Jim's Blog

Recently our state sponsored intellectuals have been waxing indignant about the fact that the recently elected Pope is Catholic.  They have not yet complained about bears shitting in the woods.

But, in fact, the Pope is not Catholic.  He is progressive, merely less progressive and more Catholic than our state sponsored intellectuals would prefer.

Our state sponsored intellectuals are indignant because the Pope opposes abortion, women priests, gay marriage, homosexual bishops and so on and so forth.  (I would have thought that the Church was seriously oversupplied with homosexual Bishops, but I suppose the objection is that they are not openly homosexual, or not open enough)

But notice that our state sponsored intellectuals are not attacking him for supporting marital rape (traditional Christian marriage) and the enslavement of women (traditional Christian marriage)

The traditional Christian position is that marriage was an irrevocable contract in which both spouses agreed each to be always sexually available to the other.  If you are married, you don’t need consent for sex.  You need consent to refrain from sex – and you are not even supposed to give consent to refrain from sex too easily or for too long.  You are supposed to “rape” your spouse, in order to maintain the marriage.  This seems reasonable to me, for my observation suggests that if people consent to stop having sex, they are apt to not resume, and pretty soon the marriage breaks up.

If there is such a thing as “marital rape”, then it is impossible to contract to marry and stay married, which is a massive violation of freedom of contract, which violation of freedom of contract gravely impairs our ability to form families and reproduce.

In fact, the Roman Catholic Church still supports that position – in Spanish.  In English, however, it is silent.    It seems that state sponsored intellectuals cannot speak Spanish, hence “rape” is one of the few things they are not attacking the Pope for.

Now since I think that all religions are at best pious frauds, at best a collection of children’s stories embodying ancient wisdom, at worst evil scams, Roman Catholics might reasonably say this is none of my business.  Trouble is, while Jesus gives permission to ditch any parts of the Old Testament that might prove inconvenient, no Christian has permission to ditch the New Testament.  If the priest ditches the politically incorrect parts of the New Testament, people smell that he does not really believe, and the churches empty out and turn into museums.

I regret the passing of Christianity.  Europe is the faith, the faith is Europe.  Civilizations die when their animating religion dies.  We will likely need a new religion, or some synthetic substitute, or shall vanish utterly.  When a people lose their religion they are apt, like the Romano British, to disappear.  In much of the Roman Empire in the west, the people remained and had descendents, but came under the rule of foreign aristocracies formed by invading bandits.  The Romano British were, however, pretty thoroughly genocided except in those areas least subject to Roman influence. The same will likely happen to much of today’s Europe.

A lot of Christians argue that atheism must be nihilistic, and that nihilism cannot possibly oppose or resist the self confident moralizing of the progressives.

There are three problems with this theory:

1. The pagan Greeks had Gods that were no better than men, and for the most part a good deal worse, and yet the Greeks did not suffer from nihilism until after they suffered social decay. Social decay and childlessness caused nihilism. Nihilism did not cause social decay. We could do with their heroic and manly morality, in place of the excessively feeble, defeatist, and other worldly Christian morality.
2. Progressives are atheist or New Age, and their new age spooks are easily recognizable as what used to be called demons and the evil undead, hating life and the living, the beings that used to be mocked and appeased at Halloween and Samhain, the evil fairies and gibbering ghosts of Samhain. And yet progressives are full of self confident self righteous anti morality, not nihilism, the atheists even more than the New Agers.
3. The reactionary atheist branch of the PUA movement, though defeatist, is not nihilist, but rather evinces the manly and stoic spirit of the Greeks, a manly morality ultimately rooted in Darwinist teleology.

Since Darwinism, no one takes a creator God very seriously. CS Lewis celebrated those medieval thinkers that took theology as serious account of the world that had to make sense and explain the world as it is, while he himself wrote children’s stories. Christianity is down to a mustard seed, while progressives take over the churches, empty out the old bottles, and fill the old bottles with progressivism. God is dead.

What did Auster do about progressive takeover of the Churches? If Christianity is going to defend us against progressivism, where is the defense of Christianity against progressivism? Only Dalrock and Sunshine Mary are resisting the progressive takeover of Christianity, and they are heavily influenced and motivated by the atheist reactionary branch of the PUA movement. It is the atheists influencing Christians to put aside nihilism, rather than the other way around.