Antemurale Christianitatis: Vol. II
“Everyone needs a hobby. Ours is suicide. We had all the right tools: Opposable thumbs and big brains full of useless shit. A long history of wrong turns and dead ends brings us back to where we started again.”-Paint It Black, “The Beekeeper”
“‘Allahu Akbar’ has somehow become inextricably intertwined with terrorism. Its real meaning is far more innocent.”-The New York Times
“Let me yell it out at 35,000 feet while you’re eating Chicken Florentine in first class. Then hope someone knows the Heimlich Maneuver.”-James Woods
In 1519, Pope Leo X dubbed Croatia Antemurale Christianitatis (most commonly translated as “The Bulwark of Christianity”) for its fierce resistance to Ottoman incursions into the Balkans; Ottoman historians record the Croatians as some of the most ferocious warriors their armies encountered. The Ottoman armies had Rome as their end-goal, but a protracted struggle of hundreds of years saw to it their destination could never be reached. The battle that ultimately stopped their northwesterly Adriatic land advance was the Battle of Sisak in 1593, with the victorious Croatian army aided by Austrian and Slovenian troops. The price of resisting the Muslim tide was astounding: half of the Croatian population perished in the course of the conflict, their entire nobility was destroyed, most of the economy predicated on trade declined precipitously, and a good chunk of Croatia was nevertheless annexed into the Ottoman Empire (much of what constitutes present-day Bosnia and Herzegovina), where Catholics were expressly forbidden from holding “immovable possessions” (ie-land, houses, etc.). Vladislav Mencetić wrote in 1665: “Italy would have sunk into the deep waves from slavery if the Ottoman sea hasn’t been streaking into the Croatian seashore.”
Pope Pius II had originally bestowed the title on the Vlach, Slav, Greek, Albanian, and Macedonian Christians rebelling against the Ottomans in present-day Albania and Macedonia under the banner of Skanderbeg in the mid-15th century. Poland also earned this distinction in the 17th century for its role in saving Christian Europe from the Ottoman Empire, though its bona fides as a bulwark of Christianity have been established over the course of a millennium, as Filip Mazurczak tells us:
Since its adoption of Christianity in 966, Poland has often played the role of Antemurale Christianitatis, a bastion of Christendom. From halting the European advance of Mongols at the Battle of Legnica in 1241, to saving Europe from Muslim colonization when King John III Sobieski defeated the Turks at Vienna in 1683, this has been reinforced. Communism failed to extinguish Polish Catholicism, when John Paul II was elected pope in 1978 and inspired the rise of the Solidarity movement, which played a crucial role in ending communism. More recently, Polish immigrants have filled hitherto empty pews in Western Europe. During the current Vatican synod on the family, Polish bishops have been among the most vocal defenders of tradition.
John III Sobieski’s Polish-dominated Christian Coalition army turning the tide at the Battle of Vienna in 1683—along with Charles Martel’s victory at Tours in 732—were perhaps the most consequential victories for keeping Europe Christian and free from the vice-grip of the Muslim world, though one may also include the Battle of Ostia in 849, the Siege of Vienna in 1529, the Battle of Lepanto in 1571, and the Battle of Sisak in 1593 as seminal victories for Christendom over the Muslim hordes; we should also not neglect the sustained efforts of the Reconquista, which concluded in 1492. Though Filip Mazurczak frames Legnica as a win against the Mongols, the Christian troops were actually crushed, and it was really only the untimely demise of the Mongol Khan Ogodei later that year that saved Europe from being over-run by the pagans. Nevertheless, Mazurczak strikes at something very crucial to our understanding of the events of the modern world: due to the fact that the religiosity of the West has declined so precipitously, most Europeans—and Westerners in general—don’t seem to understand the significance of the timing and targets of the global jihad.
The jihadis often choose their dates and locations carefully for their symbolic weight. Why do you think the nineteen hijackers chose September 11th to perpetrate the worst terrorist act ever witnessed on U.S. soil? This was the first day the united Christian forces under John III Sobieski and their Muslim adversaries clashed at the Gates of Vienna in 1683. This would signal the inexorable decline of the Ottoman Empire and the eventual cessation of Islamic control of huge swathes of Europe, with a couple of residual exceptions in the Balkans, until, well, now. As a group so singularly obsessed with their religion, the Muslim world places inordinate weight on the symbolism of historical encounters. Not only that, but these encounters are considered either temporary set-backs or positive precursors in their eyes to the surety of their victory. Norwegian Mullah Krekar says Islam will ultimately defeat Europe because:
We’re the ones who will change you. Just look at the development within Europe, where the number of Muslims is expanding like mosquitoes. Every western woman in the EU is producing an average of 1.4 children. Every Muslim woman in the same countries are producing 3.5 children. By 2050, 30 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim. Our way of thinking...will prove more powerful than yours.
Make no mistake, what for the mainstream is a “migrant crisis,” for the Muslim fundamentalists is the hijrah—a Muslim invasion through demographic transformation. It is a protracted colonization of the feckless West and if left unchecked, it will destroy Western civilization. Once again, Europe finds itself in the role of Antemurale Christianitatis, but the western half of the continent seems to have thrown down its shield. The great Jean Raspail lamented:
The people already know it all, intuitively: that France, as our ancestors fashioned it centuries ago, is disappearing. And that we keep the gallery amused by talking ceaselessly of immigration without ever saying the final truth. A truth that is moreover unsayable, as my friend Jean Cau noted, because whoever says it is immediately hounded, condemned then rejected…Is the seriousness of the problem being kept from the French people? Yes...I think the distress comes from there: the people know that things are being hidden from them. Today, tens of millions of people don’t buy into the official discourse on immigration. Not one of them believes that it is an opportunity for France “une chance pour la France.” Because reality imposes itself on them, every day.
“Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?” (Matthew 7:16). Dressed like sheep but ravenous like wolves—be wary of the throngs of “migrants” comprised of mostly fighting-age men engaged in the terra-forming of liberal Europe into the Dar-al Islam. And as none other than George W. Bush once quipped, “If it’s not the cartoons, it’s the Crusades.” There is a distinct lack of proportion among the fundamentalist Muslims that makes them impossible to reason with. They are singular in their pursuit, and just like their strange bedfellows on the Left, the only language they understand is “power.” Case in point, from a 1986 article in the L.A. Times:
The Jerusalem Post said the Soviet secret police last year secured the release of three kidnapped Soviet diplomats in Beirut by castrating a relative of a radical Lebanese Shia Muslim leader, sending him the severed organs and then shooting the relative in the head. The newspaper quoted “observers in Jerusalem” as saying: “This is the way the Soviets operate. They do things—they don’t talk. And this is the language Hezbollah understands.”
Contrast with this, from the same article: “Six Americans, missing for up to two years, are presumed to be kidnapping victims in Lebanon.” Whatever happened to them I do not know, but there was certainly no show of force to precipitate their release.
Europeans, and Western peoples in general, are suffering from severe cognitive dissonance—on the one hand, they believe the advancement of “diversity” to be a wholly natural phenomenon, but on the other, they, as Raspail observed, can intuit that their culture is evaporating before their eyes. Giulio Meotti notes grimly:
French judges are now busy removing Christian symbols from the landscape: last month in Ploërmel, the cross above a statue of Pope John Paul II was ordered dispatched for allegedly violating the separation of church and state…France’s authorities and elites are tearing up, piece by piece, the country’s historical, religious and cultural legacy so that nothing will remain. But a nation dispossessed of its identity will see its inner strength broken. Samuel Pruvot, a journalist for Famille Chrétienne (“Christian Family”), recently claimed that Christianity in France will be soon found in “museums.”
The leadership of the Catholic faith appears wholly cowed by the Islamists. Says Meotti: “The martyrdom of Father Jacques Hamel at the hands of Islamists has already been forgotten; the site of the massacre is still waiting for a visit from Pope Francis as a sign of condolence and respect.” Reports out of the Vatican are that Europe must embrace the Muslim invasion because they have “enormously enriched,” modern societies, quoth Father Michael Czerny. Even that critically important date on the Gregorian calendar, December 25th, Christmas, is no longer sacred. Meotti tells us that, “Paris’s Mayor Anne Hidalgo recently banned the city’s main Christmas market for being insufficiently elegant,” and Bruce Bawer points out that:
The [Norwegian] Stigeråsen School’s Christmas plans provide yet another example of dhimmitude: craven European submission to Islam. This year, there might be a couple of Koran verses in a Christmas show; next year, a yuletide event at which both religions are celebrated on an even footing; and not too many years after that, perhaps, a children’s celebration at which there is no cross and no Christmas tree, only prayer rugs, benedictions in Arabic, and hijabs for the girls.
Accommodating someone else’s identity does not mean yours has to be invalidated. As Donald Tusk, President of the European Council, has said: “We are a cultural community, which doesn’t mean that we are better or worse—we are simply different from the outside world...Our openness and tolerance cannot mean walking away from protecting our heritage.” I would disagree with Tusk in the sense that I do believe the West to be vastly superior to all other cultures, but his general point stands. The West in general has been unprecedentedly open and tolerant, particularly in the last sixty years or so, but this openness, as Tusk, Douglas Murray, and others have noted, must have its limits. Giulio Meotti informs us that:
The topic of immigration is fracturing Europe along ideological lines. Not only fences, but rivalry, mistrust and hate now divide the European project more deeply than ever before. The European public now looks at EU institutions with contempt. They perceive them—under multiculturalism and immigration—not only as indifferent to their own problems, but as adding to them… The migration crisis has also led to the strategic strengthening in Europe of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. He has been blackmailing European countries by threatening that if billions of euros and certain political concessions are not given to him, he will open Turkey’s borders to let millions more migrants flood into Europe. Erdogan has not only demanded that Europe jail writers and journalists; he has also tried to influence elections in the Netherlands and Germany by appealing to his Turkish constituencies there…The Pandora’s Box of a demographic revolution has been opened.
Declining native populations, growing numbers of antagonistic immigrants and their offspring, a loss of cultural and religious confidence…the revolution is here and it is certainly not being televised. Muslims perceive the West as being weak, and no one wants to be on the losing team, hence Islam—self-assured as it is—is turning back the pain-staking process of assimilation in many cases. This is a testament to the powers of identity-based persuasion on the part of the Mohammedans, and besides that, there’s no push-back from the “other side”—little is done to combat rampant migrant anti-social behavior and criminality, much less encourage assimilation to host countries that don’t even believe in themselves.
After a certain point, the only thing that grows in the human body is cancer. In the body politic ethnic enclaves, especially Islamic ones, represent these malignant cancerous tumors the aged continent is increasingly riddled with. The extended adolescence of barren-wombed Europe is nothing but a facsimile of jejunity with no real virility or vitality, and certainly no fecundity—a somnambulant, shambling existence, Europeans “nothing more than a million sheep” ultimately supplanted by the Third World. Is erasure to be Europe’s salvation? The Catholic Church itself seems to think so, and the managerial elites concur.