the world. The help of the European tradition and a new appropriation of that tradition are needed for a change in thinking. Thinking will only be transformed by a thinking that has the same origin and destiny.’

‘I know that everything essential and great has only emerged when human beings had a home and were rooted in a tradition.’

—Martin Heidegger, Der Spiegel interview 1966

Francis Collins was head of the Human Genome Project (HGP), which published an initial version of the genome in 2001 (simultaneously with Celera Genomics).  Originally led by reknowned atheist, Nobel Prize winner, and racial heretic James Watson, the HGP was taken over by Collins in 1993.  Prior to this, Collins had a successful career in disease gene discovery.  His scientific credentials make him for many a credible and interesting Christian apologist.

The foundation for Collins’ belief is the ‘Moral Law’ as outlined by C.S. Lewis in ‘Mere Christianity’, which is taken to be the source of our innate ability to judge right from wrong.  Collins realizes that his own discipline has something to say about this, so he tries to counter the sociobiologists’ arguments for altruism right away.  But he does a terrible job of it, the icing on the cake being his invoking the examples of Oskar Schindler and Mother Teresa as his sole proof against group selection (most of the examples Collins provides of the Moral Law made flesh are drawn from the usual suspects of the PC parade: Schindler, MLK, Wilberforce, etc.).  Such scientific failings expose Collins to the charge of hypocrisy, as one of his main criticisms of creationists is that they are promoting a ‘God of the Gaps’ whose existence is made vulnerable by advances in science.  In a more blatant example, after cricizing the hubris of those who referred to parts of the genome as ‘junk DNA’, he himself describes parts of it as ‘flotsam and jetsam’ and uses its purported ‘junk’ status to refute creationism.  Collins assumes he knows what parts of the genome are non-functional.  One wonders whether he is even aware of the recent revolution in RNA biology and that the majority of the genome is transcribed.

Continued...

Posted by Dasein on Friday, March 20, 2009 at 05:46 PM in Books,  Christianity
Comments (19) | Tell-a-Friend

Drew Fraser at Inverell 2008

“What I do want to talk about is, essentially, the Anglo-Saxon identity crises, the source of Anglophobia, the sort of spiritual disorder that I believe Anglo-Saxons are suffering from. What I want to start with is the nature of the disorder, move on to talk about the deep roots of the disorder, and then conclude by discussing a possible remedy for it.

First of all, the source of the nature of this crises seems to me is in the official description called constitutional patriotism, or civic nationalism, which translates in real terms into the idolatrous worship of the state and the corporate system - in practical terms.”

So began a speech by Prof Andrew Fraser given last March at the Inverell Forum, Australia’s famously incorrect annual celebration of dissident opinion and free speech.  The Forum organisers produce DVDs of each of the speeches, and it is thanks to MR reader John Fitzgerald that the Fraser speech is now in transcribed form and I can quote from it.

In the first part of the speech, Fraser traces the roots of white racial consciousness through the period of slave-owning in the American South, the development of white skin privilege and white equality, and the emergence in the North of the fundamentals of modern human rights.

“In Australia,” he asks, “how can you run an immigration policy on the basis of discrimination between white and non-white, especially once you start to play around with the notion of white, because white is not synonymous with Anglo-Saxon.  Afterwards you get massive numbers of Italians, Greeks and Lebanese Christians.  Are they white?  Just where is the boundary of whiteness?  So then it became human-ness that really counts.  And so you have what came to be known as the non-discriminatory immigration policy.”

Now, Fraser had begun by using the term “spiritual disorder”, so it should be no surprise that from here on the speech focuses heavily on the, as he sees it, broad failure of Christianity in the crisis of Anglo-Saxon identity.  “It’s a mistake,” he tells us, “to do what a lot of people on the right would do; blame it all on the Frankfurt School, or the Jews or, as I hear here, the Illuminate.”  Fraser roots the entire process in the Papal revolution which confined the action of kings to the secular world.  “The world becomes flattened, “he says, “God is a being, we are beings, he is an infinite being, we are finite beings ...  In that kind of context God, because he’s infinite, becomes very remote and only accessible to us through his will.”

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, January 4, 2009 at 07:05 PM in Christianity
Comments (112) | Tell-a-Friend

Ethnocentrism and Christian universalism: opposites and parallels

Over the last few days I have conducted an e-mail exchange with “Rocket”, whom readers will know for his firm universalist Christian stand.  Rocket asked to post here on the juxtaposing of ethnocentric and universalist Christian aims and values.  What we’ve ended up with is this, which parentage is very much more Rocket’s than mine.  So it is his handle which appears beneath the post.
GW

In the sociological substratum of ethnocentrism versus authentic Christian universalism there are a number of interesting ways to compare and contrast these two value systems.  One significant qualitative difference lies in the dual concepts of honor and shame, which are the tribal equivalents of redemption and retribution in Christianity.

Historically, tribes with an iron clad bloodline-identification placed a high premium on honor and shame.  Roman historian Tacitus wrote about Germania and its conflict with Pax Romana, and how the German tribes refused to be subdued.  Hence they remained free men in the sense of retaining control over their tribe’s fate.

Meantime, through the vicarious sacrifice of Christ, the Christian is embraced by divine forgiveness.  Hence he lives as a free men, even though his life-circumstances may dictate otherwise.

There can be no honor for the followers of Jesus of Nazareth because His followers do not seek honor from men, including each other.  They do seek redemption, though, and an act of altruism towards the poor and sick is redeeming.  Hard-heartedness or greed, on the other hand, will meet with retribution.  The parallel in the old Germanic world was that hard-hearted fighting was in-group altruism, and there was honor if you fought as an Ostrogoth and great shame if you did not.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Wednesday, February 27, 2008 at 08:03 PM in Christianity
Comments (142) | Tell-a-Friend

An Imaginary Interview

An Imaginary Interview
By
Robert E. Reis

“CAMBRIA WILL NOT YIELD” is an anonymous author at a blog by the same name. I think his blog deserves many visits. I hope you will agree.

Why are white Europeans in retreat?

“It is clear that white Europeans no longer believe what white European pagans once believed, nor what white European Christians once believed. This is why they are helpless in the face of the “passionate intensity” of the barbarians of color. The barbarians still believe in barbarism.”

Continued...

Posted by Robert Reis on Friday, September 21, 2007 at 11:39 AM in Christianity
Comments (27) | Tell-a-Friend

The Christianity Question

In European culture, polytheistic beliefs began to dwindle with the rise of Christianity.  In the centuries to come it was to be expected that the polymorph system of explanation, whether in theology or, later on, in sociology, politics, history, or psychology, in short, the entire perception of the world, would gradually come under the influence of Judeo-Christian monotheistic beliefs.  Unquestionably, the two thousand year impact of Judeo-Christian monotheism, with its distilment of Americanism, has considerably altered its approach to politics as well as the overall perception of the world.

... In modern consciousness, the centuries long and pervasive influence of Christianity has contributed significantly to the modern view that holds any glorification of polytheism or, for that matter, nostalgia for the Greco-Roman spiritual order, as irreconcilable with contemporary Americanised society.  Modern individuals who reject Jewish influence in America often forget that much of their neuroses would disappear if their Biblical fundamentalism was abandoned.  One may contend that the rejection of monotheism does not imply a return to the worship of ancient Indo-European dieties or the veneration of some exotic gods and goddesses.  It means forging another civilisation or, rather, a modernized version of scientific and cultural Hellenism, considered once as a common recepticle of all European peoples.

Dr Tomislav Sunic writing under his heading of “American neo-paganism in his book, Homo americanus.

Now, I’ve put together this quote because it contains both halves of what I suppose we must call the Christianity Question, namely:-

1) The role of the Bible in communicating the Jewish materialistic worldview, out of which came the obsessive 20th Century drive for world improvement.

All liberalism’s children, including communism, democratism, predatory capitalism, even anti-semitism in Tom’s view, are just secular offshoots of this strange, borrowed Levantine faith.  And there is no end to it as long as we draw water from that well.

2) The desirability and grave difficulty of recovering mythological value for Europeans (which Tom qualifies as “the quest for their ancestral heritage”).

I am going to make a few observations about both issues.  I do so with some nervousness about treading on hallowed ground.  I am a stranger to faith myself and would not, even if I was able, wish to follow Richard Dawkins’ tasteless precedent.  I am not, therefore, making a case against faith.  My case against Christianity is the case against the leaden characteristics of the Jewish god.

With that caveat then, here goes.

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, April 27, 2007 at 06:42 PM in Christianity
Comments (34) | Tell-a-Friend

Strange Alliance: Christian/Jewish Zionists.

When debating the existence of God, philosophers point to two major problems: unnecessary evil in the world and non-belief (See T.M. Drange’s Nonbelief & Evil, 1998). One strong component of many religions then is to find ways to prove that God exists, and especially reassuring are miracles and prophecies.

In The Politics of Apocalypse: The History and Influence of Christian Zionism by Dan Cohan-Sherbok, 2006, he traces the long history of Christian Zionists attempts’ to use biblical prophecy to show that God exists, that God plays an active role in the unfolding of the future, and being saved before “Armageddon arrives,” which is right around the corner, should be the main concern for Christians. Until recently I have always considered such ideas belonging to a small number of religious literalists, but they have far more influence than I was aware of before—and outside their group I would assume others are also quite unaware of their influence.

Continued...

Posted by Matt Nuenke on Saturday, February 17, 2007 at 10:30 AM in Christianity
Comments (13) | Tell-a-Friend

OPEN SEASON ON EVERY RELIGION BUT ONE

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2007/01/19/open_season_on_every_religion_but_one

In a nation of broken taboos—where a Brooklyn artist can display a crucifix in urine and Madonna can rock out while hanging from a cross—only one religion, Judaism, enjoys virtual immunity from criticism. Those who dare break the silence are punished with social and political ruin, tarred as “anti-Semites,” sinners of the worst stripe.

Think I exaggerate? Just take a moment to sample the scorching critiques leveled by national public figures against Islam and especially Christianity. For starters, listen to Anti-Defamation League head Abe Foxman. If you think Jews aren’t uniquely sheltered, imagine if he were talking about them.

“They are a well-funded, well-organized facet,” he intoned, “engaged in an aggressive campaign to transform America into a theocracy ruled by their warped view of biblical law.”

Foxman was talking about Christians or, in his words, “Christian Supremacists.” This was a warm-up for his lecture on Muslim extremists, another group of scary, religious radicals Foxman said also seek global dominion. The ADL head bragged that in 2006 more than 21 books or national articles were written about the threat of politically active Christians. First on his list was Michelle Goldberg’s Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism, which accuses Christians of “dominion theology.”

Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on Monday, January 22, 2007 at 07:45 PM in Christianity,  That Question Again
Comments (10) | Tell-a-Friend

Nasty, Racist, Islamophobic, Militaristic video game set to be Christmas bestseller

There’s some fight in the old faith yet:

A video game that depicts a crusade of violence by Christians could be heading for the bestseller charts this Christmas, even though it has been condemned by Muslims and secularists.

The game Left Behind: Eternal Forces is set in post-apocalyptic New York and features God’s army battling the Antichrist.

Based on the bestselling Christian fantasy Left Behind series created by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins, it puts players in command of brainwashed legions fighting the “good fight” for Christianity.

Gamers are ordered to convert or kill in order to re-model America as a Christian-controlled state, and establish its world vision of Christ’s dominion over all aspects of life.

Gamers pit battles between the paramilitary Christian Tribulation Force and the grey, faceless Global Community forces of the Antichrist, said to be modelled on the United Nations.

 

‘Grey, faceless Global Community’! As in, what we might have once the distinct races and nations of the West are subsumed into a toffee-coloured global mass!

And just wait until you hear what Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society* (read:National Society for the eradication of Christianity) and author of such uplifting and edifying works as these, has to say:

Fundamentalists on both the Christian and the Muslim side are creating this kind of nasty, extreme propaganda and aiming it at young people.

Translation: “This is precisely the sort of extreme propaganda that Muslims have been using to encourage their young to make war on Christians. This, however, is an example of Christians - Whites - doing the same, which can’t be allowed. Don’t you remember that you’re supposed to be a helot, not to fight back?”

Now, why would a campaigning homosexualist, in other words somebody who campaigns for the benefit of those whose interests do not extend past this generation, be so hostile to a reaffirmation, however vulgar, of the fighting Christian faith, which is apt to make life uncomfortable for the near future but is nigh on essential if we are to survive in the long run? That’s easy enough to answer. Now, why does the Times choose to quote him without mentioning any of these highly salient details? That’s the more interesting question.

We don’t have to agree with the sentiments, fundamentalist, totalitarian and genocidal ones, endorsed by Left Behind to welcome the arrival of this video-game. It will act purely as what The Revolutionary Conservative once called ‘a totalitarian onslaught of mind-numbing extremity against Political Correctness’. It’ll be a way of confronting Cultural Marxism with its dialectical opposite, and seeing it flinch in sheer terror at the spectacle. After all, they, not we, first decreed that the public celebration of Christmas was but a lesser variant of the same crime that the Holocaust represented, the crime of racism. Those behind this game simply agree, although they are also unwilling to give up Christmas.

*Here‘s a rather interesting website. Scroll down and count the number of National Secular Society members you can find.

Posted by Alex Zeka on Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 02:43 PM in Christianity,  Popular Culture
Comments (19) | Tell-a-Friend

I hate to over Sobranise you…

...but this week’s offering is just too good:

I finally began to get my answer when I watched, yet again, the classic liberal movie Inherit the Wind, a fictionalized version of the 1925 Scopes “monkey trial.” If you want to understand how liberals see the world, this is the place to start.

The real Scopes was prosecuted for teaching Darwin’s theory in a public school. Today, when government has switched dogmas, he would be prosecuted if he tried to teach that God created man.

The movie never actually uses the term right-wing, but the basic idea is there. On one side are the reasonable, benevolent, open-minded liberals, typified by the Clarence Darrow character (played by Spencer Tracy); on the other are the religious bigots, buffoons, and blowhards who hate science and are typified by the William Jennings Bryan character (Fredric March) and form lynch mobs.

Posted by Alex Zeka on Wednesday, November 29, 2006 at 04:21 AM in Christianity,  Liberalism & the Left
Comments (13) | Tell-a-Friend

The Big E tells God: Thou shalt not love Thy children in the BNP

None-too-bright but seemingly unstoppable lip-flapper and scourge of English survivalism ... “The Man” when it comes to equality ... the one and only Trevor Phillips, Tony’s Georgetown bro, has been laying those smooth, smooth moves on the BNP.  Again.

Church should expel racists and BNP supporters, says CRE chief

Churches should expel racists and supporters of the British National Party from their pews, the head of the Government’s race watchdog said today.

Trevor Phillips called on bishop and priests to refuse communion to racists and turn them into “pariahs and outsiders”.

“Will the churches support any priest or minister who says I will not administer the sacrament to someone who blatantly rejects Christ’s teachings?”

... The CRE chief said at a conference run by the Evangelical Alliance, a grouping that includes many of the country’s black churches, that the churches should have condemned the BNP leader.

“If ever there was a moment for hellfire and damnation, this was it,” Mr Phillips said. “At the very least, every pulpit this Sunday should have been ringing with denunciation, ministers and priests crying ‘not in our name’.

“The far right should not be able to claim Christ to their cause. But they will do if we let them.”

He added: “I feel rage that my church might expect me to be in communion with such as Nick Griffin.  This is where Christ puts us to the test.

“In the end it is Christians who decide who shares their fellowship, and who is excluded.”

Mr Phillips asked: “Are we ready to use weapons of faith to turn these people into pariahs and outsiders?”

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, November 17, 2006 at 05:47 AM in Christianity
Comments (43) | Tell-a-Friend

Balls of steel in Lambeth?  Well, just the one so far.

“The first time the Church has launched such a defence of the country’s Christian heritage” is how an un-named bishop described a confidential Church document, leaked to The Sunday Telegraph today.

“An astonishing attack on the Government’s drive to turn Britain into a multi-faith society” was how the Telegraph saw it.

The paper, titled Cohesion and Integration – A briefing note for the House [of Bishops], was written by Guy Wilkinson, the interfaith adviser to the Archbishop of Canterbury.  These are the criticisms it levels at our so-liberal political masters:-

1. The attempt to make minority “faith” communities more integrated has backfired, leaving society “more separated than ever before”.

2. Divisions between communities have been deepened by the Government’s “schizophrenic” approach to tackling multiculturalism. While trying to encourage interfaith relations, it has actually given “privileged attention” to the Islamic faith and Muslim communities.

3. The Church of England has been sidelined. Instead, “preferential” treatment has been afforded to the Muslim community despite the fact that it makes up only three per cent of the population.

4. Britain remains overwhelmingly a Christian country at heart and moves to label it as a multi-faith society suggest a hidden agenda.

5. Public funds have been used to fly Muslim scholars to Britain, legislation on forced marriage has been shelved, financial arrangements to comply with Islamic Law have been encouraged.  Yet none of this has produced any “noticeable positive impact on community cohesion.  Indeed,” the report goes on, “one might argue that disaffection and separation is now greater than ever, with Muslim communities withdrawing further into a sense of victimhood, and other faith communities seriously concerned that the Government has given signals that appear to encourage the notion of a privileged relationship with sections of the Muslim community.”

6. The Government is wrong to see faith as the cause of a divided society.

Of course, one has to note from the outset that the Church of England is more the wounded liberal Establishment at prayer than the forthright, awakening defender of an imperilled Christian nation.  It still adheres firmly to the pluralistic faith-society, the la-la “why can’t we all love one another” ideology.  But this is kumbayah with an oddly refreshing note of menace - at least as far as this useless, fearful, screwed-up Government is concerned.

The day that menace finds its proper target amid the golden crescents of England’s northern towns and cities will be really something.

Just one more ball to find.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, October 8, 2006 at 03:34 PM in Christianity
Comments (2) | Tell-a-Friend

Singin from da hymn sheet

Since I am not a Christian nor a liberal nor a Ugandan immigrant nor sound asleep it is difficult for me to assess the utility of today’s sermonising by Dr John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York.  He is, alas, the second most powerful figure in the Anglican Church, and living proof of the Communion’s exciting, go-ahead committment to ... vibrancy, of course.  So when he adumbrates upon the nature of my Englishness and cautions me to vote for a mainstream political mugger in Thursday’s local authority election, should I obediently sit up and take notice.  Does anyone, in fact, obediently sit up and take notice?

Well, according to BBC News this is what he said:-

Referring to parties like the British National Party, Dr John Sentamu said they espoused the “politics of fear”.

Dr Sentamu, who was born in Uganda, described Britain as “a country of immigrants” and ... told BBC Radio Four’s Sunday programme: “This country has been one of the most welcoming, most accommodating.

I want to suggest if it lost that because people simply say ‘we’re going to put a barbed wire around a number of things in order for us to feel safe’, that is not actual security, that’s fear - and any politics which plays on people’s fears in the long run, give it a bit of time, it will fail”.

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, April 30, 2006 at 05:49 PM in Christianity
Comments (10) | Tell-a-Friend

An expedition into Volkskultur

My previous little personal memoirs here seem generally to have been well-received, so here is another!

Intellectually, I have been an utter atheist for over 40 years but emotionally I am still the Bible-bashing Protestant fundamentalist I was in my teens.  And one consequence of that is that I have a great love of Christian music, including popular hymns.  So I feel very much at home with ALL the sacred music of my Volk.  I would scarcely be a lover of Bach otherwise as his inspiration was very much in German Protestantism and its great music.

So when Anne suggested that we attend a “Festival of Praise” last night at the Logan Entertainment Centre (a municipal facility in a working-class part of the Brisbane area), I was perfectly happy to go along.  Since she came into my life Anne has done a fair bit towards demolishing my previous reclusive lifestyle!

When we arrived, I noticed that the audience was 100% “Caucasian” (which seems to be the American euphemism for “white”—a term one uses at some risk these days.  Though the connection most “Caucasians” have with the Caucasus is very distant indeed).  And I would guess that most of the audience were Anglo-Celtic too.  Some people don’t like that term “Anglo-Celtic” but seeing I am myself Anglo-Celtic in ancestry, I see no problem with it.

Continued...

Posted by jonjayray on Saturday, April 8, 2006 at 09:37 PM in Christianity
Comments (9) | Tell-a-Friend

Christian patriots smeared by Church Marxists

Christians seeking to halt Marxist onslaught against British people are smeared by Church of England

According to its website, the recently established Christian Council of Britain is an organisation that aims to “work towards the removal of barriers to the expression of our faith and all forms of discrimination faced by Christians” by raising awareness of the “threat to our ancient faiths, values and our very existence by false prophets”. Unsurprisingly, these fairly innocuous objectives - in fact they are the ingredients for the very survival of European Christianity - have come under attack from the Marxist conspirators who have infiltrated and captured the mainstream churches.

The major “crime” of the CCB is that it has informal links with the British National Party and holds to similar objectives. The founder of the CCB, Reverend Robert West, has said, “there is a link in that the BNP has encouraged and facilitated the formation of the Christian Council of Britain”. When asked of his personal world-view, Reverend West said, “the CCB believes in the biblical teaching of nations. We should live in nations as nations”. He continued, “if we are to exist as nations then we are to have our own national homelands. In our own national homelands in which our own identity has priority…each race should have its own space”. In order to grant “space” to each “race”, Reverend West is prepared to countenance the voluntary repatriation of aliens; as he stipulates “provided it was by consent”.

This extremely subversive notion of national self-determination has been pilloried by the Church of England and other Marxist and New World Order religious fronts. In distancing itself from the CCB, the Church of England has reiterated its official policy that “any political movement that seeks to divide our communities on the basis of ethnicity is an affront to the nature of God revealed in creation and Scripture”, sanctimoniously concluding that “voting for and/or supporting a political party that offers racist policies is incompatible with Christian discipleship”. In an astonishing attempt to rewrite the Bible, the Church of England has even created a whole new category of sin:

(We) call on all Christians in England to nurture a loathing of the sin of racism and to model the teaching of Christ in loving all our neighbours…

(emphasis added)

According to the Macquarie Dictionary, “racism” is any belief that “human races have distinctive characteristics which determine their respective cultures”. As anyone with the slightest understanding of Christianity could tell you, there is no such sin as “racism” or anything remotely like it in the Bible, and in issuing such a ridiculous edict the Church is not only abusing its position as a temporal authority by concocting errant nonsense, it is arguably elevating itself to a status equal with God Himself. That the Church has abdicated its role as a responsible religious authority and become little more than an outlet of state-sponsored propaganda is further confirmed by its commitment to “building cohesive communities and affirming our multi-ethnic, culturally and religiously diverse society”.

Not to be outdone by the Church of England, Methodist Church spokeswoman Anthea Cox has condemned the CCB. She said, “I am outraged that the BNP and its allies are using Christianity to further their agenda of segregation and division”. She continued, “We reaffirm our earlier statements that Christian belief is incompatible with any political party or philosophy that is based on hatred or treats people as inferior because of their race, beliefs or for any other reason.” But the CCB has never said that anyone should be treated as “inferior” because of their race. They simply stated that each race should have the right to self-determination, a right which the churches never thought to condemn in the case of the African anti-colonial movements. Do Englishmen not have the same rights as Africans? If this is true, then will the Methodist Church recant its policy of “equal treatment of the races” as being inconsistent with its more favoured policy of “English self-abnegation”?

It is now perfectly obvious that the established churches believe in no identifiably Christian principles whatsoever. They have eschewed all Commandments except for the most sacred Commandment of all, “Thou Shalt Not Discriminate”. They believe that opposing the destruction of one’s own ethny is the most grievous sin of all, and even go further in implying that the dissolution of whole races is somehow an unqualified benefit to humanity. In taking such a positively inhumane stance the priorities of the established churches are instructive. Note that they do not argue, for example, that one cannot both be a Christian and support a political party that carries out criminal wars of aggression against foreigners on the basis of monstrous fabrications. They do not disendorse politicians who drop depleted uranium ordinance on civilians, and they certainly do not oppose state-sponsored torture at the ballot box.

No, the established churches have reserved all their ire for believers in national and ethnic self-determination, and in doing so they have confirmed themselves as nothing more than pathetic shills for the New World Order; their eventual eclipse will be mourned by nobody.

Posted by Steve Edwards on Saturday, April 1, 2006 at 01:21 PM in Christianity
Comments (33) | Tell-a-Friend

Vatican stops apologizing for the Crusades

“The Vatican has begun moves to rehabilitate the Crusaders by sponsoring a conference at the weekend that portrays the Crusades as wars fought with the “noble aim” of regaining the Holy Land for Christianity. The Crusades are seen by many Muslims as acts of violence that have underpinned Western aggression towards the Arab world ever since. Followers of Osama bin Laden claim to be taking part in a latter-day “jihad against the Jews and Crusaders”.... At the conference, held at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University, Roberto De Mattei, an Italian historian, recalled that the Crusades were “a response to the Muslim invasion of Christian lands and the Muslim devastation of the Holy Places”.... Professor De Mattei noted that the desecration of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem by Muslim forces in 1009 had helped to provoke the First Crusade at the end of the 11th century, called by Pope Urban II.  He said that the Crusaders were “martyrs” who had “sacrificed their lives for the faith”.

He was backed by Jonathan Riley-Smith, Dixie Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Cambridge University, who said that those who sought forgiveness for the Crusades “do not know their history”. Professor Riley-Smith has attacked Sir Ridley Scott’s recent film Kingdom of Heaven, starring Orlando Bloom, as “utter nonsense”.  Professor Riley-Smith said that the script, like much writing on the Crusades, was “historically inaccurate. It depicts the Muslims as civilised and the Crusaders as barbarians. It has nothing to do with reality.”

More here

Posted by jonjayray on Monday, March 20, 2006 at 05:12 AM in Christianity
Comments (10) | Tell-a-Friend

The precentor and the dragon

What is a precentor?  You haven’t a clue have you?  Shame!  A precentor is a senior official of a cathedral or other large ecclesiastical establishment.  It is all part of your European Christian background and culture.  To defend your culture you first have to know about it.  So try harder.  The precentor originally led the singing and he is still usually in charge of a cathedral’s musical affairs—though he also is a senior administrator generally —often the next down in seniority to the Dean.

I met a precentor today.  Anne and were were in town for a stroll and noticed a service in progress at the metropolitical cathedral of St John (Anglican) so we popped in for a biscuit and a sip of wine.  (Just joking!  Atheists don’t take communion).  Anyway the music was good, the service was delightfully mediaeval and we had a quick chat with the precentor afterwards.  In the absence of the Dean (who was over at the CATHOLIC cathedral in some good cause!) the Precentor celebrated the Eucharist so also had hand-shaking duties afterwards.

I must admit that I was a bit fuzzy about what precentors actually did—partly because the duties of precentors do vary—so I was pleased to meet a live one and find out what he did.  He was indeed 2IC to the Dean.

After church we strolled down to the Botanical Gardens for another sit-down and had a very fat dragon (an 18” long lizard) come up to us in an apparent quest for food.  A very pleasant Sunday morning!

Posted by jonjayray on Saturday, February 18, 2006 at 11:49 PM in Christianity
Comments (14) | Tell-a-Friend

Not Winterval yet

I am somewhat bemused to find three men in cassocks stepping into the ring to take on the “silly bureaucrats” and the “minority in leadership who want to privatise religion”.  But that’s what has happened today.

First off, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams put his name to a piece in The Mail On Sunday saying:-

What makes some people suspicious of Christmas these days is that it’s too religious. This year there seems to have been even more stories about the banning of Christian images and words by silly bureaucrats.

Right on cue the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr George Carey, weighed in during GMTV’s Sunday Programme with:-

“We must avoid the kind of political correctness that is creeping in and undermining the public expression of the Christian faith.”

He said he was concerned about “a worrying hostility towards Christianity and all religions by a minority of people in leadership today who want to privatise religion, push it to the boundaries, not allow a voice in the public arena.”

Meanwhile the Bishop of Lichfield, the Right Reverend Jonathan Gledhill, declared his diocese to be fighting back against the politically correct approach to Christmas with a new poster campaign:-

“There have been reports from all over the country about local authorities, businesses, retail centres and even central government trying to take the Christ out of Christmas, claiming Christmas is offensive.

“They seem to want to make Christmas history - the Diocese of Lichfield wants to make Christmas His story”

Ordinarily, we would say these churchmen are part of the liberal problem and preside over an emotionally feminised version of Christianity.  However, even they have limits.  They have, it seems, noticed that the silly bureaucrats and the mysterious minority in leadership have none, and will go on chipping away at every surviving outcrop of Western culture until nothing remains.

The “hands-off” declarations of today reveal a fault-line between religious liberals and committed egalitarian activists.  In essence, the former are drawing a line in the snow.  They are refusing to let their faith be marxised out of existence - which is a point I have made many, many times in respect of Western Man in general.  When all roads lead to extinction, resistance will be the only recourse.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, December 18, 2005 at 08:04 PM in Christianity
Comments (5) | Tell-a-Friend

Gregorian chant at Our Lady of Protection Ukrainian Byzantine Catholic Church

Almost all blogs contain a fair bit of comment about the personal life of the blogger.  There is not much of that here so maybe my occasional personal anecdote helps keep a balance.  My anecdotes are always fairly didactic anyway.

Because both the lady in my life (Anne) and myself are lovers of early church music we tend to end up in churches a fair bit on weekends even though we are both unbelievers.  Mentally, I am as atheist as you can get but emotionally I am still Christian.  And I can assure you that that apparent inconsistency bothers me not one iota.  I have an enormous appreciation (and considerable knowledge) of my Christian heritage.

Last night we went to a concert held after the regular service at Our Lady of Protection Ukrainian Byzantine Catholic Church here in Brisbane.  How a church can be both Byzantine and Catholic is a considerable puzzle.  Byzantium is the home of Orthodoxy.  But I assume that there was a schism some time in the past where an Orthodox church kept all its Greek rites but decided to recognize the magisterium of the Pope as well.  The fact that the church still had a version of the mediaeval “rude screen” between the altar and the congregation supports that.  There was also no organ in evidence—which seemed very strange to an old Protestant like me. Presbyterian/Methodist churches that I know always have an organ with a pulpit in front of it as the focus of attention in a church (rather than an altar).

The first thing I noted in the church was the large number of children and young people in attendance.  It made me feel very grateful for our Ukrainian immigrants.  After the genocide inflicted on the Ukrainians by Stalin, perhaps they feel an urge to restore their numbers.  And, unlike Muslims, Ukrainians don’t make the news by harassing Anglo-Australians.  I guess having a religion that says “love your neighbour” is a bit different from having a religion that says “Kill the infidel”.

The main attraction on the program was a series of Latin chants by “Schola Cantorum”—a Brisbane choir who seem to specialize in that.  The male members dressed in monk’s robes so one got a very good feel for how the chants were originally intended.  And hearing them in a church with such a prominent mediaeval feature as a rude screen helped with that too.

And the priest was YOUNG!  Still in his 20s by all appearances.  Great to see that Christianity is alive and vital among this subsection of the Australian population at least.

Posted by jonjayray on Saturday, December 17, 2005 at 10:09 PM in Christianity
Comments (11) | Tell-a-Friend

Celebrating the feast of Christ the King at “Our Lady of Victories”

It has from time to time been said on this blog that if you want to live in an entirely white society, you need to move to Eastern Europe.  In Brisbane you can do that with relative ease.  This Sunday morning, I attended a mass at “Our Lady of Victories” church—Brisbane’s major Catholic church with an entirely Polish congregation.  The service was mostly in Polish but, being a bit deaf, I found it hardly more incomprehensible than the service at the Metropolitical Cathedral of St. John—a marvellous stone Anglican church to which I also occasionally go for the music.  Being a great fan of early church music (the Missa Papae Marcelli by Palestrina is my favourite in that department) I am often to be found in places where few atheists go.

Anyway, the service at “Our Lady of Victories” was overwhelming.  The congregation was of course entirely pink-skinned and mostly elderly.  There was Gregorian chant even before the service began and young nuns in wimples were much in evidence.  The service began with a magnificent ecclesiastical procession with all sorts of flags, banners and uniforms—with the distinctive caps of the heroic Polish armed forces much in evidence.  There was no order of service or prayer-book handed out.  People KNEW what to do and when to do it.  Sanctuaries were opened and closed, bells were rung and trumpet fanfares were sounded.  And best of all was the heartfelt singing of Polish hymns.  And, quite amazingly, after the service was over and we left the church, we all processed right around the church and resumed devotions while standing outside it—with the clergy officiating from the entrance staircase.  There was a definite reluctance to let go of a great community occasion.  It was all pretty foreign to my poor old Presbyterian heart (the lady I was with was also of Presbyterian origins) but the power of the occasion was still very evident to me nonetheless.

So, yes. I do appreciate the ways of my Volk—with that term VERY broadly defined—and I believe that they are so powerful that they will never go away.  That the Poles have endured so much and still emerged victorious in all the ways that matter is proof of that.

Posted by jonjayray on Sunday, November 20, 2005 at 01:15 PM in Christianity
Comments (18) | Tell-a-Friend