Antemurale Christianitatis: Vol. I
“Those arriving have been raised in another religion, and represent a radically different culture. Most of them are not Christians, but Muslims ... This is an important question, because Europe and the European identity is rooted in Christianity.”-Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán
"Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said to them, 'Every kingdom divided against itself will be laid waste, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand."-Matthew 12:25
“What becomes of all creation if the smallest prayer is firmly answered ‘no’?”-Every Time I Die, “Petal”
You can be informed by Christianity without being ruled by it, but the question is, without the religion as a central feature in daily life, practiced by a majority or at least a sizable minority, can this balancing act of secularism last if too many citizens effectively believe in “nothing”? The evolutionary basis for religion is simple: the more atheistic the society, the less children people have; the more devout, the more fecund the population. Atheistic, and even agnostic, individuals tend to have a more negative outlook and consequently struggle with the notion of bringing life into this world. Indeed, the existence of such individuals is often defined by melancholy and restlessness; as Robert Frost wrote in “Acquainted with the Night”:
I have been one acquainted with the night.
I have walked out in rain—and back in rain.
I have outwalked the furthest city light.
I have looked down the saddest city lane.
I have passed by the watchman on his beat
And dropped my eyes, unwilling to explain.
I have stood still and stopped the sound of feet
When far away an interrupted cry
Came over houses from another street,
But not to call me back or say good-bye;
And further still at an unearthly height,
One luminary clock against the sky
Proclaimed the time was neither wrong nor right.
I have been one acquainted with the night.
I’ve discussed in previous pieces the scriptural support for secularism and what we might consider to be the foundation of classical liberal values, or at the very least not decapitating someone because they might have a different religious or sexual persuasion, but that doesn’t mean Jesus advocated for all Christians to be beta cucks. In Matthew 10:34-36, Jesus says, “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” God helps those who help themselves.
Secular Europe and Christian Europe are both under existential threat. Europe, it would seem, heeded Francis Parker Yockey’s advice to become one continental unit, out of “organic necessity,” and yet in light of the on-going “migrant crisis” that appears to be a large part of what is killing it. Bruce S. Thornton informs us that:
The EU is based on the assumption that nationalism is a premodern relic and dangerously irrational. The evils wrought by Nazism’s and fascism’s “blood and soil” ethno-nationalism supposedly proved that exclusionary national identities hinder what for nearly two centuries has been the dream of the West: All humans share not just the potential, but an innate preference for the same Western goods such as leisure, affluence, individual rights, freedom, and peaceful coexistence. And since all humans are “plastic,” they can, with the right social-political order, be shaped and improved in order to achieve Western ideals like human rights, confessional tolerance, and political freedom. The result of such transnational government would be a global order enjoying prosperity, social justice, and “perpetual peace,” as Immanuel Kant’s influential 1795 essay was titled. Only the irrational passions of nationalist bitter-enders and backward people of faith are preventing the realization of this ideal. Thus the sovereign European nation-states should cede much of their authority to the EU: a transnational, secular institution staffed by technocrats...working in government agencies and bureaus.
Thornton calls this the EU’s fatal flaw, and identifies it a “utopian antidemocratic vision.” He notes that EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker declared, “The future of Europe cannot be held hostage by electoral cycles” and that the EU “cannot allow” nationalism. A majority of Europeans approve of the EU, but a majority disapprove of its handling of the on-going “migrant crisis.” A full three-quarters of member states’ citizens believe each country must set its own immigration policy. Is it possible to have a pan-European identity or Western solidarity while maintaining individual sovereignty? Can Europe, largely divorced from its Christian roots, survive? These may be the key questions of the day.
The need for religion persists, however, and in its void atheism has created fertile ground for the various –isms and their attendant ideologies, supplanting religious faith with various alternatives, most destructively communism and its current iteration of Bolshevism-cum-critical theory-cum-“social justice.” The salvation of the global downtrodden and the oppressed—and the destruction of Whiteness and Privilege and frankly Western civilization—has become the new preoccupation of the zealous, the credo of missionaries the Western world over. Jean Raspail’s beginning of The Camp of the Saints has proven frighteningly prescient.
For these missionaries of social justice, there’s something tantalizing and even romantic about the barbarian, a modern update of the myth of the Noble Savage, which has more or less formed a cornerstone of the Leftist worldview. The barbarian, as I’ve quoted Hilaire Belloc before as saying, is perceived as “refreshing” in his “inversion of our old certitudes and our fixed creed.” Now a little transgressiveness is fine and actually necessary to the health of a society to prevent it from stagnation, but Mark Steyn makes the great point that what happens when the counter-culture becomes the culture? What happens when the barbarians’ inversions and the counter-culture’s inversions become one giant missile launched at the heart of all that Europe and Europeans have built? The Left has appropriated Islam as part of its Resistance, but what, exactly, does that entail? Its anti-Westernism is certainly appealing, but how many Leftists realize the deal they’re making with this particular devil? To quote Bruce Bawer:
Never mind that the holy books of Islam quite clearly spell out the doctrine of jihad and the heavenly rewards that await jihadist martyrs. No, according to MSNBC “terrorism expert” Malcolm Nance, Manhattan attacker Sayfullo Saipov’s butchery was “anti-Islamic.”…To fail to see a continuity between, on the one hand, the Islam of the terrorists, and, on the other, the Islam of forced marriages, honor killings, female genital mutilation (FGM) and the niqab is to engage in denial and a total whitewash. But then, whitewashing Islam is the true area of expertise of so many of these so-called terrorism experts.
The shortest hadith is, “War is deceit.” The Islam of today, as documented in Lothrop Stoddard’s terrific The New World of Islam, has become the vehicle of the pan-Islamic ideology of Wahhabism. One very disturbing notion is that far from Islam needing a reformation, it’s already had one—and it’s brought the religion back to its seventh-century roots. In this chilling view, Wahhabism was the reformation, and the militant Islam that’s with us today is the reformed version. As Lothrop Stoddard, writing in 1921, tells us:
By the eighteenth century, the Moslem world had sunk to the lowest depth of its decrepitude…Manners and morals were alike execrable…[Islam] was as decadent as everything else. The austere monotheism of Mohammed had become overlaid with a rank growth of superstition and puerile mysticism. The mosques stood unfrequented and ruinous, deserted by the ignorant multitude…As for the moral precepts of the Koran, they were ignored or defied…the most degrading vices flaunted naked and unashamed. Even the holy cities, Mecca and Medina, were sink-holes of iniquity…Yet, in this darkest hour, a voice came crying out of the vast Arabian desert, the cradle of Islam, calling the faithful back to the true path. This puritan reformer, the famous Abd-el-Wahab, kindled a fire which presently spread to the remotest corners of the Moslem world, purging Islam of its sloth and reviving the fervor of olden days. The great Mohammedan Revival had begun…In religion, as in politics, the desert Arabs kept the faith of their fathers…welded into a politico-religious unity like that affected by the Prophet. Abd-el-Wahab was, in truth, a faithful counterpart of the first caliphs…When he died in 1787 his disciple, Saud, proved a worthy successor. The new Wahabi state was a close counterpart of the Meccan caliphate.
There was a reformation, and it took Islam back to its militant roots, re-combining the religious and political aspects that had long been neglected. Wahhabi Islam is nothing less than Islamic supremacy, and it is faithful to the Prophet Muhammad’s life and teachings. The implications are that Islam is fundamentally incompatible with any government that is not sharia-compliant, for sharia is held to be the divine law to supersede all others. Example: Article Six of the Constitution says that document is the highest law in the United States, to be superseded by no other. Sharia laws claims that it is the highest law in the land, any land, to be superseded by no other. Any Muslim who would allow sharia to be subordinate to a non-sharia-compliant constitution would be breaking from Islamic doctrine.
The Prophet Muhammad is considered the ideal, indeed, perfect, model for humanity. Devout Muslims would do well to follow his example. The precedents Muhammad set, though, are far from saintly. Example: white Christian women were by far the most expensive sex slaves in the Arab slave trade because white Christian women were Muhammad’s favorite sex slaves. The targeted “grooming” of native-born white girls by Muslim men makes perfect sense by understanding that attacks on non-Muslims, the kafir, are always set against a historically symbolic back-drop, in much the same way that Leftists endeavor to “de-construct.” The duplicitousness of Muslims—“We smile in your face with hate in our hearts”—and the idea of “sacred deception,” that any deception of non-Muslims undertaken to advance the cause of Islam is part of a sacred duty and the jihad, is all there in the Koran and the hadiths. The jihad ranges from simple deception to naked violence where, for once, the feminists are right about the subjugation of women as an exercise in power. Pace T.J. Nelson:
For the Muslim mujaheddin, it is a true case of “cherchez les femmes”: if he was successful in his battle of conquest, the Arab soldier was permitted to rape his victims and plunder their wealth, as the Noble Quran instructs him to do; if he is killed, or “martyred,” he gets to spend eternity in Paradise surrounded by 72 virgins where, supposedly, sexual orgasms last for 1,000 years (this being reduced in later Hadiths to a more manageable 24 years), and he gets a free couch with matching green pillows. Either way, the Muslim believes, he is going to score big.
For the True Believer, death is a gateway. His self-immolation coincides with our own, our respective paradises identical in their sumptuousness and decadence. There is no wavering in his cause, for he is resolute, and assured that his death in the name of jihad will secure a spot in eternal paradise. Our paradise is measured in thirty-, forty-five-, sixty-minute increments where it’s not so much bliss but escape from the banalities of our modern Sisyphean existence—a trip to the Red Light District or a quick visit to RedTube; “binge watching” a show on Netflix; the big game; a syringeful of heroin. Distraction is our creed, solipsistic navel-gazing our preoccupation, conjoined oblivion with the Salafists and Wahhabis our pastime.
Can the transcendent quality of Christianity that drove men to the greatest of heights still be harnessed by a society that has rejected it? Can its essence survive the forging fires of the modern crucible once more to emerge as the driving force of a New Enlightenment? Or is the devil in the details and the whole enterprise is bedeviled? To quote Joseph Sobran:
It is Christianity, after all, that has formed our ideas of law. To accept this fact is no more to “establish religion” than writing the laws in English is to “discriminate against” people who don’t speak English. Christianity is the basis of our moral idiom. Anyone who doubts this should try to imagine imposing the U.S. Constitution on a Moslem or Hindu country. Roosting Christianity out of our political tradition is like rooting words derived from Latin out of our dictionaries.
That is to say Christianity is so inextricably intertwined with our DNA, as T.S. Eliot once wrote, “Do you need to be told that even such modest attainments as you can boast in the way of polite society will hardly survive the Faith to which they owe their significance?” For both Muslims and Leftists, that is precisely what they’re banking on, but I have a feeling many of the latter are going to get a whole lot more than they bargained for.
 Lothrop Stoddard. The New World of Islam, Chapman and Hall, 1921.