Print this post Print this post

On Christianity

1,381 words

French translation here

Editor’s Note:

Dalí, “The Madonna of Port Lligat,” second version, detail

In this 1982 article, William Pierce gives a beautiful demonstration of intellectual leadership on the Christian Question. The North American New Right, of course, is not a membership organization but an intellectual network/movement, so questions of membership criteria do not arise. Naturally, in the political realm, we are willing to cooperate with white people of all faiths to attain our common aims. But as a metapolitical and intellectual movement, it is the duty of the NANR to address all questions of vital importance to the survival of our race, including the role of Christianity in our racial decline and what role, if any, it might play in our revival.

The National Office has received a few complaints (fewer than expected) from members about what has been perceived as an anti-Christian bias in recent issues of National Vanguard (NV). One member has resigned.

The complaints fall into two general categories: 1. “I am a Christian. Why are you attacking my religion?” and 2. “I am not a Christian, but many White people are. We must all stick together. To attack Christianity is divisive.”

It should first be noted that the National Alliance is not primarily a religious organization –at least, not in the usual sense of the word, although most members are able to recognize the strong spiritual element in the Alliance’s message. Second, it should be noted that the National Office is fully aware of the sensitive nature of the Christian religion, and for that reason NV avoided the question for a long time.

This avoidance, however, was in conflict with the Alliance’s fundamental obligation to deal forthrightly with all issues of vital concern to the welfare and progress of our race. This obligation where Christianity is concerned has become especially difficult to ignore during the past few months, with the growing strength of the Moral Majority and other right-wing Christian groups and their active participation in political matters. The leader of that organization, the Reverend Jerry Falwell, has been outspoken in his support of Zionism, and he was recently given a Zionist award by Jewish leaders. There exists a clear conflict of interests for any Alliance member who supports such an organization, and the Alliance member should not compromise in matters of this sort.

This is not the place to deal at length with details of religious history and doctrine; NV will continue to have articles on these topics from time to time, and there will be such an article in the April issue. Here, however, a few things will be mentioned briefly for the guidance of Alliance members.

The most important single fact concerning Christianity with which the Alliance must deal is that all the major Christian churches, Catholic and Protestant, liberal and fundamentalist, have openly aligned themselves with the enemies of the White race. The Catholics and the liberal Protestants are vigorously supporting racial mixing, while the fundamentalist Protestants are strong boosters of Zionism. These alignments will become increasingly important factors in our struggle in the years ahead, as the churches become more and more involved in social and political issues. The Jews have already announced their intention to mobilize fundamentalist Christians in their effort to maintain control of the U.S. government. The Alliance cannot remain silent in the face of such developments, for the sake of White unity or anything else.

No honest, conscientious Alliance member can maintain his membership in the Alliance and also in an organization which is fundamentally opposed to the goals and principles of the Alliance. The former member who belongs to the Moral Majority acted correctly in resigning from the Alliance, and the same applies to others: Any Alliance member who is also a member of a church or other Christian organization which supports racial mixing or Zionism should decide now where he stands, and he should then resign either from his church or from the Alliance.

In fact, the great majority of Alliance members who originally had some Christian church affiliation have already made their decisions and left the churches. Those members who continue to consider themselves Christians either have no church affiliation or belong to very small, independent churches which have pro-White doctrines. It is primarily these members who have objected to the recent treatment of Christianity in NV. “It’s all right to attack the big churches,” they say, “because those churches have been subverted by the Jews — but don’t attack Christianity itself. What the churches are preaching today isn’t really Christianity.”

Well, far be it from the National Alliance to decide what is really Christianity. Christians have been fighting with one another over that question for the better part of the last 2,000 years without arriving at an answer acceptable to all parties concerned. From a strictly practical viewpoint, however, we must use the word “Christianity” in NV in the sense in which it is understood by the general public and by the great majority of readers. In that sense, “Christianity” means the lumped together doctrines of the major Christian churches, without regard for all the little quibbles which separate Catholics from Protestants, or ultra-liberal Presbyterians from Holy Rollers and teetotaling Baptists.

Beyond this question of whether it is the race-mixers and Zionists or the pro-Whites who are the real Christians, there are the troubling issues of the non-European origin of Christianity: of the great body of Christian ethical doctrines which are accepted by nearly all the churches but which conflict with White spirituality and the needs for White survival, such as the Sermon on the Mount; and of the body of Old Testament and its Jewish mythology — such as the creation myth of Genesis; the “chosen people” myth, and Isaiah’s ravings against all non-Jews, together with his prophecies that the Jews will eventually rule the world and all other races will serve them — which comes along with most versions of Christianity.

All three of the aforementioned issues are relevant to the mission of the National Alliance, and they cannot be ignored: We must look to our racial roots, and we must rid ourselves of alien influences, including those from the Levant; we must govern ourselves by White values and ethical doctrines, and by no others; and we must concern ourselves with truth alone.

A number of men and women who have understood the first two of these issues but who have, nevertheless, still considered themselves both Christian and pro-White have attempted to resolve the contradiction by denying the Jewish origins of Christianity and by choosing interpretations of Christian ethical doctrines which differ markedly from the commonly accepted ones. They have asserted that not only was Jesus not a Jew, but neither were the people living in Palestine during the Old Testament and the New Testament periods Jews. These people, they say, were actually the ancestors of the Anglo-Saxons and other peoples of Europe.

One can argue either way about Jesus, because the historical evidence is insufficient to support a firm conclusion. But the assertion that the people of the Old Testament or the people of Palestine among whom the Christian movement began were Anglo-Saxons, or anything but Semites, for the most part, is demonstrably false. Such assertions can only be maintained by persons who close their eyes to the clear historical record, just as a belief in the creation myth of Genesis can only be maintained by persons who refuse to accept the clear scientific evidence to the contrary.

If, despite everything above, there are Alliance members or prospective Alliance members who still consider themselves Christians, then it must be in the sense that they value the specifically White elements of Christianity which have been added since its origins — the great art, the great music, and the great architecture produced by White men during the centuries in which the Christian churches ruled Europe — and that they also share the White spiritual feelings which have been eloquently expressed by many men and women who were Christians and who applied the adjective “Christian” to feelings which, in fact, came from deep within the White race-soul and existed long before the advent of the Christian church.

Such Christians we can call our comrades and be proud to have in our ranks.

Source: http://nationalvanguard.org/2010/10/on-christianity/

 

If you enjoyed this piece, and wish to encourage more like it, give a tip through Paypal. You can earmark your tip directly to the author or translator, or you can put it in a general fund. (Be sure to specify which in the "Add special instructions to seller" box at Paypal.)
This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , , , , . Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

10 Comments

  1. Ragnar
    Posted October 29, 2010 at 7:47 am | Permalink

    Christianity is a hindrance to White survival. It makes Whites weak minded, so they do not recognize and fight their racial enemies.

    All Jewish mysticism should be rejected by Whites.

    If a White must have a religion, they should consider Creativity.

    • Posted October 30, 2010 at 5:52 pm | Permalink

      That essay by Dr. Pierce was his editorial for the monthly internal National Alliance Members BULLETIN 28 years ago. Dr. Pierce’s intellectual honesty should have been apparent to anyone reading this statement:

      “Any Alliance member who is also a member of a church or other Christian organization which supports racial mixing or Zionism should decide now where he stands, and he should then resign either from his church or from the Alliance.”

      I sure remember how that sentence grabbed me on first reading. I must have distributed hundreds of copies of that editorial to others who I thought those words by Dr. Pierce’s would resonate. It was an effective Alliance recruiting tool, until, that is, The Alliance went “big tent” after Dr. Pierce’s death, and the policy procribing Xianity as an opposed ideology to that of the Alliance was reversed. It was all downhill for the NA from then on. What had set it apart from the other big tent organizations was jettisoned.

      You’re right about Creativity, Ragnar. Check out the Creativity Alliance: http://creativityalliance.com/forum/

  2. Posted October 31, 2010 at 9:54 am | Permalink

    Back in the late 1980s, before we had the Internet, I was editor of the Racial Loyalty tabloid, the monthly newspaper for Ben Klassen’s Church or the Creator (COTC). I recently found RL #52, July ’89, and saw in it a letter to the editor I published from a National Alliance member which included the following quote from Dr. Pierce from his February ’89 National Alliance Members BULLETIN:

    “The greatest obstacle to the survival of our race is Christianity. Even with all their malice and cunning, the Jews would pose no real threat to the race were it not for their Christian collaborators. In the U.S. just as in South Africa, the Jews may be pulling a lot of strings behind the scenes, but the troops in the war against the White Race are mainly White Christians filled with religious guilt and obsessed with the need to expiate that guilt by sacrificing their own race on the altar of ‘equality’.

    “…Let us never forget…that Christianity itself is an alien, hostile, racially destructive creed of Jewish origin, and in the future most of those who have fallen under its spell will continue to be our enemies and the enemies of our race.”

    A couple of years after Dr. Pierce wrote those words to his Alliance members in the internal NA Members BULLETIN, and I republished them for Creators in Racial Loyalty, he invited me to come work with him in WV as the Alliance’s first Membership Coordinator. The COTC self-destructed around 1992 and many Creators, knowing Dr. Pierce’s world view, naturally gravitated to the National Alliance (especially after he purchased the COTC headquarters property from Mr. Klassen), so it doesn’t take a great leap of imagination for some of the more activist-minded former Alliance members to want to help rebuild a viable Creativity Alliance. Erich Gliebe’s “new & improved” National Alliance is unrecognizable to them compared to the Alliance they had been a part of under Dr. Pierce. Alliance-building is Alliance-building.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted October 31, 2010 at 10:19 am | Permalink

      I was unaware the religion was one of the issues of contention in the fracturing of the National Alliance after Pierce’s death.

  3. Manifest
    Posted October 31, 2010 at 3:31 pm | Permalink

    Here’s a Christian who doesn’t replace Jesus with Jews or MLK- http://cambriawillnotyield.blogspot.com/

  4. Manifest
    Posted November 2, 2010 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

    This is the best of Pierce. As a White Chrisitian, I consider this as valuable as Holy Scripture. Our prophets are great White Men who speak the truth today- http://www.natvan.com/free-speech/fs993a.html

  5. Posted November 2, 2010 at 5:08 pm | Permalink

    Greg Johnson says:
    I was unaware the religion was one of the issues of contention in the fracturing of the National Alliance after Pierce’s death.

    Greg, reading what Dr. Pierce, Founder of Cosmotheism, wrote to his members in 1982, shows that he had no intention of compromising with Xians. He wanted to disentangle our race from the clutches of this Abrahamic slave creed and strike out on a higher path.

    Most Alliance members realized there was a spiritual aspect to the National Alliance, and that we took a decidedly dim view of Xianity. There were never any prayers at our meetings, or any other Xian trappings like that. To some of us the Alliance was our Church, grounded in reality and Nature, and race-centered.

    Imagine how many Pierce loyalists who had dedicated their lives and fortunes to Alliance-building must have felt when Gliebe and Walker & Co. removed the entire following section from the second printing of the National Alliance Membership Handbook.

    All else aside, that one ill-advised blunder could arguably be what did the Alliance in once and for all. Gliebe had gone big tent — for expediency and short term gains — and drove the Alliance into the ground from then on.

    2.d. OPPOSED IDEOLOGIES (written in 1992)

    2d.vii. Christianity
    The National Alliance is not a religious organization, in the ordinary sense of the term. It does, however, have to concern itself with religious matters, because religions influence the behavior of people, society, and governments. The doctrines of various religious groups—Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, et al.—deal with the temporal as well as spiritual matters and therefore often conflict with National Alliance doctrine.
    Christian doctrines are of much greater concern to the National Alliance than the doctrines of other large religious groups, because Christianity is the most influential religion in the United States, Europe, and the rest of the White world. Most members of the National Alliance come from families which are, or a generation ago were, at least nominally Christian, and very few come from families which practice or practiced, Islam, Buddhism, or other religions. Furthermore, the history of our race for the last thousand years has been inextricably bound up with Christianity. The National Alliance really cannot avoid taking positions regarding Christian beliefs and practices, despite the complications this causes our work.
    The immediate and inevitable fact which forces us to come to grips with Christianity is that the mainstream Christian churches are all, without exception, preaching a doctrine of White racial extinction. They preach racial egalitarianism and racial mixing. They preach non-resistance to the takeover of our society by non-Whites. It was the Christian churches, more than any other institution, which paralyzed the will of White South Africans to survive. It is the Christian establishment in the United States which is preeminent in sapping the will of White Americans to resist being submerged in the non-White tide sweeping across the land. Most Christian authorities collaborate openly with the Jews, despite the contempt and abuse they receive in return, and the rest at least follow Jewish policies on the all-important matter of race. The occasional anomaly—a Catholic bishop in Poland speaking out angrily against Jewish arrogance, a few Protestant groups in the United States expressing sympathy for oppressed Palestinians—does not invalidate the rule.
    We are obliged, therefore, to oppose the Christians churches and to speak out against their doctrines. But we do not, as some groups have done, accuse the Christian leaders of being false Christians. We do not say, “We are the real Christians, because we stand for the values which the mainstream churches stood for a century ago, before they were subverted.” We do not reach for our Bibles and point to verses which seem to be in accord with the policies of the National Alliance and contrary to the present policies of the Christian churches. A diligent Bible scholar can find in the Judeo-Christian scriptures support for—or ammunition against—virtually any policy whatsoever.
    Beyond the immediate conflict between us and the Christian churches on racial matters there is a long-standing and quite fundamental ideological problem with Christianity. It is not an Aryan religion; like Judaism and Islam it is Semitic in origin, and all its centuries of partial adaptation to Aryan ways have not changed its basic flavor. It was carried by a Jew, Saul of Tarsus (later known as Paul), from the Levant to the Greco-Roman world. Its doctrines that the meek shall inherit the earth and that the last shall be the first found fertile soil among the populous slave class in Rome. Centuries later, as Rome was succumbing to an internal rot in which Christianity played no small part, legions of Roman conscripts imposed the imported religion on the Celtic and Germanic tribes to the north.
    Eventually Christianity became a unifying factor for Europe, and in the name of Jesus Europeans resisted the onslaught of Islamic Moors and Turks and expelled the “Christ-killing” Jews from one country after another. But the religion retained its alien mind-set, no matter how much some aspects of it were Europeanized. Its otherworldliness is fundamentally out of tune with the Aryan quest for knowledge and for progress; its universalism conflicts directly with Aryan striving for beauty and strength; its delineation of the roles of man and god offends the Aryan sense of honor and self-sufficiency.
    Finally Christianity, like the other Semitic religions, is irredeemably primitive. Its deity is thoroughly anthropomorphic, and its “miracles”—raising the dead, walking on water, curing the lame and the blind with a word and a touch—are the crassest superstition.
    We may have fond memories of the time before the Second World War when pretty, little girls in white dresses attended all-White Sunday schools, and Christianity seemed a bulwark of family values and a foe to degeneracy and indiscipline. We may cherish the tales of medieval valor, when Christian knights fought for god and king—if we can overlook the Christian church’s bloodthirsty intolerance, which stifled science and philosophy for centuries and sent tens of thousands of Europeans to the stake for heresy.
    We may even find Christian ethics congenial, if we follow the standard Christian practice of interpreting many of its precepts—such as the one about turning the other cheek—in such a way that they do not interfere with our task. But we should remember that nothing essential in Christian ethics is specifically Christian. Any successful society must have rules of social conduct. Lying and stealing were shunned in every Aryan society long before Christianity appeared. Our pagan ancestors did not need Christian missionaries to tell them how to behave or to explain honor and decency to them—quite the contrary!
    Historians may argue the pros and cons of Christianity’s role in our race’s past: whether or not the unity it provided during a period of European consolidation outweighed the loss of good genes it caused in the Crusades and the bloody religious wars of the Middle Ages (and through the Church’s policy of priestly celibacy); whether the splendid Gothic cathedrals which rose in Europe during the four centuries and the magnificent religious music of the 18th century were essentially Christian or essentially Aryan in inspiration; whether Christianity’s stand against the evils of self-indulgence—against gluttony and drunkenness and greed—was worth its shackling of the human mind in superstition or not. One thing already is clear, however: Christianity is not a religion that we can wish on future generations of our race.
    We need ethics; we need values and standards; we need a world view. And if one wants to call all of these things together a religion, then we need a religion. One might choose instead, however, to call them a philosophy of life. Whatever we call it, it must come from our own race soul; it must be an expression of the innate Aryan nature. And it must be conducive to our mission of racial progress. Christianity, as the word is commonly understood, meets neither of these criteria.
    The fact is that, completely aside from the racial question, no person who wholeheartedly believes Christian doctrine can share our values and goals, because Christian doctrine holds that this world is of little importance, being only a proving ground for the spiritual world which one enters after death. Christian doctrine also holds that the condition of this world is not man’s responsibility, because an omnipotent and omniscient deity alone has that responsibility.
    Although some Christians do believe Christian doctrine wholeheartedly, however, most do not. Most instinctively feel what we explicitly believe, even if they have repressed those feelings in an effort to be “good” Christians. Because of this many nominal Christians, even those affiliated with mainstream churches, can, under the right circumstances, be persuaded to work for the interests of their race. Other nominal Christians—especially those who stand apart from any of the mainstream churches—have interpreted Christian doctrine in such an idiosyncratic way that the contradictions between their beliefs and ours have been minimized.
    For these reasons we want to avoid conflict with Christians to the extent that we can. We don’t want to give unnecessary offense, even when we speak out against the doctrines of these churches. We don’t want to ridicule their beliefs, which in some cases are sincerely held. Some of these people later will reject Christianity’s racial doctrines. Some will reject Christianity altogether. We want to help them in their quest for truth when we can, and we want to keep the door open to them.
    Members who want to study the subject of Christianity and its relationship to our task in depth should read Which Way Western Man? by our late member William Simpson. The book’s initial chapters describe the spiritual odyssey of a man of exceptional spiritual sensitivity, who was far more intensely a Christian than nearly any Christian living today and who eventually understood the racially destructive nature of Christianity and rejected it.
    A more concise study of the difference between the Christian world view and ours is given in Wulf Sörensen’s The Voice of Our Ancestors, which was reprinted in National Vanguard No.107.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted November 2, 2010 at 7:01 pm | Permalink

      I can’t count the number of times within Right Wing circles that I have seen a room full of atheists and agnostics and even pagans bowing their heads in prayer because they think it a clever move to deceive the Christians among them by paying lip service to their false God and ideals.

      Of course the Christians usually deserve this, because more often than not they demand this sort of hypocritical appeasement. Religious believers seldom put much stock in honesty anyway.

      But if a religion is so degenerate that it now contents itself with extorting lip-service from lying non-believers, and if non-believers are craven enough to go along with that, my question is: Does anybody willing to engage in such a charade have the character necessary to save our race? I have my doubts.

      I am willing to work with any man, Christian or otherwise, as long as he is honest enough to level with me about his beliefs and mature enough to accept that others disagree with him.

      I have found from bitter experience that the non-believers who play paddy-cake with Christians tend to be dishonest all the way through, and nothing strong or lasting or good can be built with that kind of human material.

    • Kurwenal
      Posted November 3, 2010 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

      “Imagine how many Pierce loyalists who had dedicated their lives and fortunes to Alliance-building must have felt when Gliebe and Walker & Co. removed the entire following section from the second printing of the National Alliance Membership Handbook. ”

      Any possibility of reading the whole Pierce-era Membership Handbook somewhere?

  6. MOB
    Posted November 3, 2010 at 1:22 am | Permalink
  • Video of the Day:

  • Kindle Subscription
  • Our Titles

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    The Lightning and the Sun

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Forever and Ever

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Fascism viewed from the Right

    Notes on the Third Reich

    Morning Crafts

    New Culture, New Right

    An eagle with a shield soaring upwards

    A Life in the Political Wilderness

    The Fourth Political Theory

    The Passing of the Great Race

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Fighting for the Essence

    The Arctic Home in the Vedas

    The Prison Notes

    It Cannot Be Stormed

    Revolution from Above

    The Proclamation of London

    Beyond Human Rights

    The WASP Question

    Can Life Prevail?

    The Jewish Strategy

    The Metaphysics of War

    A Handbook of Traditional Living

    The French Revolution in San Domingo

    The Revolt Against Civilization

    Why We Fight

    The Problem of Democracy

    The Path of Cinnabar

    Archeofuturism

    Tyr

    Siege

    On Being a Pagan

    The Lost Philosopher

    The Dispossessed Majority

    Might is Right

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance