The Church of England has sent a clear message to its conservative churchgoers – you’re not wanted*
I don’t get it: haven’t they (the CoE) realized that liberals don’t tend to like the Church? Why bother trying to appease them? Why are they demonising someone for something they permitted?
Give progressives an inch and they’ll take a mile. Nothing will please them. If it does, it’s for, what? A month? A week if you’re lucky? These people don’t support a meritocracy, after all. It’s about who fits their agenda and personal diversity quotas.
So why bother? For a quiet life? That’s weak. It’s cowardice embodied. This risks only division for a Church which flouts its broadness.
*Source: International Business Times. Accessed 20 March 17
I read an article from the site”Return of Kings”, today which interested me. Its title was: Why Returning To The Pagan Mindset Could Bring Back Masculinity [link].
I must admit, I laughed at the title before I read it. I thought it was going to be hyper-masculine, neopagan LARPing. It wasn’t.
The author states that modern Christianity has a reputation for being namby-pamby. This is correct. It does. This namby-pamby, weak Christianity is what inspired me to set up this blog.
This weakness turns away many people. I can understand why. I come from a tough, working-class area. The Christianity many seem to espouse cannot work here.
Despite this, it’s not Christianity at its heart. It’s a modernist, idealistic sense of Christianity. It doesn’t work. It can’t. This new form believes everyone is good, that we can overcome with dialogue. Despite we can’t always do that.
Michael Sebastian, the author of the article, states:
Medieval Christianity did not share the modern belief that everyone is good. Cities were built with walls and strong defenses, not because their inhabitants hated the people on the outside, but because they wanted to protect themselves and their posterity. The idea that Christians are obligated to take in hordes of Muslim immigrants would have been ridiculed by Christians of the past.
I agree. Actually, I imagine it would be more than that. More likely, they would see those who think that as traitors. An enemy within.
He states how modern Christianity is pacifistic. Many Church leaders and Christians espouse not only non-violence, but even avoiding self-defence. He’s right. I’ve discussed with some Christians who act like that. Their smugness grates me.
I imagine that he, like me, is unhappy to be able to say this and be right. This lilly-livered pseudo-Christianity makes me sick. This is usually a form of idealism found in middle-class neighbourhoods. Very little crime. Everyone knows each other. A world a far cry from the world outside my living room.
The author and I part ways in agreement with the term ‘pagan mindset’. He doesn’t advocate for rejoining the old, European pagan religions. It would’ve been better if he used something else. Like Crusader Mindset. Or Templar Mindset. But Pagan mindset? Nah.
This is anecdotal, but most pagans I meet are serious SJWs or LARPers. They seem to hate Christians. Many even seem to love Islam. Weird, I know, but this is my experience – and it’s not one or two people.
His conclusion? A hope for church leaders to stop chasing secular culture. To reclaim our medieval history.
I agree. I am not ashamed of the Crusades* nor the Reconquista. If it wasn’t for those, Europe would have been Islamic. Islam doesn’t absorb cultures. It doesn’t meld with them. It destroys and replaces them. Overrides them. In rare cases, Islam and another culture can co-exist, but this seems to be more rural. Cities become more… Arabesque? The culture doesn’t survive as much.
* Except the Fourth. What the hell was that about?
My stance is, if we want to help destroy the SJW, pseudo-Christianity, we have to do three things:
I encourage my Christian traditionalist friends and any traditionalist, Christian readers to write. Blog. Speak. Proclaim. Preach. Grow. Read. Learn apologetics. Defend.
The brave form of Christianity, the one of our ancestors, will take off.
We can do it.