As the latest in a long line of churches doing things that ethno-nationalists do not like, the Polish Episocopate has now decided to make sure that you really know that they are against anti-semitism:

Radio Poland, ‘Polish Episcopate condemns anti-semitism as ‘a sin’‘, 20 Oct 2015: (emphasis added)

The Polish Episcopate has published an extensive condemnation of anti-semitism on the 50th anniversary of a landmark Vatican declaration on relations with non-Christian religions.

In a special pastoral letter entitled ‘The shared spiritual heritage of Christians and Jews’, the Episcopate stressed that “anti-semitism and anti-Judaism are sins against the love of thy neighbour.”

The letter notes that the Church organises an annual ‘Day of Judaism’, affirming however that “Christian-Jewish dialogue must never be treated as ‘the religious hobby’ of a small group of enthusiasts, but it should increasingly become part of the mainstream of pastoral work.”

The Polish clerics also acknowledged that the Holocaust, which was planned by “Nazi Germany and largely carried out on the territory of occupied Poland,” nevertheless “sometimes met with indifference among certain Christians.”

According to the Episcopate, “if Christians and Jews had practised religious brotherhood in the past, more Jews would have found help and support from Christians.”

In that respect, the Espiscopate particularly praises the ‘Righteous among Nations’ who “risked their lives and those of their loved ones, heroically rescuing Jews” during the war. Under the Nazi occupation, giving shelter to Jews by Poles was punishable by death.

“In many places in our country there are no Jews, only traces of their religion and culture, often in neglected cemeteries,” the letter notes.

“The Love of thy neighbour, and the spiritual bond with our older brothers in the faith obliges us to care for the places that bear witness to the centuries-long presence of Jews in Poland and the memory of their contribution to the culture of our multinational and multireligious country.”

The document pays tribute to the conciliatory efforts of previous members of the Roman Catholic Church, including Polish pontiff Pope John Paul II, who was the first pope to visit a synagogue, and a committed leader of dialogue with Jews.

The so-called ‘Nostra aetate’ (In our time) declaration made during the Second Vatican Council 50 years ago under Pope Paul VI is regarded as a breakthrough regarding relations with non-Christian religions.

Thaw

During the communist era, academic debate concerning the Holocaust was largely frozen in Poland.

An anti-Zionist campaign led by the government in 1968 compelled several thousand Polish Jews who had survived the war to emigrate. After that, Jewish issues were taboo in many aspects of officially endorsed Polish culture.

It was not until the 1980s that a reassessment of Polish-Jewish relations began in earnest, a trend that gathered pace following the collapse of communism in 1989.

Previously little discussed stains on Poland’s wartime treatment of Jews have been highlighted in recent years, owing to books such as Jan Gross’s Neighbours (2001), which focused on what had been a largely forgotten massacre of Jews by ethnic Poles in the town of Jedwabne, north eastern Poland.

Such issues remain highly emotive and divisive in Poland. (nh/rk)

Under any sane ethno-nationalist framework, the burden should not be on ethno-nationalists to explain why Jews ‘should be regarded as a separate people who ought to live outside of Europe’, the burden instead should be on everyone else to explain and to attempt to justify why Jews ‘should be allowed’ to persistently be part of Europe while not being European.

For every other non-European population group whose people are inside Europe in any number, that is how the burden of proof works when having that discussion. You have to prove how you are useful to Europe, at the very least. But mysteriously, when it comes to the issue of Jews, that burden of proof is reversed. Why?

• Is it because Jews can ‘pass as white’?
• Or is it because of extensive application of guilt narratives in the post war environment?
• Or is it because Christianity is part of the Judaic jurisdiction?

Oh, actually, it’s probably all of the above.

Adrean Arlott wrote an article back in May 2013 in which he touched on this issue in a broad sense within the United States:

Compulsory Diversity News, ‘Save us Jebus!’, 18 May 2013:

I have been debating Christianity’s lack of virtues today. I ask you this: Does Christianity do more to help or hurt White people? If we consider anti-racist to be code word for anti-White, then I vote it hurts White people.

Orthodox Church: (Source)
...we reject phyletism, that is racial discrimination and nationalistic contention, enmities and discord in the Church of Christ as being contrary to the teaching of the Gospel and the sacred canons of our holy Fathers, who support the holy Church and adorn the whole of the Christian life, leading to divine Godliness.

Catholic Church: (Source)
We begin with three facts. First, racism exists here; it is part of the American landscape. Second, racism is completely contrary to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Third, all baptized Catholics have a moral obligation to work toward the elimination of racism.

Episcopal Church: (Source)
Racism is totally inconsistent with the Gospel, therefore, must be confronted and eradicated. Basing its message on the baptismal covenant, the Bishops invited all baptized Christians to enter into a new covenant to fight racism and, “proclaim the vision of God’s new creation in which the dignity of every human being is honored.”

Baptist Church: (Source)
“We are all saddened when any sin, including the sin of racism, rears its head,” said Southern Baptist Convention spokesman Sing Oldham. “Part of our gospel is that we are being redeemed. We are flawed, failed creatures and redemption is a process.”

Westboro Baptist Church (Source)
...the Scripture doesn’t support racism. God never says “thou shalt not be black.” However, He does say, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” (Leviticus 18:22).

Mormon Church: (Source)
“The church’s position is clear,” LDS Church spokesman Michael Purdy said. “We believe all people are God’s children and are equal in His eyes and in the church. We do not tolerate racism in any form. For a time in the church there was a restriction on the priesthood for male members of African descent,” Purdy said. “It is not known precisely why, how or when this restriction began in the church but what is clear is that it ended decades ago.”

Lutheran Church: (Source)
Racism is one of the most destructive sins in today’s world. It refuses to honor God’s mighty acts in creation, redemption, and sanctification. Racism simply does not trust the gospel. It builds on human pride and prejudice, abusing power for selfish advantage. Racism dishonors God, neighbor, and self. It rejects the meaning in God’s becoming incarnate in Jesus Christ, because in rejecting another person one rejects Jesus Christ.

Presbyterian Church: (Source)
The Dismantling Racism and Privilege Ministry Team assists the presbytery in its commitment to dismantle racism and privilege. Its purpose is to increase awareness and work toward the eradication of intentional and unintentional racism and privilege at critical decision points in the life of the presbytery, and to assist sessions and congregations in dismantling racism and privilege among our church constituency.

Methodist Church: (Source)
At the beginning of the 21st century, the United Methodist Church is focusing on racism and promoting diversity with more vigor than ever. It is actively promoting more inclusiveness and diversity in its institutions and leadership. One of its 14 churchwide agencies, the Commission on Religion and Race, focuses on those issues, and caucuses such as Black Methodists for Church Renewal and Methodists Associated Representing the Cause of Hispanic Americans also keep them in front of the church. Through programs such as Strengthening the Black Church for the 21st Century, the National Plan for Hispanic Ministries, the Council on Korean-American Ministries and the Native American Comprehensive Plan, the denomination is building up racial-ethnic congregations.

Pretty interesting, Adrean Arlott had done a good service to his readers when he pointed that out to them.

The fact that Arlott has drawn attention to this in the past, should provide even more of a context to how well-known and well-understood it is to ethno-nationalists, that Christian churches are not capable of being allies of ethno-nationalists and never will be. Even the most cynical political calculations could not bring anyone to the conclusion that organised Christianity could be utilised in the defence of anyone’s ethnic genetic interests (EGI).

It’s so bad in fact, that the Christian churches promote not only white genocide—not even metaphorically but literally—but also for the rest of the planet they offer nothing other than genocide either.

For example, plenty of church bodies espouse the position of mass mestizaje for Central Americans, thus advocating the continuation of the genocide against the native peoples of the Americas.

Here’s one example of that:

Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, ‘Ethnic Specific and Multicultural Ministries - Latino’: (emphasis added)
We are a community that confesses its origin and identity in the creative, redemptive and sanctifying work of God. The great diversity that characterizes us is a process of continual biological and cultural “mestizaje,” and our unity is in Jesus Christ, who gathers us around word and water, wine and bread.

Truly mindblowing.

So really, in what world would anyone think that ethnic advocacy from ‘a Christian perspective’ could ever be possible? In what retarded world is ‘cultural Christianity’—which is to say, the idea of a political alliance between Christianity and ethno-nationalism—even a thing that could be worth considering for more than five seconds? It’s just completely ridiculous.

The real and actually-existing physical manifestation of Christianity is one which is intrinsically opposed to the existence of pretty much everyone’s ethnic groups. It’s not that Christianity somehow acquired an ethnicity-destroying agenda after the year 1968. It was already doing that from the start, it’s just that the ‘anti-racist’ cultural phenomenon that manifested in the west after 1968 offered Christianity the ability to express its full ‘anti-racist’ potential while uninhibited by secular interference.