“It Doesn’t Make Me ‘Feel’ Good”

“How impervious to things spiritual, my heart! No savor in pious reading, no pleasure in meditation nor in prayer!” – St. Bernard 

Quite often in my discussion with some of my more nontraditional Evangelical friends, and even among modern Catholics I hear them talk of how they don’t like the Catholic church, or for the Catholics, don’t like some priests, because they don’t feel uplifted or consolidated. What I mean by this is that many people seek God with the wrong intention, or for a better word, expectation. People want to “feel” uplifted, consolidated, happy or affirmed. They want an experience, not a trial or the truth. It is no wonder that Joel Olsteen is one of the most popular telievangelists. He tells you what you want to hear. That if you follow God he will reward you with riches, and happiness and all sorts of temporal gifts. This is a problem.

Flickr_-_…trialsanderrors_-_The_Roads_to_Heaven_and_Hell_religious_tract_ca._1896-e1360539870695

The Christian road is not shortcut to a better life. On the contrary it is much of the time a trial, a hardship full of suffering. This is not to say that you won’t find peace, because if done correctly God will bring you peace and joy. But peace and joy are not “feelings” or emotions, but states of being. In all the turmoil be at peace and know that God is with you and that in the end he will have the last word. Be joyous knowing that if you follow God you will attain the kingdom of heaven. Joy is a state of mind and an orientation of the heart. It is a settled state of contentment, confidence and hope. Happiness on the other hand is a fleeting feeling. One can be unhappy, yet joyous. One can be in the midst of much turmoil around them, yet be at peace.

This is important to understand. The pursuit of a pious life is not one of an easy path, it will require much of you. Consolidations are reserved for the untried soul to keep them on the path to sanctity. But as many of the Saints show us, these consolidations will fade once one truly picks up their cross. The true rewards abide in heaven and are reserved for those who attain it. The earthly life is a place to gain merit, which can only be achieved through suffering. To lead this life you must seek the truth and accept it, and that truth is many times harsh and difficult to accept.

So I say to you, do not seek a religious service that panders to your feelings, but one that seeks to worship God in the most reverent way possible. Put your mind on God, and not on your own desires, but on his will. It will require all that you have to attain salvation, but the reward is for eternity.

Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth. Psalm 46:10

Traditional Western Art: The Reply of the Zaporozhian Cossacks by Ilya Repin

Note: Vulgarity ahead.

The Imperial Traditionalist

The Reply of the Zaporozhian Cossacks by Ilya Repin

ilja_jefimowitsch_repin_009

Since you are probably wondering what the “Reply” is, I will explain, but just a warning, the Cossacks were quite vulgar in their response to the Ottomans.

In the Year of Our Lord 1676, Sultan Mehmed IV of the Ottoman Empire demanded that the Zaporozhian Cossacks submit to him, sending the following letter:

“Sultan Mehmed IV to the Zaporozhian Cossacks:

As the Sultan; son of Muhammad; brother of the sun and moon; grandson and viceroy of God; ruler of the kingdoms of Macedonia, Babylon, Jerusalem, Upper and Lower Egypt; emperor of emperors; sovereign of sovereigns; extraordinary knight, never defeated; steadfast guardian of the tomb of Jesus Christ; trustee chosen by God Himself; the hope and comfort of Muslims; confounder and great defender of Christians – I command you, the Zaporogian Cossacks, to submit to me voluntarily and without any resistance, and to desist…

View original post 246 more words

Religon and Warfare

As Im sure many people reading this know, one of atheists most used objection is that without religion there would be no warfare. Any individual mildly educated on the history of the world will tell you that this is preposterous; with the most famous example being communism, which at its core is atheistic. Aside from this little insight let me go into a little more detail on the issue.

The common held belief, even by those on the Christian and Conservative side of things, is that prior to modern times the world was full of much more violent and constant warfare. This may be true to an extent but only in a very general sense. Yes the world was harsher and many times violent, but this was due more to the nature of things. Obviously with less advancements in medicine and technology death at the hands of nature was much more commonly met. However it is untrue that warfare existed on a larger or more destructive scale. Warfare during the Middle Ages was radically different then the warfare that modern man wages. Middle Age warfare was predominantly fought over land disputes and other petty disagreements among sovereigns. Furthermore it is important to note that this warfare was many times fought on a much smaller scale. It was predominantly fought in a series of battles between private armies with the goal to outmaneuver the enemy. The victor of these battles being the victor of the dispute. It was not until Napoleon that we saw the mobilization of entire states to warfare.

With that aside, it wasn’t until the the modern period that we begin to see warfare being waged between ideologies. Now some will say, “What of the Crusades?” It is important to first understand the Crusades as not a clash of ideology. Yes, it is true that the Crusades was waged between two rivaling religions, however it was not motivated solely based off that fact. The Crusades were a armed response to the conquest of the Islamic world into Christendom. Furthermore they where armed pilgrimages with highly concentrated objectives by the Christians. The amount of land taken by the Mohammedans was never fully recovered, or even attempted to recover, by the Christians. The main goal of the Crusades was one, to halt further advancement of Islam into the Occident and secondly, and probably more importantly, an attempt to organize armed pilgrimages into Christian holy sites. So to claim it was an ideological war is a gross over generalization.

It was not until the World Wars that we begin to see true ideological conflict. WWI being a prime example. When the United States entered the first World War it became a war aimed at “making the world safe for democracy” and putting an end to the last remaining Monarchies of the time. The second world war was similar, but with a more secular conflict between ideas. This time it was Democracy conflicting with Fascism. With the conclusion of this war it soon led into democracy fighting against the ideology of communism. As we see here, the predominance of modern warfare has revolved around the imposition of democracy on a global scale. Anyone versed in history and holding counter-revoltionary ideals will understand that this is a purely secular and civil religion in itself and lay the foundations to atheism. So in retrospect we can see that the rise of atheistic and anthropocentric thought brought much more bloodshed then that of classical religion. Ever since the French Revolution the world has been attempting to eradicate theocentric religion and force a more secular, atheistic ideology, many times by force and warfare. It is also important to note that the change to the modern nation-state created a extremely destructive form of warfare. It involved the entire mobilization of a nations people, economy and political machine to warfare and only ended with a total surrender, no truces. The modern secular ideology does not stop its warfare until the enemy it fights is completely crushed, reformed and rebuilt to the model of the victor. We can see this through several examples. The result of WWI was not a truce or peace but a complete and total removal of the Monarchial structure of government and the dismantling of the Holy Roman Empire until it conformed with democratic government. We can also look at more recent examples such as that of Iraq. Iraq was completely toppled followed by years of nation building and forced democratization. Non of these endeavors have proved very fruitful. Forced removal of democracy led to Nazism, ISIS and many examples of a failed state.

As we see the rise of enlightenment, anti-religious thought fueled a long chain of ideological secular conflicts that continues to this day. Even prior to the modern times, warfare was mainly a secular endeavor carried out by Kings who had non-religious disputes with other Kings. Religious warfare is rare, was rare and motivated a small portion of conflict. Now one could claim that secularism is a religion in itself but all that shows is that atheistic ideology such as the secular religion has created much more destructive warfare then Christianity ever did. In summary the atheist ideology has much more blood on its hands then any other single religion when one looks at the big picture.

Of course there is quite a bit more too it.

Suggested Reading:

Monarchy and War –Erik Von Kuehnelt-Leddihn

Democracy is a Theological Problem

“Democracy” is a theological problem, since government is the result of Original Sin. Democracy embodies the illusion that “Self-Government” means really to rule oneself and nobody else involved, whereas it is simply the rule of the majority over the minority. Sir Henry Campbell- Bannerman told us that “Self-government is better than good government.” So the next time we have a serious disease, we should practice quackery on ourselves and dispense with the medical profession.

-Erik Von Kuehnelt-Leddihn

King Louis XVI’s Last Testement

Today marks the infamous day that revolutionary usurpers executed the rightful King of France, Louis XVI. In light of this I would like to share with you the last will and testament of the King that he wrote on Christmas day while imprisoned. Its quite beautiful and shows the piety that such noble men should have.

“In the name of the Very holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Ghost.

To-day, the 25th day of December, 1792, I, Louis XVI King of France, being for more than four months imprisoned with my family in the tower of the Temple at Paris, by those who were my subjects, and deprived of all communication whatsoever, even with my family, since the eleventh instant; moreover, involved in a trial the end of which it is impossible to foresee, on account of the passions of men, and for which one can find neither pretext nor means in any existing law, and having no other witnesses, for my thoughts than God to whom I can address myself, I hereby declare, in His presence, my last wishes and feelings.

I leave my soul to God, my creator; I pray Him to receive it in His mercy, not to judge it according to its merits but according to those of Our Lord Jesus Christ who has offered Himself as a sacrifice to God His Father for us other men, no matter how hardened, and for me first.

I die in communion with our Holy Mother, the Catholic, Apostolic, Roman Church, which holds authority by an uninterrupted succession, from St. Peter, to whom Jesus Christ entrusted it; I believe firmly and I confess all that is contained in the creed and the commandments of God and the Church, the sacraments and the mysteries, those which the Catholic Church teaches and has always taught. I never pretend to set myself up as a judge of the various way of expounding the dogma which rend the church of Jesus Christ, but I agree and will always agree, if God grant me life the decisions which the ecclesiastical superiors of the Holy Catholic Church give and will always give, in conformity with the disciplines which the Church has followed since Jesus Christ.

I pity with all my heart our brothers who may be in error but I do not claim to judge them, and I do not love them less in Christ, as our Christian charity teaches us, and I pray to God to pardon all my sins. I have sought scrupulously to know them, to detest them and to humiliate myself in His presence. Not being able to obtain the ministration of a Catholic priest, I pray God to receive the confession which I feel in having put my name (although this was against my will) to acts which might be contrary to the discipline and the belief of the Catholic church, to which I have always remained sincerely attached. I pray God to receive my firm resolution, if He grants me life, to have the ministrations of a Catholic priest, as soon as I can, in order to confess my sins and to receive the sacrament of penance.

I beg all those whom I might have offended inadvertently (for I do not recall having knowingly offended any one), or those whom I may have given bad examples or scandals, to pardon the evil which they believe I could have done them.

I beseech those who have the kindness to join their prayers to mine, to obtain pardon from God for my sins.

I pardon with all my heart those who made themselves my enemies, without my have given them any cause, and I pray God to pardon them, as well as those who, through false or misunderstood zeal, did me much harm.

I commend to God my wife and my children, my sister, my aunts, my brothers, and all those who are attached to me by ties of blood or by whatever other means. I pray God particularly to cast eyes of compassion upon my wife, my children, and my sister, who suffered with me for so long a time, to sustain them with His mercy if they shall lose me, and as long as they remain in his mortal world.

I commend my children to my wife; I have never doubted her maternal tenderness for them. I enjoin her above all to make them good Christians and honest individuals; to make them view the grandeurs of this world (if they are condemned to experience them) as very dangerous and transient goods, and turn their attention towards the one solid and enduring glory, eternity. I beseech my sister to kindly continue her tenderness for my children and to take the place of a mother, should they have the misfortune of losing theirs.

I beg my wife to forgive all the pain which she suffered for me, and the sorrows which I may have caused her in the course of our union; and she may feel sure that I hold nothing against her, if she has anything with which to reproach herself.

I most warmly enjoin my children that, after what they owe to God, which should come first, they should remain forever united among themselves, submissive and obedient to their mother, and grateful for all the care and trouble which she has taken with them, as well as in memory of me. I beg them to regard my sister as their second mother.

I exhort my son, should he have the misfortune of becoming king, to remember he owes himself wholly to the happiness of his fellow citizens; that he should forget all hates and all grudges, particularly those connected with the misfortunes and sorrows which I am experiencing; that he can make the people happy only by ruling according to laws: but at the same time to remember that a king cannot make himself respected and do the good that is in his heart unless he has the necessary authority, and that otherwise, being tangled up in his activities and not inspiring respect, he is more harmful than useful.

I exhort my son to care for all the persons who are attached to me, as much as his circumstances will allow, to remember that it is a sacred debt which I have contracted towards the children and relatives of those who have perished for me and also those who are wretched for my sake. I know that there are many persons, among those who were near me, who did not conduct themselves towards me as they should have and who have even shown ingratitude, but I pardon them (often in moments of trouble and turmoil one is not master of oneself), and I beg my son that, if he finds an occasion, he should think only of their misfortunes.

I should have wanted here to show my gratitude to those who have given me a true and disinterested affection; if, on the one hand, I was keenly hurt by the ingratitude and disloyalty of those to whom I have always shown kindness, as well as to their relatives and friends, on the other hand I have had the consolation of seeing the affection and voluntary interest which many persons have shown me. I beg them to receive my thanks.

In the situation in which matters still are, I fear to compromise them if I should speak more explicitly, but I especially enjoin my son to seek occasion to recognize them.

I should, nevertheless, consider it a calumny on the nation if I did not openly recommend to my son MM. De Chamilly and Hue, whose genuine attachment for me led them to imprison themselves with me in this sad abode. I also recommend Clery, for whose attentiveness I have nothing but praise ever since he has been with me. Since it is he who has remained with me until the end, I beg the gentlemen of the commune to hand over to him my clothes, my books, my watch, my purse, and all other small effects which have been deposited with the council of the commune.

I pardon again very readily those who guard me, the ill treatment and the vexations which they thought it necessary to impose upon me. I found a few sensitive and compassionate souls among them – may they in their hearts enjoy the tranquillity which their way of thinking gives them.

I beg MM. De Malesherbes, Tronchet and De Seze to receive all my thanks and the expressions of my feelings for all the cares and troubles they took for me.

I finish by declaring before God, and ready to appear before Him, that I do not reproach myself with any of the crimes with which I am charged.

Made in duplicate in the Tower of the Temple, the 25th of December 1792.

LOUIS”

Christian Rx

Let this be the final word on the ’14/88 crowd’. Their endgame is the Occident, minus ethnic minorities. Our endgame is the Occident, minus the entire pernicious edifice of Modernity. Those are two very different things. -Mark Citadel

 

The blog that I probably spend the most time reading, Citadel Foundations, recently produced an article addressing what seems to be somewhat of a rivalry within the alt-right. It defends the Catholic/Orthodox Rx school of thought. It can be found here. I suggest you read it along with a previous post by Mark on what it means to be ‘right’. It can be found here.

Now for my own commentary on the matter.

I was brought into Rx through a combination of things. They entailed an interest, along with a degree, in Political Thought; a reversion to Catholicism, specifically Traditional Catholicism; a realization that something about Modernity doesn’t seem correct (brought about by my faith) and a foundation set in being raised by conservatives. Eventually, through study of my faith, history and the reading of Rx material I made the journey over to the dissident right.

When I began using twitter to promote my blog I was able to view the alt-rights diversity more clearly. Although there is a multitude of different views, many times a mix of several, there seems to be two larger competing schools of thought. These are the Throne and Alter Christendom  and the Fascists. Now obviously it get much more complex based off person to person, some with views pulling from both, but I don’t want to go too deeply into that.

I am going to go over what my views, as someone on the Throne and Alter side, seek to achieve. I won’t go into much detail on the Fascist side because it is not my intention to compare the two, but to clarify my position.

As a Catholic Reactionary I am a counter-revolutioanry. I seek the restoration of Christendom to a form of governance before that of the Enlightenment period. Now, I do have particular interest in certain ways to model it because there is always room for improvement in some areas, but in summary I am a Monarchist. I believe in tradition, private government, true aristocracy, Christianity as the state religion, and the social reign of Christ. Also it is important to note that many alt-righters seem to advocate for a ‘white identity’ which in essence isn’t the best term to use. The Occidental man is diverse and I think that is a good thing. Therefore there cannot be one giant white identity. I think it is important to have different Kingdoms that are defined by the customs and traditions of their own peoples (different Occidental peoples that is). This is not to say that these Kingdoms can’t be united under a common Empire, but it allows them to operate within their respected traditions. (I would also like to note that this should not be a reason for division among Occidental man. Our different traditions should be cherished but we should remain united under our faith, another reason for Christendom) One can use the Catholic Church as an example. There are 26 rites in union with the Roman Church, all adhere to the same faith, yet all have particular traditions that grew out of particular cultures. The most obvious example being the Latin Rite and the Byzantine Rite, one grew out of western culture the other out of Eastern.

So what I am saying is I am not a fascist, 14/88er, Neo-Pagan, or National Socialist. I am a Throne and Alter, counter-revolutionary, Traditional Catholic, Monarchist. I seeks a return to the glory of the Occident, and a Rx form of society within the morality of true orthodox Christian teaching.

 

 

Again I advise you to visit Citadel Foundations for a much more thought out discussion of such things.

 

 

Quote of the Day 

“Humanity as such scarcely existed as a living principle in the Middle Ages because man had in regard to eternity no collective existence. Individuals sacrificed themselves for their families, their manorial lords, kings, cities, rights, privileges, religion, their beloved Church or the woman they loved, in fact, for everything or anybody to which or to whom they had a personal relationship. The anonymous sand-heap “humanity” was unknown to medieval man and even the concept of the “nation” was not equivalent to a gray mass of unilingual citizens but was looked upon as a hierarchy of complicated structure … The collective singular “humanity” was only created after the Reformation as a living unit.”
Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn 

Reading List

In my journey to better expand my knowledge on counter-revolutionary and reactionary thought I have compiled a list of reading material that I intend to dive into. If anyone has any recommendations that they think I should add to the list I am all ears. Also if you know where I can find good core material on the internet please let me know because some of these books are quite expensive.

Currently Reading:

Revolt Against the Modern World –Julius Evola

Leftism Revisited: From de Sade and Marx to Hitler and Pol Pot– Erik Von Kuedhnelt-Leddihn

Intended Reading: 

Erik von Kuedhnelt-Leddihn

  • Liberty or Equality 
  • Menace of the Herd 

Rene Guenon

  • Crisis of the Modern World 

Christopher A. Ferrara:

  • Liberty the God that Failed
  • The Great Facade 
  • The Church and the Libertarian 

G.K. Chesterton:

  • Orthodoxy
  • The Everlasting Man 
  • Whats Wrong with the World 

Hans Hermann-Hoppe

  • Democracy: The God that Failed 

Joseph de Maistre

  • Considerations on France 
  • The Generative Principle of Political Constitutions 
  • Against Rousseau 
  • The Pope: Considered In Relations With The Church, Temporal Sovereignties, Separated Churches, And The Cause Of Civilization

Nicolas Gomez Davila (at the moment unsure where to find his work in english, please let me know if you can help)

E. Michael Jones

  • The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit 
  • Barren Metal 

Collection of Distributist Writings

  • Distributist Perspectives Volume I 

Corneliu Zelea Codreanu

  • For My Legionaries 

Thomas Aquinas

  • Summa Theologica (I have read parts but would like to own it) 

 

Note: This list is not exhaustive.