19 September 2009

Via Nordica Media

In i933 Dom Gregory Dix wrote a couple of scintillating articles about the errors of one Dr N P Williams (formerly, I have to admit, a priest on the strength of S Thomas's). Williams had invented "Nordic Catholicism", "neither Roman nor Byzantine ... non-Papal, but at the same time specifically Western in its outlook and temper". He associated this with the 'Nordic' lands of Britain, Scandinavia, Holland [included presumably so as to incorporate the minute gang of schismatics called the'Old Catholics'] and North Germany.

Interesting, isn't it, that a donnish Oxford Anglican should be devising this Aryan racist nonsense just as Hitlerism was on the up. Of course Williams did not get all this from Nazism; it is, rather, a superb example of how things can be in the air; the fashion of the times ... the spawn of the Zeitgeist ... an idea whose time has come and whose time will through the mercy of God undoubtedly go. You will recall the parallel of Eugenics and racial purity, which were already being peddled by birth-controllers in America and Europe when the euthanasia of the unfit and the elimination of European Jewry were merely a gleam in Herr Hitler's artistic eye.

Dix was merciless in the satirical bite of his articles (I believe Williams never spoke to him again). I will give but one example. Williams had written of the "essential religious genius of the Northern peoples ... mystical soaring quality ... beneath grey and weeping skies ... quality which urges it to pierce straight upwards to the ineffable Godhead itself, and forbids it to take over-much delight in symbols, or to rest with satisfaction in material objects of devotion". Dix begins his clinical demolition of this claptrap thus:
It is a vivid and sympathetic picture. One can almost see these mystical and polygamous freemen at their simple devotions, and catch the rustle of their golden beards as they bend forward to breathe unsuperstitious prayers into their winged casques, seated on damp logs beneath the grey and weeping dome of heaven.

At the end of his first article, Dix writes:
It has been the nemesis of all racial Christianities from St Paul's opponents to the present day that they have proved sterile and inadequate just in proportion as they have expressed only the emphatic qualities of a race. Truth will be held most entirely and in due proportion in a Church which is truly "universal", supra-racial, AND UNAFFECTED BY THE TRANSIENT SPIRIT OF A PARTICULAR AGE.

And in the other paper, he writes:
Above all else, the Oxford Movement was an attempt to recover for the magisterium of the Church that final control of belief which "liberalism"claims for irresponsible private scholarship. ... "liberal Catholics" ... seek to impose on the Oxford Movement a theology which is not its own, which springs indeed from the principles of that "liberalism" which, as Newman said, "is the enemy".

66 years later, how relevant are Dix's words to the Liberal establishment of today, to its servitude to the Spirit of the Age in matters such as Priestesses, and to its certain transience.

18 comments:

rev'd up said...

Eugenics as a "science" has stranger roots than Hitler or Nazism which was based on the philosophy of Alfred Rosenberg, a Jew. Racism at the time of WWII was pandemic. Nationalism as it was known was all the rage, England and USA were perhaps more guilty of it than others (calling it Manifest Destiny, British Israel, Via Nordica Media etc - it was their divine right to order the world). But to study eugenics, one has only to study Pharisaical Talmud-ism, the pseudo-wisdom of Maimonides, 19th century Zionism and Jewish Bolshevism. No other racial group has had such a fascination and love affair with itself (which in a nut shell is eugenics) as that of anti-Christ Judaism.

Here's a start:

http://www.whatwemaybe.org/txt/txt0001/Reichler.Max.1916.Jewish%20Eugenics.htm

Dix's view is the Christian one and was as unique then as it is now. His view has always been the minority opinion. True conversion to a race-less Christianity is the only way.

Dressing eugenics in "Hitler," who was sodomite scum, only obscures the picture. He was not the most evil man of the 20th C. nor were Nazis the most evil clan. The Bolsheviks, who were predominantly Jewish (90+%), killed more and more ruthlessly, destroyed more churches and killed more priests, and did it with money from the United States/English banks. The same crowd that made Bolshevism possible, made abortion possible through first promoting prophelactics and then the pill - and those throught the "Catholic" U of Notre Dame.

The Church foolishly named the enemy "Freemasonry" or "Modernism," they were wrong on both counts. But were they wrong on purpose or by accident? And were does Vatican 2 fit in?

Independent said...

It is surprising how much the Nazi ideology infected theology at the time. Karl Adam the world renowned theologian argued that not only were National Socialism and Catholicism not in conflict with each other they belonged together as nature and grace. Of Hitler he said "Now he stands before us, he whom the voices of our poets and sages have summoned, the liberator of the German genius.He has removed the blindfolds from our eyes and,through all political, social, economic, social and confessional covers, has enablked us to see and love again the one essential thing, our unity of blood, our German self, the homo Germanus". This appeared in an aricle in 1933 "Theologische Quartalschrift ",CXIV, p59. Interestingly it was not listed in the Festschrift published on Adam's birthday in 1952.

What a pity Dix did not turn his attention to Adam.Racialism had infected the Catholic Church itself. The present Pope has indeed warned of the Nazification of the faith.

Michael McDonough said...

Frankly, I think "scientific" Racism goes back a bit farther in the 18th C. There was (and is) a type of Southron in the USA who adheres very closely to Science as a kind of universal interpretor of reality. In the AnteBellum South John Calhoun was the great apologist of the scientific rightness of slavery, a point which Harry V. Jaffa, A New Birth of Freedom (Rowman & Littlefield, 2000) shows quite well. Of course, the "evidence" at that moment of history had mostly to do with skull sizes, and other morphologic externalities. Gregory Dix was right to satirize "Nordic Via Media", and I had a laugh at the words Fr. H. copies here.

Very much "Better living through science" (presumably, for the survivors).

radex33 said...

I don't think Alfred Rosenberg was Jewish. Peter Peel, in his preface to the 1982 translation of Rosenberg's 'Myth of the 20th Century' says: "Rosenberg seems to have been the butt of a good deal of rough humor in upper party circles, and not least on account of his name which, in Germany, was thought of as typically Jewish, although in the Baltic area from where he came it was commonly a gentile name also."
An English example of a name that can be either Jewish or gentile is 'Newman'.
The belief in the significance of racial differences was the norm in the nineteenth century and earlier. Carlyle, Mill, Spencer, James Fitzjames Stephen, Leslie Stephen, T.H. Huxley, and many othere thought there were significant racial differences. I think Newman did too, as evidenced in some of his historical essays. The belief that there are no significant racial differences is very much the shibboleth of this age.

Independent said...

Jews are in any case not a race any more than Christians or Moslems are. There are Black, Yellow, and WhIte Jews just as there are Black, Yellow, and White Christians and Moslems. German Jews in the thirties regarded themselves as being Germans of the Jewish religion, as did most emphatically Herr Spiegel, the head of the Jewish Committe in Germany who died a few years ago.. He was tall, with fair hair and blue eyes,
considerably more Aryan looking than the Fuhrer, and survived the Shoah sheltered by a Catholic family.

Alfred Rosenberg was a folkdeutsche from Reval in Estonia which when he was born in 1893 was part of the Russian Empire.He was educated in Moscow.He had no Jewish grandparents and did not therefore fall foul of the Nuremberg laws. Had he done so other Nazis would soon have seen to his extinction.

Karl Marx, born of parents who had themselves foresaken Judaism, attacked all religion, To talk of Jewish Bolshevism is to echo the propaganda of the Third Reich as the Marxist-Leninism which inspired the October Revolution had no connection with any religion whatsoever.Stalin made short work of many revolutionaries who were of Jewish origin.

I see what Marx meant when he said "Anti-semitism is the socialism of fools",there are obviously still idiots who accept the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as fact, and I would agree with the present Holy Father when in Paris talking to the Jewish community he said that to be anti-semitic is to be anti-Christian. No wonder he has at times warned of the dangers of the Nazification of the faith.

I remember well an old Anglo-Catholic hymn which runs as follows

"Blessed are the chosen people out of whom the Lord did come, Blessed still the Land of Promise which He made His earthly home, but far blessed far the Mother she who bore Him in her womb, Hail Mary full of grace.

Since today is the Jewish Feast of Rosh Hashonah in the spirit of the hymn may I wish any Jewish readers a Happy New Year?

rev'd up said...

Anyone with half a brain knows that it isn't "to echo the propaganda" to point out that Stalin et al were coffee house, pseudo-intellectual, anti-Christ Jews. They murdered 45 million Christians! Only a fool hopes to get away with such sophistry. Henry Ford published this information long before the Nazis may have parroted it. For that matter, Winston Churchill wrote about the Jewish-ness of Bolshevism. Marx's parents were non-practicing? So what. While it is true there is no such thing as an "atheistic Catholic," there is such a thing as an "atheistic Jew," millions of them in Israel.

For those who don't think Rosenberg was a Jew, happy daydreaming.

And for those convinced of nationalistic soteriology, even for "Jews," I suggest reading Aurthur Koestler's (a Jew) The Thirteenth Tribe. He proves that AshkeNAZI Jews have no genetic basis for claiming to be the seed of Abraham.

Oh, I know you think its "anti-Semitic" to point out and believe objective truths. So be it; I keep good company with the Apostles, Fathers and Doctors though maybe not the person of the Pope.

PS Protocols of Zion! Give me a break!

PPS NB, the ADL considers it "anti-Semitic" not to capitalize the "S" in Semitic!

rev'd up said...

I suggest for further reading (WARNING: this is not for the weak minded):

"Hateful views of Jews as being subhuman did not have to be invented by Nazi theorists such as Hitler, Goebbels, Rosenberg and Streicher. This ideology was simply adapted from statements of political Zionists such as those found in the writings of the Zionist Yehezkel Kaufman in 1933."

I quote from this Jewish site:

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/zionism/zanda.cfm

BillyD said...

I think it's lovely how you can turn a thread following a post against racist ideology in the Church into a rant against the Jews, Rev'd.

By the way, Stalin was most certainly not a Jew. He was a Georgian, and at one point in his life studied to be a priest. The Georgian Orthodox Church, at least, evidently had standards about who can be a priest and who can't.

rev'd up said...

It's only a "rant" because you call it that, silly man.

Iosef Besarionis dze Jughashvili, Joseph Stalin's birth name. Jughashvili means "son of a Jew." Stalin had three wives, all Jewish.

Facts.

Yes, racist ideology is what I've been addressing; it is a curse man bears because he will not shed his sin. In order to purge them, we must be clear what they are. No body gets a free pass, including me.

BillyD said...

"His first name is also transliterated as Josif. His surname, ჯუღაშვილი (Jughashvili), is sometimes transliterated as Dzhugashvili and occasionally rendered as Djugashvili. -შვილი (-shvili) is a Georgian suffix meaning "child"(son). Neither the word nor the name ჯუღა (Jugha or Dzhuga) belong to the Georgian language. On the other hand, the name "Jugaev" is known among Ossetians. In 1939, Georgi Leonidze wrote a poem about Stalin's early years. The poem claimed that Stalin's ancestors came from South Ossetian village of Geri. The poem was written during the purges and passed censors, and thus can be considered a significant source. These facts could be the basis of the rumors regarding Stalin's allegedly Ossetian ethnical roots. "

I'm pretty sure that if the Georgian's wanted to name someone "Jew's son" they could have done so unambiguously. Don't believe everything you read on Stormfront, Rev'd.

Sue Sims said...

Wow.

I've come across some vitriolic anti-semitism among ultra-trad Catholics, but didn't realise that it had infected some Anglicans as well.

I'd better avoid Rev'd up, since, as a Jew converted to Catholicism (the Roman variety), I can see that I press both his explosive buttons, so to speak.

Oh well. Just off to slaughter a few goyische kinder to mix their blood with flour for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Then I'll get back to my embroidery: a beautiful altar frontal displaying a hammer and sickle.

rev'd up said...

BillyD: Your quote and comment are a mystery. Where is the quote from and what is it supposed to accomplish? Your conclusion is not drawn from the quote, or is it? What's this "Stormfront?"

----------

Sue: It would seem the proper authorities need be advised and young children kept away from you! Are you on the local registry? Or is it that just your rapier wit? Pervert.

You both might like to read this:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3342999,00.html

BillyD said...

Sorry. I got the quote from a site called Indopedia, but it's also on other sites as well. Try Google - it's a wonderful thing.

In addition, Wikipedia has this to say about the name: 'There are several etymologies of the ჯუღა ("jugha") root. In one version, the name derives from the village of Jugaani in Kakhetia, eastern Georgia...Neo-Nazi and other anti-Semitic sources have claimed that "Dzhuga" or "Jugha" means "Jew" in Georgian and hence "Dzhugashvili" literally means "Jew-son" or son of a Jew. This, however, is incorrect as the word for "Jew" in Georgian is "ebraeli".'

What both these quotes do is give the lie to the claim that Stalin's surname means "Son of a Jew."

I have to rely on the internet on this because I don't speak Georgian. Where did you happen to learn it?

Stormfront is a white power, neo-Nazi web forum, and was one of the first major hate sites on the internet. I am surprised that you do not know it.

Regarding your link to ynet, all I can say is that it's such a comfort that no Christians have ever been murderers...

rev'd up said...

Seems Wikipedia cleans up on Stalin info on the net! I wonder who controls Wikipedia? I prefer to get my information from books; I'll leave trusting Wikipedia to you.

I'm happy to say I've never (unlike you) visited the "Stormfront." Sounds like just the place for those goofs who wish to be under the spell of politically incorrect internet backwash. I'm under no such spell. Racism and bigotry are obnoxious evils which I endeavor to hate, God help me. So, why is it that when overwhelming evidence convicts anti-Christ Talmudic Judaism of malignant racist bigotry they get a free pass, and otherwise reasonable people step forward to defend it? BillyD, are you just as incensed at what the Saints and Doctors have said about Jews? Do you also believe the Gospels of Matthew and especially John to be "anti-Semitic?" You would make S Paul an "anti-Semitic" Stormfront groupie for having said, "The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth."

rev'd up said...

This review of Inglourious Basterds is well worth reading. I agree with it's author's sentiments.

rev'd up said...

http://www.counterpunch.org/atzmon09182009.html

rev'd up said...

"Regarding your link to ynet, all I can say is that it's such a comfort that no Christians have ever been murderers..."

Sorry, forgot to address this.

What are you a student of the Talmud? This is the typical turn-about pilpul sophistry that they use to validate any Judaic act of evil. You would no doubt conclude that Christians and gentiles in Russia had it, these Jewish hang-men, coming after the thousands of years of pogroms. Akin to the modern crimes being perpetrated against the Palestinians. For example, *someone* launches an empty metal tube into a field adjacent to an illegal Jewish settlement and the IDF is "justified" annihilating a Palestinian village from which they say the "katyusha" came from; or catching a boy throwing rocks at armored vehicles they cut off his arm.

So what are you; a dumb Christian or a rabbi?

BillyD said...

"Racism and bigotry are obnoxious evils which I endeavor to hate, God help me."

The irony is delicious. Thank you for providing it, even though you don't seem to be in a position to appreciate it.

What book was the source of your information about what Stalin's original surname means?

"BillyD, are you just as incensed at what the Saints and Doctors have said about Jews?"

Sometimes. I find Chrysostom's attacks repugnant, as were Luther's ideas of how to deal with the presence of Jews in Germany.

"Do you also believe the Gospels of Matthew and especially John to be "anti-Semitic?" "

No.

"You would make S Paul an "anti-Semitic" Stormfront groupie for having said..."

Um, no, I wouldn't.

"What are you a student of the Talmud? This is the typical turn-about pilpul sophistry that they use to validate any Judaic act of evil. You would no doubt conclude that Christians and gentiles in Russia had it, these Jewish hang-men, coming after the thousands of years of pogroms."

That's quite a stretch, there, Rev'd, even for you. Here's my point: whenever a bigot comes across the example of a Jew doing something bad, he uses it as proof that Jews are inherently bad themselves. Whenever he comes across the example of a non-Jew doing something bad, he fails to make the same connection. Jews always seem to be representatives of the Jewish people for bigots, while non-Jews act as individuals.

"This review of Inglourious Basterds..."

I'll take your word on it. I refuse to watch Tarantino movies.