Religions vs Cults, or How to Reform Christianity to Restore the White West

“Europe is the faith and the faith is Europe.
—Hilaire Belloc

Whatever may be the opinions of dissident right types regarding Christianity, I’m fairly confident that virtually all would admit that it in its current form is dying, as is its European heartland, or the region of the earth once called Christendom. Unlike some in the Dissident Right, I feel that there is a strong causal link between those two progressing mortalities, with the former serving as one of the major reasons for the latter; I also believe that revitalizing the one will lead to the recovery of the other.

Rather than spend time running the gauntlet of angry detractors of Christianity talking about the origins of the faith or how it got to its current, mostly effeminized and multicultural (which most often implicitly means antiWhite) forms—be they the ones who argue that it is nothing more than a Jewish theological Trojan horse or the ones who believe it to be a genuine religion, though a genuinely ruinous one, here I intend to show what its reformed manifestation would look like and how that would aid our cause of saving the White West.

To be clear from the get-go: I am not in this essay going to get into the theological weeds of doctrinal minutiae (e.g., the nature of the Trinity or whether Mary was without sin), no matter how important those might be for particular Christian creeds; rather, in the spirit of a work such as C. S. Lewis’s Mere Christianity, I intend to focus on issues which all true Christians (i.e., not those of too many churches in their current, decadent forms) could find common ground on. With that in mind, let’s get into the main areas of contemporary Christianity that are in desperate need of reformation.

By far the most critical issue is that for Christianity to be restored to its true form, it must forcibly remove and toss into the fire those parts of it which make it a cult rather than a true religion.

What’s the difference?

Well, although this definition is somewhat idiosyncratic, I’m fairly sure that most people, save those who hate religion in general (e.g., the late, ironically named Christopher Hitchens), would agree with it: the difference between a true religion and a cult is that the latter demands that earthly matters which are amenable to the God-given faculty of reason be made matters of unquestioning faith while the former does not; that is, true Christianity requires us to take on faith only those things which go beyond the ability of the mind alone to grasp, those things which are of this world only by the way in which the choices that we make in dealing with them echo, to our everlasting joy or sorrow, beyond the grave. So, the pondering of whether the act of killing a man out of malice rather than self-defense is a grave sin and leads to hell in the afterlife (if the murderer refuses to truly repent and mold his actions for the rest of his life to conform to that resolve) will necessarily lead to the realm of matters of faith, whereas whether any particular act of killing was or was not done in self-defense would most definitely not require an act of faith—and attempting to make it do so would be not stupid but downright sinful, even the point of blasphemy.

How so?

Well, because it runs afoul of the first Commandment: “I am the Lord thy God. . . . thou shalt have no other gods before me. . . . Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image. . . . Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them.” Graven images or idols, you must understand, are not limited to literal statues, but rather mean anything to which we accord the reverence and worship that is owed to God alone. To God and Christ alone we owe faith . These are one and the same, but like I said I’m not getting into Trinitarian matters here; to make anything earthly that is amenable to reason a matter of faith is to treat it as a de facto god and thus to commit implicit blasphemy. And beyond that, even if one does not make important earthly matters into matters of faith, to refuse to subject them to the acid test of reason is to refuse to make use of that gift from God and thus, like the man in the parable of the talents who refused to use the talents given him, to commit sin.

This is how true Christianity is needed to revive the West. Virtually all the power that our elites hold is held thanks to citizens in general and Whites in particular not embracing the true Christian principle of subjecting all earthly matters to reason’s scrutiny: only evil needs darkness to conceal itself in, while good has no such need; as we call Christ the Light and the Truth, so fidelity to truth is fidelity to God. And beyond the metaphysical, there are very earthly practical reasons (biological and physical ones, in fact) why this is so.

To put it as concisely as possible, our elites are parasites, and like all parasites are reliant on much larger bodies than themselves (national and politic, in their case) for the resources that they desire, entities which could easily crush them were they to suddenly become aware of their nature and intent. So like all parasites, they must rely on stealth and deceit to achieve their goals. An iron law of nature is that the moment the costs of maintaining the deceit exceed the benefits gained from it, the parasite is doomed. Were the host population to give the pursuit of truth the value that true Christianity accords to it, the cost of maintaining their parasitic deceit would make the elites’ efforts utterly unsustainable. To prevent this, evil must attempt to lure men into idolatry: it must make ideology their de facto god.

Ideology is for many men a de facto god, since any facts or issues seen through its twisted lens (in the case of most ideologies) are not truly seen at all but rather put beyond questioning and thus made into articles of faith. The most glaringly obvious examples of this in our time are liberal attitudes toward race and sex: for them race realism and the from-time-immemorial notion that there are two genders are not positions to be debated but heresies to be stamped out. Gregory Hood referred to anti-racism/wokeism as the church of the damned for good reason: for these ideologues, such things really are matters of faith alone—matters by which Whites face damnation by faith alone—to invert Luther’s famous idea, since they have no way of questioning their anti-racist notions that they are the source of all evil in this world.

Although the broader Right is usually better about this than the Left (though that’s not saying much), most of the normiecons have quite a few self-induced, pseudo-religious blind spots: the value of Israel or the evil of Russia being two prominent examples. Even many on the dissident right have a bit of this, particularly with regard to the value of Christianity itself: a few of them take it as a matter of faith that the faith has been nothing but an unmitigated disaster for Europeans and Whites in the lands beyond old Christendom and display an adamant refusal to even debate the matter. Save for the neo-pagans, most of these people are atheists—atheists who, ironically, turn atheism itself into a religion wherein the gravest mortal sin is finding anything worthwhile in religion in general and Christianity in particular; the ultimate irony of this is that their dogmatically held anti-God notions prevent them from using reason to see the very practical uses of upholding true Christian doctrine.

For from a purely practical (even cynical) standpoint, nothing could be more useful to the dissident right than nominal Christians taking true Christian principles to heart. As our side likes to say, we are not afraid to debate race realism and the Jewish question because we know we have truth on our side and would win. So what is stopping that debate from occurring? Ideologies, the Overton window (less so now, but people are still not ready for a full and honest discussion of race, the Jewish question, etc.), etc.—in other words, all those things that would hold no sway over men’s minds were they to live according to true Christian precepts and pursue truth no matter where it leads. True Christianity would smash the intellectual idols and allow race realism to reign supreme. Beyond that even, it would give an absolute advantage to anyone with truth on their side: thus, it’s rather odd for many on the DR, who never tire of proclaiming truth to be on the side of their policy recommendations, not to wish Christianity to spread across the West (though to be fair, most of them are taking the current, degenerate forms of the faith as true ones, not the militaristic faith described by Jim ).

And the very same can be said of scriptural exegesis: while the Word of God is indeed timeless and infallible, human interpretation of it is most certainly not; hence, while the ultimate truth of scripture is a matter of faith, a correct understanding of the specific meaning of any parts requires reason. Just take the example of: “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple” juxtaposed with “Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee”—at first glance there seems to be a contradiction, one which the atheists are ever wont to point to as proof of the irrationality of scripture; but once we realize that the former was simply a case of Christ using hyperbole to make the point that there is a hierarchy of values with love of God and salvation at the top—since without God’s love, there is nothing to our love of our parents beyond mere genetically encoded biological drive that has no significance that can hold beyond the grave—the seeming contradiction resolves itself.

The very opposite would occur with some of the deadliest heresies and pseudo-religions of our time, since all of them are based on intellectually vacuous interpretations of scripture which are then taken as articles of faith in and of themselves. If this true Christian idea of holding the ultimate truth conveyed in scripture as a matter of faith but correct interpretation of scripture as matter of reason were to take hold in the minds and hearts of nominal Christians, it would sound the death knell for the oxymoron of Christian Zionism: just the line, “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” by itself would be enough to destroy the heresy, let alone a contrasting of it with the Talmud passage described thus: “Whereas pious Muslims consider Jesus as the holy prophet of God and Muhammed’s immediate predecessor, according to the Jewish Talmud, Jesus is perhaps the vilest being who ever lived, condemned to spend eternity in the bottommost pit of Hell, immersed in a boiling vat of excrement” and Martin Luther’s description of the Jews’ treatment of the mother of God when he writes, “Then they also call Jesus a whore’s son, saying that his mother Mary was a whore, who conceived him in adultery with a blacksmith.” And with the death of Christian Zionism, Jewish power in America would be massively reduced—and would be ended entirely if this were paired with an absolute pursuit of the truth that reveals the degree to which Jews are responsible for the degradation of current and formerly White Christian nations.

Even from a purely practical standpoint, there is no getting around the fact that men have a deep-seated need for faith, “[t]he need of some imperishable bliss,” to quote Wallace Stevens, and so, as Chesterton’s Father Brown says, “It’s the first effect of not believing in God that you lose your common sense, and can’t see things as they are,” which in our case leads to soy boys and single cat ladies wanting to burn you at the stake for believing to be true what Steve Sailer has called “the most settled science in all the social sciences,” i.e., “the White-black intelligence gap.”

There is simply no escaping the need for a faith: banish it, and men begin to believe anything and believe it with all the fervor of a religious zealot; allow it in its degenerate form and it aids rather than defeats the destruction of White nations. By pushing for an embrace of true Christian principles, we can inspire men to fight for their homelands with all the truth of our timeless understanding of race, sex, Jewish malignant influence, etc. (and the fear of sinning by compromising truth), and all the zeal of knowing that our work will echo not only into future ages but even beyond the grave.

This is simply not something that neo-paganism is capable of. To be clear, I have nothing against my Nordic ancestors: I love them and appreciate the struggles they endured to keep their bloodlines alive and well long enough for me to be born; I also love the old pagan tales, having spent long hours in my youth reading them (along with many other mythologies, most of which I felt paled in comparison, as well); but I could never enjoy them as part of a faith, for the simple reason that I know in my heart and mind they aren’t true enough to live and die for. As Harmonica pointed out in a series of articles on Identity Dixie (all of them well worth your time) which argue that neo-paganism is a dead end for the DR and for the White nations they are trying to save:

The political problem with paganism, and why it leads to a dead end for the Right, is that the vast majority of self-described modern “pagans” do not believe Odin exists, either. They may claim to be the “Soldiers of Odin” (or some other nonsense), but when challenged, they will fall back and claim that they do not actually believe in Odin. Instead, modern pagans view Odin as some sort of role model, looking up to him in the same way a young boy admires Bruce Wayne and Superman.

That is one of the biggest flaws of modern paganism, and why embracing it is suicidal for the Right. It is a fringe movement for edgy atheists and, more importantly, it cannot inspire the kind of fanaticism that is needed to save the West. The truly devout will always have a great advantage over the wishy-washy, and that devotion can topple empires.

Although I wish to see the White West return to its true Christian roots for the transcendent truth in them, I do not overlook the fact that from a purely cold and calculating standpoint it makes a lot more sense to try to save our peoples by reforming the now corrupted Christian faith which vast numbers of them at least nominally follow: by the numbers alone, reforming Christianity is a winner, while returning to an older pagan faith that even its modern adherents do not truly believe is not.

Could the DR achieve a neo-Reformation, they could blast apart the oppressive power structures built on lies and sustained by the irrational zealotry of innumerable pseudo-faiths (anti-racism, transgenderism, etc.) without firing a single literal shot, without any violence at all. For the true Christian notion that fidelity to truth is fidelity to God could raise the costs of our parasitic elites’ deceptions to the point at which they become utterly unsustainable. For that reason alone, even the atheists among us have reason to want to see, as Belloc so wished to, Europe (and the lands its children settled and built up into great nations) and the Christian faith become one once again.