Introduction
Contemporary Protestants try hard to be nice. Church leaders ceaselessly call upon Christians to be “inclusive” and “compassionate” when dealing with “the Other.” Introductory texts in theology teach that the “church is always threatened by a false unity that does not allow for the inclusion of strangers and outcasts.” Among White Anglo-Saxon Protestants, in particular, the compulsory embrace of humanity’s “rich diversity” is the prescribed antidote to “the ominous coupling of a shadowy religiosity with a militant nationalism or racism in such slogans as ‘God and Fatherland’ or ‘God, family, and country.”[1]
According to Princeton theology Professor Daniel L Migliore, such “vague but uniformly comforting references to God and religious values” shaped “the ideology of too many German Christians during the Third Reich and are still invoked by “chauvinistic movements in the United States and other countries.”[2] The notion that nationalism is a social pathology owes much of its all-pervasive influence to Karl Barth (1882–1968), a Swiss Protestant theologian who achieved fame and more than a little notoriety in the 1930s through uncompromising opposition to the National Socialist takeover of both church and state in Germany. The fact is, however, both Barth and Migliore seriously misrepresent the relationship between Christian communities of faith and the blood bonds of national identity.
The Bible provides ample warrant to designate “nations” and “peoples” as essential building blocks in the constitution of the holy, catholic, and apostolic church of Christ. Indeed, Christ directed his disciples to “make disciples of all the nations.”(Matthew 28:19) The Old Testament people of Israel thus became the prototype of the Christian peoples of God in the New Covenant creation. Accordingly, the Russian Orthodox Church affirms that all peoples have the “right to national identity and national self-expressions” within the Body of Christ. In the nineteenth century, even an Anglican theologian such as FD Maurice saw the Old Testament as the history of a “peculiar nation” whose destiny is fulfilled and completed in the New Testament. God’s covenant promises to Old Israel are fulfilled when “a universal Church [unfolds] itself out of that nation,” taking “root in other nations and peoples throughout the ancient world.”[3]
But during the twentieth century ethnonationalism lost its religious aura of sanctity. In the erstwhile “Anglo-Saxon countries,” in particular, few Protestants any longer believe that it is part of God’s plan to form the character of each nation by means of the “spiritual body” within it, giving rise to what the Germans call a Volkskirche. Even Anglicans reject the idea that the Church of England was and should be again the Church for England and the English people, at home and in the diaspora. That decisive break with the past is very largely due to the Protestant Deformation produced by the theological crisis afflicting the German church during the 1930s.[4]
Ideological Civil War and Theological Crisis
The Protestant Deformation in Germany was part of the collateral damage inflicted on Christian civilization by the “ideological civil war of the twentieth century” in which “the universalist extremism of Bolshevism provokes the extremism of the particular in Nazism.” Ernst Nolte portrays the role of German National Socialism in the europäische Burgerkrieg between 1917 and 1945 as an “excessive” reaction to Bolshevism. In his view, an “excess in what is justified at the outset leads to the unjustifiable.”[5] The same dynamic operated in the theological crisis which engulfed Protestant churches in Germany as growing numbers of academic theologians, pastors, and parishioners eschewed neutrality and took opposing sides in the ideological conflicts dividing society at large. Soon after the Machtergreifung (the Nazi seizure of power) of 1933 which endowed Hitler with dictatorial powers, open ideological warfare broke out between a breakaway Bekennende Kirche (Confessing Church, hereafter BK) under the intellectual leadership of the Karl Barth and the Deutsche Christen (DC) movement in mainstream Lutheran and Evangelical churches. The latter were soon united under a Reichsbischof sworn to serve the Führer.[6]
Emanuel Hirsch (1888-1972) was just one of many prominent theologians whose loyalty to the National Socialist regime placed them at daggers drawn with Barth and the BK. Very early on in the ideological civil war tearing Germany and Europe apart, Hirsch aligned himself openly with the right.[7] Meanwhile, on the left, Barth, began his life-long journey as a fellow-traveller, a radical anti-Nazi widely suspected to be soft on Communism. Early in his career, he was known “as the notorious ‘red pastor’ of Safenwil;” late in life during the Cold War he excused “his peculiar attitude towards aggressive Communism in Hungary” by reference to the “good intentions” that inspired leftist totalitarianism. Barth’s ideological allegiances account for his “excessive” reaction to the rise of the DC movement. Even “Barth’s ‘friends’ in the Confessing Church thought him too difficult and not diplomatic enough.” In fact, he was seen as the “greatest danger” to the church “because he picked too many specific battles with National Socialism.”[8] Few would call Barth’s “rationality” into question. Barth was not, however, always so generous to his DC opponents, whose teachings he dismissed contemptuously as a “blatantly nonsensical” and “irresponsible pseudotheology.” [9]
Such vituperative rhetoric was both unjust and lacking in Christian charity. Robert Ericksen, a historian who shares Barth’s anti-Nazi stance, nevertheless describes Hirsch and two other prominent theologians supportive of the Deutsche Christen as “well-meaning, intelligent and respectable individuals who also happened to support Adolf Hitler.” He carefully demonstrates that each of these men developed an intellectually defensible theological rationale for his political stance. But, he continues, in and of itself, reason could not ground their political judgements. Like Barth, they made “an existential leap of faith” when choosing sides in the ideological civil war raging around them. In the end, however, Ericksen agrees with Barth that DC theologians were on the wrong side of history when they portrayed Jews as “a destructive force in Germany.”[10] Ernst Nolte is not so sure; he suggests that the anti-Judaism of the National Socialists had a “rational core” which “consists in the factual reality of the large role played by a certain number of personalities of Jewish origin at the centre of the communist and socialist movement, evidently because of the universalist and Messianic traditions proper to historical Judaism.”[11]
No doubt Jews were heavily over-represented in both Russian Bolshevism and the German Communist Party, a circumstance often cited by Hitler to justify his anti-Jewish policies. Such empirical data made little impression upon Karl Barth. As an intellectual leftist, Barth was predisposed to philo-Bolshevism; as a Christian humanist he naturally leaned towards philo-Semitism. He shared in the cosmopolitan universalism inherent in the messianic traditions of both historical and contemporary Judaism. For Barth, Jews, far from being an especially evil race were God’s ever-present reminder to Christians of the essential sinfulness of mankind at large. Barth broke “radically with those more traditional Christian thinkers who see in Israel’s refusal to receive Christ a purely human refusal, a merely human blindness to the messiahship of Christ.” For Barth, according to John Johnson, “the Jews do not receive Christ because God has ordained their rejection of him.” Israel’s disobedience, whether in killing Christ two thousand years ago, or in siding with the Bolsheviks in their ideological civil war against bourgeois Christians in modern Europe, “is really a sign of humanity’s rebellion against God.”[12]
Barth went further, suggesting that the existence of the Jews was, in itself, proof of God’s existence. But the Jews cannot “fully convince the rest of the world of its need of God until the Jews themselves acknowledge their own need and enter the church.” God’s salvific plan for humanity therefore requires the mass conversion of the Jews at the Second Coming of Christ. Barth insists that the “Church can understand its own origin and its own goal only as it understands its unity with Israel. Barth denied that God has rejected the Jewish people. The New Covenant of Christ did not supersede the Old Covenant with the seed of Abraham. Old Israel remains under the bow of one covenant joining it with the New Israel of the Church until the last days when “Jesus Christ will come again in His glory with all His angels.” Jew and non-Jew would finally be fused together in the Body of Christ.[13]
Barth and other “progressive” German pastors worked to undermine the theological foundations of the deeply-ingrained Christian wariness towards Jews. While they were successful in destabilizing orthodox theology on the Jewish Question, their efforts attracted the law of unintended consequences. On the traditional understanding, God cursed the Jews because they rejected the Lord Jesus Christ. If a Jew is baptised, therefore, the theological case for discrimination against him collapses. But, once German Christians were persuaded to find the source of a Jew’s ethno-national identity not in his theology but in his genetic make-up, the seeds of an intractable ethno-racial conflict were sown. However well-intentioned it may have been, Barth’s ecumenical enthusiasm brought the biological dimension of Jewish racial identity into sharper relief. Just as the murderous excesses of the revolutionary left heightened the horror attached to the Schreckbild of “jüdischer Bolschewismus,” Barth’s frankly irrational faith in the divinely-ordained, messianic role of the Jews inevitably provoked counter-excesses among Christians sympathetic to the cause of German national revival.
Barth vs. the Volkskirche
In a speech at the Berliner Sportpalast on 13 November 1933, a prominent DC leader, Dr Reinhold Krause, vowed that the National Socialist Revolution was not going to halt before the gates of the church. On the contrary, he looked forward to the full assimilation of ecclesiastical matters into the realm of politics; the Volkskirche was to be folded into the Volksstaat. When Krause went on to reject both the Old Testament and the theology of St Paul because of their Jewish origins, it was clear that the DC had become the “mirror-image” of Jewish hyper-ethnocentrism. Both Germans and Jews were to be defined as members of a race not a religion. Conceiving the Jewish Question in racial rather than theological terms, Krause condemned the church’s mission to the Jews as a serious threat to the racial integrity of the German Volkstum. Accordingly, the DC supported the so-called Aryan Paragraph requiring the dismissal of pastors who happened to be baptized Jews.[14] In the face of such provocations, Barth rapidly assumed leadership in the creation of the BK, drafting much of the Barmen Declaration of 1934 which formalized the split within the German church.
Eleven years later, the bloody denouement of Europe’s ideological civil war left Germany lying prostrate in Schutt und Asche. Barth emerged as the clear victor over völkische rivals such as Emanuel Hirsch who received what amounted to an immediate dishonourable discharge from the Göttingen theological faculty. In 1935, Barth had lost his position as “the most highly regarded professor of law in Germany” when he refused to swear an oath of loyalty to the Führer.[15] But, back in Switzerland, he continued his campaign against Hitler’s Germany while working on his magnum opus, the twelve volumes of Church Dogmatics—which remained unfinished at his death. By the Sixties, he was a world-renowned religious thinker, even appearing on the cover of Time magazine. His massive body of work is not, however, without its critics. Barth’s “excessive” reaction against the ideal of the Volkskirche led him not just to deny that the “ordo of nation and nationality” is “immanent in human nature” but to “dichotomize” Christ as the head of the Church from the ecclesiastical body which is the earthly-historical form of his existence.[16]
Barth denied that the Church can “be regarded as a human production.” It does not owe its existence to this world; rather the being of the Church is “secured, unthreatened, and incontestable only from above, only from God, not from below, not from the side of its human members.” What Barth “finds important about the church is not its empirical or historical dimensions, but rather its essential identity with Jesus Christ.” His “understanding of the church oscillates between the poles of the essential (Christ is his body, the church) and the merely accidental and empirical.” As a consequence, “Barth’s ecclesiology lacks…a sense of persistence or durée.” Many of Barth’s critics identify “the Spirit’s work with persistent, enduring social forms” and advocate “a critical historicism focused on the practices, structures, and traditions of historic Christianity.” But few, if any, of Barth’s academic critics dare to redeem the ideal of the Volkskirche from the shame and ridicule heaped upon it by the victors in the ideological civil war of the twentieth century. Generally speaking, theologians who are critical of Barth’s “reluctance to see God’s revelation ‘captured’ in human time” join with him to deny that “in the national determination of man we have an order of creation no less than in the relationship of man and woman and parents and children.”[17]
According to Barth, “the concept of one’s own people is not a fixed but a fluid concept.” Such ideas have become the conventional wisdom of our time. Similarly, few theologians today demur from Barth’s claims that “the majority of peoples have for centuries been physical mongrels.” Mainstream Christians in every erstwhile Anglo-Saxon country now “confess our people as a historical construct,” their purely contingent national identity cannot be identified as a command of God or a presupposition of the divine order of things.[18] In his struggle to overturn the orthodox Christian doctrine of nations, Barth’s ideological triumph was complete. But that victory exacted a steep price.
[1] Daniel L Migliore, Faith Seeking Understanding: An Introduction to Christian Theology Second Edition (Grand Rapids, MI: William Eerdmans, 2004), 13, 31.
[2] Ibid., 31-32.
[3] Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarchate of Moscow, Bases of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church, II. Church and nation, available online at: http://3saints.com/ustav_mp_russ_english.html#2; Jeremy Morris, FD Maurice and the Crisis of Christian Authority (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 4, 93, 103-105.
[4] I have borrowed the phrase “Protestant Deformation” from James Kurth, “The Protestant Deformation and American Foreign Policy,” (1998) 42(2) Orbis 225.
[5] François Furet and Ernst Nolte, Fascism and Communism (Lincoln, NB: University of Nebraska Press, 2001), 4, 11, 29. See also, Ernst Nolte, Der europäische Burgerkrieg, 1917-1945: Nationalsozialismus und Bolschewismus (Frankfurt am Main: Propyläen, 1987).
[6] Steffen Recknagel, Evangelische Kirche im Dritten Reich-Deutsche Christen und Bekennende Kirche im Zwiespalt zwischen Anpassung und Widerstand (Norderstedt: GRIN Verlag, 2005) 5-6.
[7] Robert P Ericksen, Theologians Under Hitler: Gerhard Kittel, Paul Althaus, and Emanuel Hirsch (New Haven, CN: Yale University Press, 1985).
[8] Frank Jehle, Ever Against the Stream: The Politics of Karl Barth, 1906-1968 (Grand Rapids, MI: William B Eerdmans, 2002), 2, 89, 54-55.
[9] Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics: The Doctrine of Creation III 4 (London: T&T Clark, 2009), 309
[10] Ericksen, Theologians, 26-27, 154.
[11] Nolte, Fascism and Communism, 28.
[12] John J Johnson, “A New Testament Understanding of the Jewish Rejection of Jesus: Four Theologians on the Salvation of Israel,” (2000) 43(2) Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 229, at 237.
[13] Ibid., 237; Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics: The Doctrine of God II 2, 284.
[14] Recknagel, Evangelische Kirche, 6-7; see also Kevin MacDonald, Separation and its Discontents: Towards an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism (Westport, CN: Praeger, 1998), 146-147, 160-161.
[15] Jehle, Ever Against the Stream, 13.
[16] Barth, CD III 4, 305; Ian A McFarland, “The Body of Christ: Rethinking a Classic Ecclesiological Model,” (2005) 7(3) International Journal of Systematic Theology 225, at 226.
[17] McFarland, “Rethinking,” 227; Karl Barth, God Here and Now (London: Routledge, 2003), 83; Joseph L Mangina, “Bearing the Marks of Jesus: The Church in the Economy of Salvation in Barth and Hauerwas,” (1999) 52(3) Scottish Journal of Theology 269, at 278, 302; Karl Barth, CD III 4, 291, 305; Joseph L Mangina, “The Stranger as Sacrament: Karl Barth and the Ethics of Ecclesial Practice,” (1999) 1(3) International Journal of Systematic Theology 322, at 333.
[18] Barth, CD III 4, 291, 294-295.
Facing the Future as a Minority
Was the Immigration Act of 1924 Illiberal?
Babel Tower # 1 didn’t work out that well. What’s the exegesis on that?
Soft on Communism indeed! I remember my mother’s anger, sometimes in the late Fifties, when he admonished the protestant churchmen of communist Eastern Germany to sign a loyality declaration for that hideous runt and de-facto dictator Walter Ulbricht. This is a very good article. I sincerely hope that many a present-day churchman reads it with great care.
Great article, very informative. With the excitement of WW2, we forget the significance of WW1 on the debate. In WW1, the different national churches supported their national governments and many people felt afterwards that they had been misguided. This also contributed to discrediting the idea of a national church in the UK between the wars.
I truly hope you will let this comment go through, as it is written with the best of intentions.
The anti-wasp tone and lack of understanding about wasp culture is why I am a bit lukewarm on AP3, as much as myself and others would like to support such a party.
What I ACTUALLY REMEMBER about the American 60s, for instance, is Mother having to go to the Catholic church and answer questions about which of their beliefs she could not subscribe to, in accordance with the “Ecumenical Councils” of Vatican II, the Pope’s Program that was visited on what had been a truly non-catholic country in its creation and founding ideas. In addition, of course, was Hart-Celler, perceived by us as a catholic-jewish coalition, the Kennedys, the attacks on the decidedly protestant south, opening the border only to South americans, again catholics, the creation of “anti-anglo” (code for wasps) Liberation Theology, and beginning to see friends meet with violence due to catholic immigration from S. America, and then the creation of the embassy for the pope and so on. (Even now, the country is majority protestant, but Catholic Nationalists (not decent people who simply believe in Jesus, but those who are for the Idea Nation, for their Idea/doctrine—just like the anti-white racialists– frequently gleefully publish numbers about their demise on their sites—as if the children of the founders cannot be gone fast enough. To this day, the non-wasp numbers are constantly inflated by breaking down the protestant groups, in order to even make the case that “catholics have won the nation!” The Supreme Court, we are told, has finally been ripped from the hands of the ‘heretics.’ For the jews, the children of the founders are ‘not chosen,’ for the catholics, they are ‘heretics.’ And why would God bless such a people…right?
TOO will not discuss such things from this perspective, generally, nor do “real wasps” really have a voice. The ascendence of the Ideologically-Based “nation” (the “Doctrinal nation”) very obviously does NOT have its roots in protestantism, for heaven’s sake, quite the opposite.
A nation is A PEOPLE by definition, but without the conquest of Rome (the Ideological “doctrinal” persecution of Europeans, BLOOD would have continued to rule. The slaughter of anyone who did not agree with an IDEA is NOT a protestant thing. The Idea Nation became European due to Rome.
Once BLOOD is conquered, in favor of an IDEA, (what Rome did), THEN the people are then RIPE for conquest by ANOTHER Idea. In other words, the idea of “nation” as “a people” has then been displaced, and then competing “ideas” can “takeover.” “Blood,” itself, has been conquered.
Many say that without the conquest of Rome, THEN Europe could never have become socialistic. It was the conquest of the Doctrinal Way FIRST that lays the groundwork for other Ideological Nations (s/a communism). In this way, the two are hand in hand.
This is why we wound up with the false dichotomy “communism versus capitalism” and some in america, actually believe that Catholicism can “fight” communists. In reality, BOTH suggest “doctrinal” Idea-Based societies. Both suggest Idea Nations, not “a people.”
This is exactly how things had parsed out in Europe— THEN the u.s. received BOTH the fascists (proper, in the sense of militarist-corporatist) AND the communists (who did infiltrate institutions in Gramsci-style) at the same time. It is really very funny to watch coverage in the country— half the shows discuss the “mccarthy era” and evil jewish spies! The other half of shows illustrate the Militarist-corporatist fascist (but whose militarism and corporatism is no longer a problem, but rather only the racialism, exemplified by the figure of “Hitler.”
In other words, the shows are info-mercials for Multi-racial Fascism, (a hybrid).
And so, the u.s. now has the same situation of the “two party systems,” the same wild swings between the “left” and the “right,” (with strange configurations of illogical party programs— creating many characters s/a the “Anti-abortionist Military Man.” Or the “crunchy conservative foodie.”
Many American Protestants (still the majority actually) just look at all this and laugh— to them, it is just a bunch of jews and catholics, usually first or second generations (look at your governance and t.v. makeup), going at each other as if they never left Europe. It is is JUST AS MUCH (please be honest) a string of pro-IRA movies (starting Daniel Day Lewis, Liam Nissan, Aiden Quinn), and the Coppalas, DeNiros, DeCaprios, Tarrantinos, Garafolos, Madonnas, Lady Gagas, etc, etc—- calling into question the idea put forward of “jewish ONLY hollywood.” (In fact, life is full of coalitions, alliances, etc.)
When I had to take catechism class (for “ecumenicism” although Protestant in a Protestant country), one of the strangest things said to me was “catholics ALLOWED PEOPLE to keep their ethnicity.”
But do they? Certainly not in the sense of PLE– “the uncontrolled energy” of culture that can happen when a sub-group of whites get together. In the backdrop of NYC, are the “parades” given to the Irish and the Italians, the African Heritage Days, or Puerto Rican Parades really “heritage?” Or —this is how it really is— do they make a JOKE of heritage, by reducing it to a cheap tax-supported parade, (for some groups, not others), where the Irish are reduced to “pipe players,” and the Italians to people who make good noodles, like Emeril.
There are many wasps out there (more than are known) who have NOT forgotten their enemies, nor the reality of what “heritage” MEANS under an “Idea Nation.”
The influx of European immigrants to America (a truly protestant nation rooted in founders who were defending against the “left”/”right” swings caused by the fight between BLOOD and IDEA in Europe, that occurred in 1848, and then around 1900 are key to understanding what happened, NOT protestantism.
But these people cannot look at themselves, nor how their underlying assumptions about life and the world (and protestants) changed places s/a America.
The jews are often associated with communism, and rightly. The catholics (many of whom have been genuine Catholic Nationalists, a position incompatible with blood, quite obviously), are associated with Fascists, not racialists— but Militarist-Corporatism, which the Americans now how as one of their two “parties.”
Without the influx of Catholics, this Militarist-Corporatism could not have emerged. The attempted “spin” now is to blame the protestants (due to “Manifest Destiny”– as if Empire Christianity never existed before that moment in time, which is quite dishonest.
Many “wn” sites disseminate such views, and exacerbate the hatred of wasps (and their genocide) by attempted to create these false, self-serving narratives.
In Reality– the problems of Europe are old and deep in this regard, and The Protestants in the U.S. had actually offered WAYS OUT of the problems, which were then brought to us by the Europeans when they arrived en masse, especially in 1848 and the turn of the last century. They brought with them wasp hating narratives— and as they have gained power with those narratives, they have slowly, themselves, become “white.”
In other words, their own aspirations have come back to bite them, and now their own families are endangered by the very “anti-anglo” narratives they had produced (to gain power). Many, imo, just think it’s hard to feel sorry for them, or concerned about the whole mess.
Some thoughts.
We shouldn’t underestimate that Barth was a Calvinist (his antipathy to Hirsch stemmed from the time when in Goettingen he represented Calvinist theology and Hirsch Lutheran theology). That’s above all important to understand his theology of the Jews (foundation theology is Calvinist from the beginning, if “superseding” or not).
Secondly, we must see that the German intelligentsia since the late 19th century was split up between a pro-German and an anti-German party. Barth may have seen himself as a godly rod to castigate the pro-Germans, but in a way he simply served and embellished the quite ungodly wishes, likes, dislikes and bigotries of the anti-German party.
At last, cherishing the stranger may be a useful antidote in times of excessive nationalism. Worked out as a theological principle, it means that all particular communities have to be destroyed and all founding of new communities has to be prevented. That process has already overcome Barth himself (which e.g. wanted to conserve the heterosexual familiy at the cost of gays), and n the end it will lead to the self-destruction of the protestant communities.
…Anglicans reject the idea that the Church of England was and should be again the Church for England and the English people, at home and in the diaspora.
And the higher their ecclesiastical rank, the more strongly they reject it. We at least agree on this part.
That decisive break with the past is very largely due to the Protestant Deformation produced by the theological crisis afflicting the German church during the 1930s.
This proposes that anti-white behavior of the leading WASPs only appeared in the mid 20th Century. And following standard WASP custom, you still wish to indict nationalist Germany as a major causative factor.
There is very little historical evidence in favor of this proposition and a great deal against it. This behavior is not and never was aberrational for the WASPs who indulge in it. The WASP elite propensity to ally with Jews, other non-whites and non-Christians against lower class English and all other white Europeans has a notoriously long history. It was in fact implicit in the English WASP project from the very beginning.
The reign of Elizabeth I in the 16th Century already provides abundant evidence of this behavior. We see Sir Francis Walsingham and John Dee busily negotiating alliances with Morrocans, the Muslims of the “Barbary States”, the Judeo-Ottoman Turks and Rabbi Judah ben Lowe of Prague.
A little while later in 1776 one T. Jefferson noted,
“He (King George III acting as the “WASP” sovereign) has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.”
The subsequent action of WASPdom to ally with murderous Judeo-Bolshevik “Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions” was merely standard practice. It was nothing extraordinary.
The best thing that can happen for the white race is for the incurably diseased branch of Judeo-WASPdom to be lopped off at the trunk and tossed in the fire. Anglicanism and the Church of England was NEVER a ‘national church’ of white Englishmen. From its very inception It was always and only an ideological tool deployed by the WASP ruling class on behalf of their own narrow interests.
With Barth’s ideas that “the concept of one’s own people is but a fluid concept” and that “the majority of peoples have for centuries been physical mongrels” which led mainstream Christians in every erstwhile Anglo-Saxon country now “confess our people as a historical construct”, the typical Jewish double standard has triumphed : all ethnic identities are fortuitous and not worthy of preservation except that of the Jewish people. That has a divine origin and should be preserved until the end of time.
Sometimes Goyim can do the destructive work of the Jews better than the Jews themselves.
Fox Latin America has removed its poll from Zionist propaganda organ, Facebook, after complaints from Simon Weisenthal Center in Buenos Aires. Fox Spokeswoman Guadalupe Lucero has apologized saying the poll was removed immediately and measures have been taken to prevent such incidents in the future.
The poll had asked readers who they think is responsible for the death of Christ: “Pontius Pilate, The Jewish People or the High Priests“. The poll was to promote the National Geographic Channel’s Christmas special.
Interestingly, both Fox News and the National Geographic Channel are owned by Israel-Firster Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. On 2006 anniversary of 9/11, National Geographic Channel had aired Jonathan David Towers’s documentary “Inside 9/11″ based on anti-Muslim and anti-Arab Zionist propaganda lies. Last year, Abe Foxman, national director ADL, had honored Murdoch for his “stalwart support of Israel and his commitment to promoting respect and speaking out against anti-Semitism”……
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/12/31/fox-poll-who-killed-jesus/
The Swiss Barth was a minor character in the general scope of German Protestantism; the “good” German promoted by the Jews and their allies in English speaking countries.
I wasn’t aware that Barth was this critical of the Jews, unless one doesn’t believe the Jews to be human, which is a position I don’t think too many would endorse:
“For Barth, according to John Johnson, “the Jews do not receive Christ because God has ordained their rejection of him.” Israel’s disobedience, whether in killing Christ two thousand years ago, or in siding with the Bolsheviks in their ideological civil war against bourgeois Christians in modern Europe, “is really a sign of humanity’s rebellion against God.”[12]”
I take it that Fraser is a Roman Catholic or some sort of a pagan, the two are not far apart. (just kiddin’ sort of) LOL. In reality he doesn’t understand Protestantism whose main arguement is those who do not believe in Jesus Christ are going to hell—simple as that. This central fact condemns Jews & other pagans to eternal misery. This is what Jesus Christ taught, if you read the New Testament.
@dixie:
Well said, did we go to different colleges together?
One thing that these European socialist & nationalist types don’t get is that Americans saw themselves, and many still do, as a Great Race of European Protestants, particularly composed of northern European Protestants.
If one wants to see a Roman Catholic outcome, one only has to look across our border with Mexico.
This article, so soon on the heels of The Balkanization of the System: Ernst Jünger and the Endtimes is but more stealth Nazism. Nazism has nothing to do with white Americans fighting to preserve their people in North America and articles like this are nothing more than fluff pieces, produced by inveterate Germanophile history buffs.
Really, we need to move on.
Either that, or paste some swastikas at the top of this website, so it’s at least honest advertising.
At the end of the day, Christianity is a Semitic religion, with roots in Middle Eastern mythology. It has nothing to do with preserving the interests of Europe and those of European origin. The fact that, when push comes to shove, most Christians are either neutral towards, or fervently supportive of, Jews, Zionism and Israel says it all, really. It is nothing more than a proxy servant of the Chosenites.
@Ex-Pro White Activist:
Well said. The most moronic and vicious anti-White rhetoric I see on the internet (youtube, news sites, etc.) invariably comes from people who list their locations as in the UK. It’s actually so prevalent that I can often guess who’s a limey just by reading their comments. Like Nietzsche said, “They are no philosophers, these English.”
@Tom:
Nonsense. Your beloved Prots simply exterminated the natives, like the good Jews they were in spirit, then brought over negroes to do their work for them, again, like good Jews. Some model for a White civilization. No wonder, as Hitler correctly predicted, the USA became “the Jews new playground.”
@Tom,
As far as I know, 90% of African-Americans are Protestant.
American Protestanism is not exactly an all-White movement.
@Celtic_Heathen:
I get tired of this “ancient heathen” posturing.
Actually “at the end of the day” neo-paganism is the Judaic import of recent vintage. Modern neo-paganism largely descends from Kabbalistic Judaism, via Freemasonry. Reference: Our Judeo-Pagan heritage
The trouble, in a word, is Calvinism! Freud, Marx, Einstein, and Calvin are all determinists — “there is no such thing as free choice and responsibility.” No wonder Barth sided with Bolshevism and the Jews! This ancient superstitious doctrine that human beings are not moral free agents is the greatest danger to rational thought and problem-solving the world has ever known.
The trouble, in a word, is Calvinism! Freud, Marx, Einstein, and Calvin are all determinists — “there is no such thing as free choice and responsibility.” No wonder Barth sided with Bolshevism and the Jews! This ancient superstitious doctrine that human beings are not moral free agents is the greatest danger to rational thought and problem-solving the world has ever known.
Calvinists are known from promoting liberal views on race and ethnicity. I even heard one South African Calvinist say that miscegenation is just fine because “All races of men are ‘totally depraved,’ even man’s skin is ‘totally depraved.’ ” This there is perfect “equality” in Calvin’s doctrine of “total depravity.”
Islam, Freud, Spinoza, Marx, Einstein, et al all fervently preach a fatalism and determinism. This is the doctrine that has made White nations crumble in the grip of defeatism. This is the doctrine that has bestowed upon the Jew the “Chosen People” status. To be free people, the Western nations must embrace the belief in psychic freedom — that we Whites are endowed with rationality and moral free agency! There is no other way out of our dilemma.
And let me add that, in contrast, Judaism is NOT beset, as is Christianity, with the notion of psychological determinism. Religious Jews believe that they have free will. The theological and psychological determinism arose with Greek Philosophy and entered Christianity with such theologians as Augustine — as did the doctrine of eternal torment in hellfire.
‘Western’ States and Christian denominations have turned the words “nation” and “state” into synonyms. In ‘Western’ regimeist history classes we see the distinction between these two words intentionally blurred and the resulting confusion propagated in discussions of the rise of the “nation-state.”
Now we see apologists for the WASP project at TOO failing to acknowledge the fact that the Church of England is a “State Church” and that from the beginning its theology has been perfectly plastic and paralleled the ideological needs of The State. If theology and ideology seamlessly conform to the secular needs of the common rulers of both the Church and State, and these secular needs are universal, then there’s little to choose between the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church.
Despite the efforts of WASP apologists Protestant outreach will continue to be a ‘hit or miss affair’ for us. Furthermore, as XPWA has noted above,
“The WASP elite propensity to ally with Jews, other non-whites and non-Christians against lower class English and all other white Europeans has a notoriously long history. It was in fact implicit in the English WASP project from the very beginning (with Elizabeth I).”
There certainly is much to criticize in the Roman Catholic Church, especially post-Vatican II. However one-sided, strident anti-Catholicism is a problem, for there is a branch of the RCC that can be reached by us imo. That branch would be the followers of the Tridentine Latin Mass, which probably represents 8-12% of white Catholics in the United States.
Among the three big Christian denominations the Russian Orthodox Church is the only one that distinguishes the divine from the nation, the nation from the state, and promotes the right of national identity and self-expression:
http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/3/14.aspx
Bases of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church
II. Church and Nation
“…The universal nature of the Church, however, does not mean that Christians should have no right to national identity and national self-expressions. On the contrary, the Church unites in herself the universal with the national. Thus, the Orthodox Church, though universal, consists of many Autocephalous National Churches. Orthodox Christians, aware of being citizens of the heavenly homeland, should not forget about their earthly homeland.”
III. Church and State
“The Church as a divine-human organism has not only a mysterious nature not submissive to the elements of the world, but also a historical component which comes in touch with the outside world including state. The state, which exists for the purpose of ordering worldly life, also comes into contact with the Church. Relationships between state and the followers of genuine religion have continuously changed in the course of history.”
“The family represented the initial cell of human society. The holy history of the Old Testament shows that the state was not formed at once. The Old Testament people had no state before Joseph’s brothers went to Egypt. State was gradually formed in the epoch of the Judges. As a result of a complex historical development guided by Divine Providence, the complication of social relations led to the emergence of the state.”
“Thus, the emergence of the temporal state should not be understood as a reality originally established by God. It was rather God’s granting human being an opportunity to order their social life by their own free will, so that this order as a response to the earthly reality distorted by sin, could help avoid a greater sin through opposing it by means of temporal power.”
We can see the toxicity of nearly all forms of Protestantism and Catholicism in comparison to the Russian Orthodox Church.
I maintain that religious Jews believe in free will based on this teaching from a Jewish religious scholar:
10 Minute Topics: Original Sin
I am with the religious Jews on this particular point. Christian theology went very wrong in this doctrine, and Islam followed suit.
“Now we see apologists for the WASP project at TOO failing to acknowledge the fact that the Church of England is a “State Church” and that from the beginning its theology has been perfectly plastic and paralleled the ideological needs of The State.
The “Church of England” (known as “Episcopalian” in the USA) was never a monolithic mass structure even in its prime. Working and middle class English were at least as likely to be Methodists (since the 18th Century), members of the various “Free” or “Non-Conforming” churches or English Catholics. In Scotland Presbyterianism ruled after the suppression of political Catholicism in the 16th Century. But all were taking their lead from the intellectual milieu fostered by the CofE through its “elite” universities at Oxford and Cambridge.
The Church of England (notable USA members have included Jefferson Davis, Confederate General & Bishop Leonidas Polk and the Jorge Bush family ) was always the church of the ruling classes. Its theology has always denied the existence of any white ‘nationhood’ that is separate from the WASP State. This was in harmony with the ideological needs of England’s protestant dynasties and later the Judeo-Anglo-American mercantile elites.
And Anglican fingerprints are all over the greatest single anti-white nationhood act in American history. This is the mass importation and propagation of low wage nonwhite labor.
The “Protestant Deformation” of white nationhood has always been sourced in the Judeo-Protestantism of England. The appointed Anglican ecclesiastical servants of Elizabeth the Useless, their sodomite & lesbian fellow clergy in the USA and their African colleagues like Desmond Tutu clearly understand their denomination’s doctrinal basis.
To blame this abominable cesspool of anti-white racial hatred and ingrained sexual degeneracy on some kind of reaction against 1930s nationalist Germany is the height of – ahem – chutzpah. Their real inner nature and doctrines are the reason these creatures sided with openly avowed atheist Jew war criminals against the white Christians of Germany in the 1940s.
It’s the same reason they sided with Muslim narco-gangsters and white female sex traffickers against the white Orthodox Serbs in the 1990s. These policies are consistent and unwavering. They run in a straight line from the 1590s to 1990s and beyond.
@Okiereddust:
Your argument is a straw man, I’m afraid. Ridicule my Pagan stance all you wish (I worship Nature, no plastic “God” and bow before no Semitic religions… and yes, Christianity IS a Semite religion.
How ambitious, conspiratorial Jewry broke the WASPs, but is now breaking upon itself
Introduction by Chris Moore:
In the following essay for the right-wing Occidental Observer, Andrew Fraser argues that the universalist (Bolshevik) interpretation of Protestantism has prevailed over the particularistic (Nazi) interpretation, leading to today’s contemporary disintegration of Protestantism nearly in its entirety.
It’s hard to find fault in his premise. This disintegration is echoed, for example, on the U.S. Supreme Court where, as Pat Buchanan has noted, the Court is now divided between three Jews and six Catholics, “but not a single Protestant, though Protestants remain half the nation and our founding faith.”
As I see it, the universalist vs. particularist split within Protestantism is now starting to play out within Judaism, as well, with the “Nazi” interpretation of the faith (Zionism) vs. the growing cadre of left-wing, anti-Zionist Jews.
There are more than a few ironies, here. The first is that murderous Nazism rose up in many ways as a counterweight to murderous Jewish Bolshevism in the Soviet Union, and that Hitler modeled his Nazism on The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which turned out to be essentially a propagandist caricature of Jewish conspiracy, albeit a not completely inaccurate depiction of how the Judeofascists actually operate. (As I noted here, Hitler is alleged by one time Nazi Hermann Rauschning to have modeled his own fascism on The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which may or may not have been written by Jews, but which was clearly fashioned by parties well aware of the Jewish supremacist agenda and its technique.)
Hence, just as with Bolshevism, Nazism itself can be viewed as a manifestation of Jewish conspiracy.
Another irony is that the eradication of WASP prestige, leadership and moral authority in America, primarily to the benefit of Jewry, was then a consequence not of a natural internecine split within Protestantism, but rather a consequence of some WASPs essentially aligning with Bolshevism (a Jewish material and intellectual movement) and others essentially aligning with Nazism (an emulation of a Jewish conspiracy movement).
A third irony is, as I mentioned above, Jewry itself now seems to be fracturing along the same lines as Protestantism has, hence the particularistic Jewish plot to use left-wing, pseudo-universalism (Bolshevism) to fracture Christian cohesiveness has boomeranged back upon itself, and Jewry is again being attacked by a monster it had a major role in creating. — C.M.
http://www.judeofascism.com/2012/01/how-ambitious-conspiratorial-jewry.html
Fortunately, many people are finally realizing that the myth of “Nazi atrocities” was invented and cultivated by the pro-communist/bankster establishment and Hollywood, not only to obscure their own crimes, but also to discredit any nation which seeks self-determination and sovereignty as Germany and her multitude of European allies (google: European Volunteer Movement) did. Gullible acceptance of the myth has enabled commies and NWO globalists to smear not only their most formidable enemy of the 20th century, the Germans, but ultimately white people everywhere; including Whites in America. So, in essence, we’re all Germans now.
Whereas the task of deconstructing the “atrocities” myth is nearly complete, work in the fine tuning of our knowledge of that historical period is still necessary. That’s why I’m thankful to see such fabulous scholarly work on the topic of Germany, her past intellectual/spiritual movements, and how everything ties in with our present condition. It seems like a very logical way to build a foundation for understanding our plight. More great articles, please!