Until the advent of materialism and 19th c. dogma, Western Civilisation was superior to anything Islam had developed. Islam has not aided in the development of the modern world; in fact civilisation has only been created in spite of Islam. Proof of this resides in the 'modern' world and the unending political-economic and spiritual poverty of Muslim states and regions. Squatting on richer civilisations is not 'progress'. Islam is pagan, totalitarian, and irrational.
It is refreshing, indeed mandatory, to read common sense and real perspectives from the past. Out of the dark and gloom of the modern era of 'scientism' [abiogensis, plant food causes climate, panspermia, life on dead rocks, algae became Achmed etc.]; and into the light of learning. In a culture which praises transgendered bathrooms and applauds a bronze age moon cult as enlightened, it is difficult to understand where civilization came from and why it formed. There is no 'evolution' of civilization to use the modern world's unscientific obsession. Civilization, as with life, art or any material substance, is designed, built, constructed and managed. It can be torn down, just as easily as it can be created.
Adams makes important notes on Christianity's seminal impact on Western Civilization, a metaphysics unlike any which had preceded it in the pagan world:
"Christianity taught also the equality of all men in the sight of God. It taught this not merely as an abstract idea. Stoicism had done that. But in the early Christianity, at least, it put the idea into practice so far as it was possible to do so. The master was held to treat his slave as a brother. They both stood on the same footing within the church, and its offices and dignities were open to both alike. ...instances are not uncommon of men from the lowest classes rising to positions in the church of the highest rank. The teaching of the church always kept before men the idea of the equality in moral rights and in final destiny of all men. That it was the chiefly effective force in establishing practical equality, so far as it has been established, can hardly be asserted."
Equality of men, leads to the equality of rights, freedom of speech and due process, between all men, and over time, women. The universal ethics of Christianity, demanded a universal creed in which all men had to be treated equally, fairly and justly.
"Christianity also taught, as a necessary result of the Christian conception of the relation between God and man, that religion has a direct practical mission as an ethical teacher and help. This was a new and most important step in advance. The ancient national religions had made no ethical demand of the worshipper. The character attributed to the gods could not be helpful to any man. The pagan priest had never looked upon himself as a teacher of morals, or conceived of any reformatory mission for his religion. The Greek or Roman in need of ethical aid and comfort sought the philosopher and not the priest. This whole condition of things Christianity revolutionized. The pure ideal of character which it held aloft in its conception of God, its clear assertion of the necessity and the possibility of such a character for every man which it made in the gospel narrative, created an intimate bond between religion and ethics unknown before. The religious life which Christianity aimed to create in the individual must of necessity express itself in right conduct. This was its true fruit, its external test, and to perfect this the energy of the new religion was especially directed."
Even when acting badly, and Christians have a long history of that, as does most any man or woman today; the ideal does not perish. The character of faith should imbue all action. God is not unknowable or untouchable. He is a part of each person and of the world around us.
...[the] fatherhood of God, typified and proclaimed in an extremely effective form in the sonship of Christ, man’s elder brother, brought man near to God and gave him a new point of view for all the future. Love became the great religious force of the new age. In the practical working of Christianity this idea did not remain a mere idea. It was transformed into a positive force in history through the keen conception which the individual Christian had of the immediate personal relationship between himself and God, by virtue of which the power of the Almighty would come to his aid in his endeavor to make himself like God. In other words, Christianity not merely taught that this relationship was an ideal possibility, but it made men believe it as a fact, so that they actually lived with a sense of the divine power in them."
Animated by equality, opportunity, joy, morality, a strong character, always trying to stay ahead and deny the baser impulses and true demerits we all possess including free will and our poor choices [sin]; Christianity galvanized and demanded action. Help to the poor, the needy; protection of the old, young, infirm and innocent. A conscious desire to do good and to be active in this life, to try to live a good, not a crude life and to participate in society in order to effect good works for the next life if grace grants us that. A commitment to life, family, beauty, reality and proper conduct. We all far short. But those attributes are what created the modern world. Christianity created that culture.
Outright persecution Today we are living through one of the most serious phases of Christian persecution in history. Throughout the world Christians are meeting exclusion from society, sustained violence, arson attacks, rape and murder because they profess faith in the Prince of Peace. Most people, especially the liberal opinion-formers, prefer to ignore it.
Christianity is the most persecuted religion in the world, and most of the persecution occurs in Muslim majority states. Despite continual cries of ‘Islamophobia’, and stiff competition from Hindus in India and Buddhists in Myanmar, the uncomfortable truth is that Islam is the most persecuting religion in the world.
Christianity may have been born in the Middle East but it is being systematically driven from its homeland. The apartheid states covering North Africa and the Middle East continually disadvantage and persecute their Christian populations with nary a murmur from the secular liberal West. Sadly, large numbers in the church are no more concerned about their brothers and sisters than are the unbelievers.
Christians in the West don’t help matters when we describe our problems as ‘persecution’. What we experience is as nothing to what our brothers and sisters elsewhere suffer on a daily basis.
Institutional harassment The high priests of Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion deem traditionally-minded Christians to be undeserving of the privileges of equality, diversity, and inclusion.
It is not uncommon for street preachers to be taken to a police station and interrogated before being released to wait for months before a court hearing, then finally cleared. Even although the charges don’t stick, the process is the punishment and serves to inhibit others.
There has even been a case where a woman was prohibited by police from singing Christian songs in the street on the grounds that she was not permitted to ‘sing church songs outside church grounds’. The police later admitted they had ‘made a mistake’, but the incident illustrates a prevalent official mindset which is dismissive of Christianity.
In 2018 Father Mark Morris was fired from his post as Catholic chaplain at Glasgow Caledonian University for holding an off-campus prayer meeting in response to a gay pride march in the city. As Madeleine Kearns wrote, identifying gay pride ‘as a gross offence to God then praying about it with a bunch of grannies is, it turns out, a gross offence against the Church of Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion’.
Polite Persecution Polite persecution is the opposition biblical Christians experience increasingly in the West. This well-mannered persecution takes away our freedom as well as our right to voice a considered opinion based upon Scripture or our right to conscientious objection.
Only certain modes of expression are permitted to the Christian when speaking of contentious subjects. That is to say, only those neutered expressions which have been stripped of all force, power and above all clarity.
Take the opposition of biblical Christians to same-sex marriage and sexual relations. It would be acceptable in polite society to make a nuanced philosophical argument, carefully citing exceptions and different opinions amongst authorities, about the proper ends of sex. But one may not discuss the matter in the more robust, direct and difficult-to-misunderstand terms likely to be employed by non-graduate working people.
This means in effect that biblical arguments are permitted to be put forward only by a select class of non-controversial Christians, those who are well versed in the acceptable modes of speech used by liberal progressive graduates. As well as sharing the same background as the secularists, the acceptable Christians usually share the same political and moral views. They are considered safe.
Scorning or dismissing out of hand Christians when they voice a traditional position on sexual morality in an unapproved fashion is a way of silencing biblical Christians in the public square.
Christian vs Christian One of the most disturbing aspects of polite persecution is the refusal of many Christians to acknowledge its reality. If any Christian in the West says that the Church here faces discrimination, one of his co-religionists is sure to accuse him of overstating the case.
When pro-life Christians join demonstrations or prayer vigils there are always polite Christians ready to object that such action brings the church into disrepute. When working-class Christians question the wisdom of flooding the country with Muslims, many of whom have no intention of integrating, there are always polite respectable liberal Christians willing to denounce them as ‘racist’.
This divide-and-conquer strategy is one of the most effective powers of polite persecution. Rather than being conducted only by Intolerant progressives employing crude means, it is very often enforced by Christians themselves in order to flatter and serve their secular betters. They can always be counted on to rush to denounce other Christians as ‘hateful’, ‘insensitive’ and ‘bigoted’.
Liberal Christians should be careful they don’t allow their own biases and insecurities about their standing with their secular liberal friends to control their fellowship with other Christians. Failing to defend fellow believers from the scorn of unbelievers, even though they may not share all the convictions of those conservative Christians, is a betrayal.
This article appeared in A Grain of Sand and is republished by kind permission.
“...the presence of the Christian church enhanced, rather than damaged, the development of the natural sciences.”
The quote above is entirely accurate. In 'Galileo goes to Jail and Other Myths...', there is a good and detailed record of why this statement is true. There is no doubt that an objective observer, not one immersed in the apocrypha of the poorly named 'Enlightenment', or the post modern claptrap of cultural Marxist relativity, including the nonsense that Moslems invented everything [including fire, at least twice]; recognizes the veracity of the claim. This is not to say that only Western European traditions formed science; or that only Western European efforts are worthy of the name science. The very definition of science is in dispute, it is not metaphysics and hand-waving [evolution, globaloneywarming]; nor is it operational and technological innovation [manufacturing processes, design improvements, new technologies]. But it is entirely correct to say that modern science was formed only in Catholic Western Europe.
Naturalism or naturalist 'science', was long debated by Christians. As this book relates, going back to the 2nd century AD, Christian philosophers, well versed in Aristotle and Plato, were arguing over pagan theories about nature, the cosmos, and observed phenomena. Every educated person knew that the earth was a sphere, that unlike Aristotle's belief it moved, and that there was a cosmological rotation of planets in certain orbits. No one however, either pagan or Christian, knew why. Christians attempted to find out:
“[detailed study of naturalism from] Justin Martyr (d. ca. 165) to Saint Augustine (354-430) and beyond, Christian scholars allied themselves with Greek philosophical traditions deemed congenial to Christian thought.”
The Greek philosophers were not blindly accepted as 'experts' by Christians. Unlike Moslems, the Christians threw a healthy and heavy skepticism into pagan claims and beliefs. Today of course, the very term 'scientist' means one has to fall to the knees and scream in adulation. Not so with real science and philosophy. Justin Martyr was a Jewish convert, murdered by the Romans for his beliefs [how very tolerant]. In particular he was killed by the Romans for daring to assert that reason and faith are bound together, and that Christianity espousing this belief was no threat to the Roman state, and in fact would aid man in understanding nature:
“In the first part of the First Apology, Justin defends his fellow Christians against the charges of atheism and hostility to the Roman state. He then goes on to express the core of his Christian philosophy: the highest aspiration of both Christianity and Platonic philosophy is a transcendent and unchangeable God; consequently, an intellectual articulation of the Christian faith would demonstrate its harmony with reason. Such a convergence is rooted in the relationship between human reason and the divine mind, both identified by the same term, logos (Greek: “intellect,” “word”), which enables man to understand basic truths regarding the world, time, creation, freedom, the human soul’s affinity with the divine spirit, and the recognition of good and evil.”
In the name of tolerance the pagans killed the man who wrote the above.
In 'Galileo goes to jail and other Myths', there is a nice passage about Tertullian, another Christian who married reason with faith, in the 2nd century AD:
“Tertullian presented, and to a very significant degree he built it out of materials and by the use of methods drawn from the Greco-Roman philosophical tradition. He argued, for example, that the precise regularity of the orbital motions of the celestial bodies (a clear reference to the findings of Greek astronomers) bespeaks a "governing power" that rules over them; and if they are ruled over, they surely cannot be gods. He also introduced the "enlightened view of Plato" in support of the claim that the universe must have had a beginning and therefore cannot itself partake of divinity; and in this and other works he "triumphantly parades" his learning (as one of his biographers puts it) by naming a long list of other ancient authorities.
Tertullian and many other Christian writers [some of whom were called Montanists, largely orthodox and ascetic]; had no issues with pagan philosophy and its relevance. Basil of Caesarea (ca. 330-379), carried on some of Tertullian's ideas, and had similar attitudes toward the classical sciences. He sharply attacked philosophers and astronomers who "have wilfully and voluntarily blinded themselves to knowledge of the truth."
“But while attacking the errors of Greek science and philosophy-and what he did not find erroneous, he generally judged useless-Basil also revealed a solid mastery of their contents. He argued against Aristotle's fifth element, the quintessence; he recounted the Stoic theory of cyclic cosmological conflagration and regeneration; he applauded those who employ the laws of geometry to refute the possibility of multiple worlds (a clear endorsement of Aristotle's argument for the uniqueness of the cosmos); he derided the Pythagorean notion of music of the planetary spheres; and he proclaimed the vanity of mathematical astronomy...”
Who can possibly argue with the above ? It is common sense and correct. Today sci-fi parading as science vomits out theology about pregnant black holes, dark matter and multi-verses. Maybe these non-scientists can revisit Basil, laws of geometry and even Aristotle.
What the early Christians knew, and what we have forgotten in our age of the cult of science; is that science itself is a metaphysical enterprise. Whatever your world view is, will shape your so-called science. Augustine in the late 4th century knew this. His very influential view, was that the knowledge about our world is not a legitimate end in itself, but a means to other ends. In other words, your philosophy imbues your reason. In this vein the classical sciences must accept a subordinate position as the handmaiden of theology and religion. This philosophy is still used today but in the reverse. The metaphysics of 'science', now controls other 'faiths'.
“Augustine's handmaiden science was defended explicitly and at great length, for example, by Roger Bacon in the thirteenth century, whose defense of useful knowledge contributed to his notoriety as one of the founders of experimental science.
Augustine and others like him applied Greco-Roman natural science with a vengeance to biblical interpretation. The sciences are not to be loved, but to be used. This attitude toward scientific knowledge was to flourish throughout the Middle Ages and well into the modern period. Were it not for this outlook, medieval Europeans would surely have had less scientific knowledge, not more.”
This is very true. Without the handmaiden concept, “medieval Europeans would surely have had less scientific knowledge, not more.” When your world is random chaos, when you believe you are evolved algae, when you scream that there is no meaning, no reason to live, and that all is without purpose, your world view and your society do not develop reason, nor science, but a cult of social chaos, relativity, lamentation and death. There is no reason to the current post-modern dogma and cult of 'science', which is anything but scientific.
‘Science’ whatever that might mean, cannot explain innate morality or good deeds. Our entire legal system and cultural determination of morality, what is right, what is wrong, what can and cannot be done was entirely shaped and formed by the Church. The bedrock of our civilisation and morality is the Christian claim that all life is sacred, and every person uniquely created in the image of God. Further, every person has a mind and soul, and the soul lives on after death. Therefore, what you do in this life does matter.
Catholics waged a social war against suicide, poverty, slavery, infanticide, polygamy, bigamy, sexual perversion, gladiatorial contests, and the pagan abandonment of the weak and sick. All ancient civilisations neglected the dispossessed and marginalised. Children were sacrificed to Baal and various other ‘gods’. Women were reduced in the main to sex slaves or baby production units (see Islam). The widower was often stoned to death for being a burden to the village. The leper and sick ignored or isolated until they died. Such was ‘classical civilisation’ so lauded by atheists and Christophobes.
Seneca, the 1rst century BC philosopher killed by Nero commented, “We drown children who at birth are weakly and abnormal.” How civilised. Today of course we murder millions of babies every year under the banner of ‘abortion’, far more than the pagan Romans, Greeks, Celts, Britons, Saxons, and other paganisms destroyed. Yet we call ourselves ‘modern’, living in the age of ‘science’. We are barbarians who have forgotten the Church’s ethos and morality.
In the City of God, Saint Augustine rightly dismisses the rationale to allow and even encourage suicide: “..greatness of spirit is not the right term to apply to one who has killed himself because he has lacked the strength to endure hardships…the stupid opinion of the mob; we rightly ascribe greatness to spirit that has the strength to endure a life of misery…” Today we murder old people calling it ‘mercy killing’ or ‘euthanasia’. We are now murdering people who are poor, depressed or suffering from various mental afflictions. We are no better than the pre-civilised pagan societies who dispensed with the weak and wounded en-masse.
Christ told his followers that they would be persecuted. He asked them if they would have the strength of character and mind to suffer through such persecution. He did not tell them to run or hide. He adjured them to stand and to eventually be murdered for their faith. Through this suffering they would come closer to God. Indeed, a common theme in Catholic history is that suffering and pain are essential to understand divine truth.
Even on war, the Church advocated a ‘just war’ only policy, first enunciated in detail by Saint Augustine. There must be a defensive and moral aspect to war. War can only be justified as a response to an aggressor who imposes suffering and injustice. Revenge, expansion, the lust for slaves or gold, and material exploitation are all condemned by the Church as immoral acts which can never justify war. Saint Thomas Acquinas wrote: “In order for a war to be just…a just cause is required, namely those who attacked, should be attacked because they deserve it on account of some fault…the belligerents should have a rightful intention, so that they intend the advancement of good, or the avoidance of evil…”
Spanish scholastics in the 16th century expounded on Acquinas’ viewpoint, establishing nascent international law and demanding that the enslavement, destruction and land appropriation of the Ameri-Indians by nominally Christian men, be declared illegal and stopped.
Only in Church doctrine do we find strictures against sexuality immorality. In the early Church women were predominate because of the Church’s belief that adultery, so widespread in the ancient world, was a sin which had to be applied equally for men as well as women. The abuse of women in the ancient world is hard to underestimate and comprehend. It was the Church who supported the equal rights of women, and it was the Church who declared that marriage was a contract that could not be broken, and that infidelity within a marriage was not to be tolerated. This benefitted women. Our own ‘modern’ views of women and their ‘rights’ are based on Church doctrine. Where in world history outside of Christendom do we find women running abbey’s, farms, hospitals, convents, colleges, and orphanages?
Ramadan is just following Mein Koran. Sex slaves and women who are 'possessed' by his 'right hand'. Page after page of Mein Koran extols the rape and sex slavery of women, especially infidel women. To the half wits who populate modern academia and the fake news, sex slavery means liberation, and if you are wife #3 you are empowered and free. Ramadan is just another Muslim rapist imitating the insane totalitarian Muhammad, who raped a 9 year old.
Tariq Ramadan, “Europe’s leading Islamic scholar” and “towering intellect” and one of the “100 top global thinkers” who was once a professor of contemporary Islamic studies at St. Antony’s College, Oxford University? As Jihad Watch noted briefly here, he has just been convicted by a Swiss Appeals Court of the rape and sexual coercion of a woman known as “Brigitte” in Geneva.
Brigitte was not one of the four students he taught years ago at a lycée in Geneva. who have accused him of seducing them when they were his trusting pupils, aged between 14 and 18. No, she’s “in addition” to those former students, a victim of Ramadan’s predatory ways. It’s not known if those four Swiss girls-now-women will be bringing charges against him, but this first conviction in Switzerland should encourage them to move forward in pressing their own claims.
More details about his first conviction for rape, just announced by the Appeals Court in Geneva, can be found here: “Tariq Ramadan, disgraced former star of European Islam,” AFP, September 10, 2024:
Islamic scholar Tariq Ramadan, convicted on appeal of rape and sexual coercion by a Geneva court, is a Swiss intellectual accused of masking violence and radicalism behind a mild facade.
Ramadan, 62, is the grandson of the founder of the Islamist movement the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, and wrote his doctoral thesis on his ancestor.
Ramadan is the grandson of Hassan al-Banna, a Muslim fanatic who was the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. Asked repeatedly to condemn his grandfather, Ramadan always tears up and mournfully replies that “he was my grandfather” — presumably we are meant to understand that filial piety precludes him from distancing himself from the man who founded the Muslim Brotherhood, that group of fanatics and killers.
Ramadan’s accusers all earlier testified to his modus operandi: “Tariq Ramadan Accused of ‘Seducing His Teenage Students,’” by Noor Nanji, The National, November 4, 2017:
…One, known as Sandra, was 15 when Mr Ramadan made advances towards her. She said he told her: “I feel close to you. You are mature. You are special. I am surrounded by many people but I feel lonely.” She started spending time with him outside of school, and “two or three times we had intimate relationships. At the back of his car”. She added: “He said it was our secret.”
Another, Lea, said she was 14 years old when the teacher approached her during a trip. “He put my hand on my mouth telling me he knew I was thinking about him in the evening before falling asleep. Which was wrong. It was manipulation. He said he thought of me but he was married.”
In her case, she says nothing physical happened. She described him as a “crooked, intimidating man who used perverse relational ploys and abused the trust of his students. There was such an impression on us.”
A third woman, known as Agathe, was 18 and described being “captivated by the speech of this charismatic teacher”. She said Mr Ramadan invited her for a coffee outside of school, “and then I had sex with him. He was married and a father. This happened three times, especially in his car. It was consented but very violent. I had bruises all over my body.”
Agathe says the scholar threatened her and demanded she tell no one about the encounters. “It was an abuse of power, pure and simple.”
The fourth woman, Claire, was 17 when the pair started a relationship and 18 when they first had intercourse. “I was fascinated, under his control. He took me, threw me, established a relationship of dependence.”
None of these incidents was made public before now, with one of the women expressing feelings of “disgust” and “shame” which made her stay quiet.
How many more non-Muslim women in Geneva remain too “disgusted” and “ashamed” for what they allowed themselves to endure as schoolgirls from their respected “‘prof” Tariq Ramadan to come forward even now?
How many more Muslim women in Paris, who were once admirers of the famous “scholar” Tariq Ramadan, were invited after his lectures to discuss further the subject of “Islamic ethics” in his hotel room, only to be choked, beaten, raped, and then threatened if they were ever to report him?
More than 16,000 Christians were killed in Nigeria in four years between 2019 and 2023 as more followers of Christ were victims of violence than adherents of other religions, according to data collected by the Observatory for Religious Freedom in Africa.
ORFA released a four-year data project Thursday documenting 55,910 fatalities from 9,970 attacks, including both civilians and combatants, across Nigeria. Of those killed, 30,880 were civilians. Christian victims totaled 16,769, significantly outnumbering the 6,235 Muslim fatalities — the ratio of Christian to Muslim deaths being 6.5:1. Radicalized Muslim Fulani herdsmen were responsible for 55% of the Christian deaths.
"For over a decade atrocities against civilians in Nigeria have been downplayed or minimized. This has proved a major obstacle for those seeking to understand the violence," the researchers wrote in the 136-page report shared with The Christian Post.
"Misleading euphemisms, such as 'armed herdsmen' and 'cattle grazers' are used to describe continual waves of invasion, torture and killing in rural communities. Descriptions of attacks as 'ethnic clashes,' 'farmers-herders clashes' or retaliatory attacks are seriously misleading."
Another frequent term used to describe militias that carry out mass kidnappings and enforce "serfdom" on communities is "bandits," the report warns, adding that "a policy of concealing the religious identity of victims" is distorting the reality of the situation.
"Fulani Ethnic Militia are targeting Christian populations, while Muslims also suffer severely at their hands," notes Rev. Gideon Para-Mallam, an observatory partner and analyst, said in a statement.
"Millions of people are left undefended," Frans Vierhout, senior analyst at the Observatory of Religious Freedom in Africa, added. "For years, we've heard of calls for help being ignored, as terrorists attack vulnerable communities. Now the data tells its own story."
Across Nigeria, over 21,621 people were abducted in 2,705 attacks, with some incidents overlapping. The observatory recorded 11,610 distinct attacks where individuals were killed or abducted. Of these, 8,905 involved only killings, 1,065 included both killings and abductions and 1,640 involved only abductions.
Of the 21,532 civilians abducted, 11,185 were Christians, and 7,899 were Muslims, according to ORFA.
Researchers stated the religious identity of victims significantly influenced their treatment by captors, with Christian captives often facing harsher conditions and higher risks of execution compared to their Muslim counterparts.
On average, eight attacks involving killings or abductions occurred daily over a four-year period in Nigeria. Fear of violence has gotten so bad there were reports of children sleeping in trees to avoid nighttime attacks.
The data showed a large geographic spread of violence, with 65 different Local Government Areas affected. The majority of civilian fatalities occurred during attacks on communities, particularly during the farming season's peak months between April and June. The North West, North Central and North East regions were identified as epicenters of such attacks.
People were most vulnerable in their homes, with the majority of civilians — 25,312 killed and 16,761 abducted — suffering attacks in their communities, according to the report. This contrasts with other locations where 5,568 civilians were killed and 4,771 abducted.
The report pointed to the Fulani Ethnic Militia and other less-known groups as primary aggressors.
Armed Fulani herdsmen, part of FEM, and various terrorist groups were responsible for most killings and abductions, overshadowing the more internationally recognized threats from Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province. For instance, armed Fulani herdsmen were responsible for the deaths of 11,948 civilians, while other terror groups were responsible for 12,039 deaths. Armed Fulani were responsible for over 6,000 civilian abductions, while other groups were responsible for 13,000.
Armed Fulani were responsible for 9,153 Christian deaths during that timespan; Other terrorist groups accounted for 29% or 4,895 deaths. Combined, Boko Haram and ISWAP were responsible for 8% of the Christian deaths, which amounts to 1,268 fatalities.
Natural law rights, and Individual rights is a byproduct not only of Church doctrine, but also Scholastic philosophy. The ‘Enlightenment’ ideals about the ‘rights of men’ were pilfered from Church doctrine dating back to the 12th century. There were not new or innovative.
When 17th century philosophes asserted the basic rights of men, they reused what had already existed for centuries. In the 12th century the celebrated ‘Decretum’ of Gratian was a composition of Church law which included the tradition of natural law rights, and man’s inalienable rights to freedom from arbitrary rule, slavery and poverty. The Magna Carta of 1215 is a document based on these ideals which elevated the rights of Barons and landowners and guaranteed habeas corpus, freedom from arbitrary arrest and imprisonment and the legal right to the protection of private property and personal sanctity.
The 10th century witnessed the investiture controversies, or the rights of the Church and the state to ‘invest’ or appoint ecclesiastical positions. This was the old debate between the boundaries of Church and state. This was during a recrudescence of urban activity, accelerated by a warming climate, the Reconquista in Spain, and extended terms of trade and credit. Urban centres also wanted some independence from arbitrary state or ecclesiastical rule.
These rights were centred on particular interests and groups. But they were soon extended to members and individuals. Church canonists realised that ‘rights’ must extend to what is ‘naturally’ given by God to individuals. Such ‘rights’ were independent of state power and statute. We see such ideas by 1300 in European legislation and codes. Property, self-defense, non-Christian marriage, and legal procedure were all deemed rooted in natural law, not state law.
Pope Innocent IV and others defended these natural law rights for infidels as well as heretical Christians. In the 16th century Las Casas, the Vatican and Spanish Kings would apply the concepts of natural law rights to Ameri-Indians, stating categorically that Ameri-Indians had full ownership of their land and bodies. Though these various decrees and bulls were ignored, these legal expositions declared that Europeans must buy the land from Ameri-Indians and desist from enslaving the native populations.
Medieval Canon law is thus the ancestor of ‘Enlightenment’ ideals and of the Western concept of God given natural law rights, individual rights, private property, proper jurisprudence and the separation of Church and state. The 17th century philosophes pilloried these concepts at will but refrained from acknowledging or attributing the source. Such theft is standard practice in modernity.
Allah has nothing to do with the Christian idea of God embedded in the Holy Trinity. Main Koran is quite clear that the Christian Trinity is a polytheism and belief in polytheism and blasphemies is punished by death. Sura 5:33 states that those who make mischief by not obeying the cult of Muhammad, must be killed, executed, humiliated and crucified. This is a direct threat to Christians.
Al Lah or The Lord is a celestial God, called Baal. Depending on your source and viewpoint, the Near Eastern Baal Gods for millennia represented the weather, thunder and lightning, or the moon. Some maintain the Arabian Baal or Al Lah might be the Sun with the moon as its consort. In historical fact the opposite true, and it is pretty clear from archaeology and historiography that the Meccan Al Lah was the moon god, and its consorts was the Sun.
When a totalitarian UK elite and ‘legal’ system imprisoned an English man for asking in a demonstration ‘Who the F is Al Lah?’, we are witnessing a complete societal implosion and disavowal of the pagan, atavistic and savage nature of the Muslim threat. The UK courts and elites, corrupted and ignorant as they are, have no idea what the Al Lah is. Those who are educated and use critical thinking skills, know that the Arabian Al Lah was the ‘Lord’ or main god in the Arab pantheon of celestial worship. It is quite right to ask, ‘Who the F is this pagan idol?’ worshipped by millions of Muslims in the UK.
Allah is the moon idol of Mecca.
In the last 200 hundred years prominent archaeologists have discovered throughout the Arabian peninsula thousands of inscriptions which prove beyond any doubt that the dominant religion of Arabia during Mohammed's day was the cult of the moon-god. Hub'Al[lah] was the chief god of Mecca, responsible for instance in repelling the Ethiopian invasion of 571 AD [the year of Muhammad's birth perhaps, though the dates for that do range from 570 to 580 AD].
For many generations before Mohammed was born – his full name was Muhammad ibn Abdullah or Muhammad the son of the slave of the 'one' or Hubal -- the Arabs worshipped some 360 pagan gods housed at the stone temple in Mecca called the Kabah. According to archaeologists, the chief deity of Mecca was the moon-god called Hubal or 'the one' [Al-Lah, El-Lah, i-Lah]. Independent historians have long confirmed that the pre-Islamic Arabs worshipped the moon-god by bowing in prayer toward Mecca several times a day. They would also make a pilgrimage to Mecca, run around the crude stone Kabah seven times and throw stones at the devil and the 'sunset' demon. They also fasted and were at 'peace' for one month, giving each other a respite from the interminable raiding, cattle thieving and caravan destruction which were the full-time jobs of most Arabs. This period of Ramadan or quiet, would begin with the appearance of the crescent moon and would end when the crescent moon reappeared some 4 weeks later on. This Arab cult of ritualization existed centuries before the 'great man' Muhammad was born.
We know who Al Lah was. We want to know why is ‘Western Civ’ so intent on becoming slaves of Al Lah (abd-ullah) and his cult?
Across the UK there have been multiple protests and violent clashes between normal UK born citizens, many of them White, and the authorities and the useless gestapo named the UK police force. Muslims, Blacks and non-Whites have been the targets. The fake news media, the usual cadre of cowardly boot licking multi-culturalist politicians, the un-civil service, have all viciously attacked and arrested many of the ‘White thugs’. They display of course a completely different set of standards for Muslims in Leeds, Birmingham, London and elsewhere, who can burn, loot, murder and destroy almost at will. No opprobrium or vitriol from the elite. No condemnation from the fake news and fake ‘experts'.
The UK has a real population of probably 75 million, not the false 67 million declared in the 2021 census. Of the 75 million, probably 1/3 are non-White mostly Black, Muslim and Indian immigrants, asylum seekers, illegals. In the past 10 years roughly 1 million ‘immigrants’ have landed in the UK both legally and illegally, or roughly 10 million in a decade. London is majority non-White, as is Birmingham and many famous cities notable for their prominence during the Victorian era and industrialisation including Leicester, Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield and Nottingham. Many of us who travel within the UK have noted this.
In short, the UK has been turned upside by immigration. The entire national fabric including its Christian heritage, past and legacy are being systemically annihilated. All by plan. The EU or German Empire project was always a political endeavour to eradicate the nation state and have a regional and eventually a global hegemony. When Brexit occurred, the elite did everything possible to reverse that outcome and part of the globalist response was to open wide the borders. Brexit was largely a vote to seal the borders and reclaim national sovereignty. When this did not happen, the elite simply seeded a massive national grievance into the majority White population. As Enoch Powell stated 60 years ago, the Rivers of Blood, are flowing and have been for 20 years.
Within the UK we have:
· Probably 10 million Muslims, doubling every decade. By 2040 the northern English cities and London will be majority Muslim.
· By 2040, the Muslim population in the UK will be 40-45% of the total UK population.
· From 1 or 2 mosques in 1970, we now have over 2.000.
· Muslims and their allies dominate local, regional and national governments, institutions and organisations.
· Half a dozen major cities have Muslim mayors including the execrably racist Jihadist Khan in London.
· 1 million white working-class girls have been raped since 1980 in the UK by Muslims.
· 70% of Muslims do not officially work in London.
· Jews are on the record that they don’t feel safe in London or other cities dominated by Muslims.
· Crime is at record levels across the UK, due to immigration.
· Cost of living and house prices are at ridiculous levels in part due to open borders.
When a Black teenager carves up 3 White girls at a Taylor Swift party, it creates a trigger. It matters not that he was born in the UK. The valid reaction is that he and his family should never have been in the UK in the first place, with his parents arriving as ‘refugees’. The gratitude shown to the UK from a Black born here, from 'refugee parents', is to murder young White girls. This is an act of racism. Why didn’t he kill 3 Black girls?
This atrocity is just the latest in a long list of crimes committed by ‘immigrants’ or their offspring against the natives. The open borders invasion is simply that – an invasion, part of the Great Replacement of White English. In the upside-down clown world that is the UK and its anti-reality ‘culture’ the victims are to be blamed and anyone protesting the absolute evisceration of England, including its history, culture, heritage and Christian roots, is of course, a Nazi, Fascist, Racist and Phobe. This is why there will be a civil war in the UK and rivers of blood.
Critics of Islam usually demand a Western style reformation to drag the Arab creation out of the 7th century pre modern pagan mind-set, into the modern world. There is little chance of that happening. Islam is an ideology – a political project first and foremost. A reformation is impossible when you are dealing with ideas which are closed to discussion; repetitive; ritualised; and inherently imperialist. The myth of an Islamic reformation is one of many which abound about this so-called 'religion'. [Perhaps Hitlerism is also a religion].
Some general myths held about Islam by the media and the general public within the Western world:
1. Islam is open to a reformation
No it isn't. Islam is a total project. 'Total' meaning that the social, civil, spiritual, and intellectual life are governed by pre-set rules and rituals. Total mandates that all things in a Muslim's life belong to Islam. Individual Muslims will opt out of many or even most of Islam's demands. But the ideology does not opt out of its totality. Any system of thought which is total in nature is by political extension totalitarian. And as anyone who has read the history of such concepts, these systems of living are not open to change.
It should be noted that the Western 'Reformation' was no such thing. The nationalist movements usurped Church authority and established national churches. The 'Reformation' was based on only scripture, or 'sola scriptura'. The entire edifice of Christian history, including miracles, traditions and even art and architecture was attacked, debased, and in many locales destroyed. Books were also committed to the fire. What the Protesting movement did was to remove eccelsiastical power from Rome and situate it in the local. Hence, the massive transfers of wealth in England under Henry VIII, from the Church to the State, which was replicated across Europe and an important factor in the upper middle class revolt against the 'system' called the French Revolution.
2. Islam's violence can be reformed
No it can't be. Islam is based on 2 ideas: 1. the word of the Quran and 2. Mohammed as the last prophet of 'God'. Both ideas are supremacist meaning that the Quran is the superior book and path of living because it comes from Islam's perfect man – Mohammed. Neither idea is going to be jettisoned. This supremacism justifies violence and aggression.
3. Muhammed was just like Jesus
Christianity has little in common with Islam, if one looks at what Christ actually taught and what the apostles attempted to teach to others or 'Gentiles'. Christ is a good example of how men might wish to live and what moral values they might wish to hold. Mohammed was the opposite of Christ of course. Christ enacted the second covenant around love and forgiveness. Christ deployed an endless array of miracles and healing. The Resurrection is the greatest miracle in history and has only been replicated by Catholic saints such as Saint Francis of Assissi or Saint Vincent de Ferrer.
Mohammed was a political – military leader who lead 80 odd military campaigns; slaughtered caravans; stole gold and property; adjudicated violence; broke agreements; killed with his own hands; was an anti-semite; had sex with a 9 year old girl; was a voracious womanizer; an owner of sex-slaves; an accomplished liar; and a role model only for a violent, pagan, war like and immoral society. Much of Islam wants to emulate Mohammed – or so Islamic writings and teachings profess. It does not take a great deal of imagination to fear the type of society which would be created through the production of little Mohammeds.
4. Islam is only fighting back against Western oppression
The great imperialist project is of course Islam. The Arab 'wave' took over the Near East, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, parts of India, North Africa, and Spain. The Turkish wave invaded the Balkans, Eastern Europe, Russia, central Asia, and even parts of China. The Crusades were simply a very feeble, and rather dilatory response to 400 years of Muslim aggression against Europe.
As stated by Gregory M. Davis author of Religion of Peace? Islam's War Against the World:
“Following the defeat of the Ottoman army outside Vienna on September 11, 1683 by Polish forces, Islam went into a period of strategic decline in which it was overwhelmingly dominated by the European powers. Much of dar al-Islam was colonized by the European powers who employed their superior technology and exploited the rivalries within the Muslim world to establish colonial rule.
While many of the practices of the Western imperial powers in the governance of their colonies were clearly unjust, it is utterly unwarranted to regard Western imperialism -- as it often is -- as an endemic criminal enterprise that is the basis of modern resentment against the West. It was only due to the assertive role of the Western powers that modern nation-states such as India, Pakistan, Israel, South Africa, Zimbabwe, etc. came to exist in the first place. Without Western organization, these areas would have likely remained chaotic and tribal as they had existed for centuries.
When one looks at the post-colonial world, it is apparent that the most successful post-colonial nations have a common attribute: they are not Muslim. The United States, Australia, Hong Kong, Israel, India, and the South American nations clearly outshine their Muslim-majority post-colonial counterparts -- Iraq, Algeria, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, etc. -- by just about any standard.”
Davis is of course right. Islam has been a failure - a complete one - on any standard one cares to use to measure life, freedom, free speech, and individual worth - not to mention material comforts. But for many in the revisionist, self-loathing, multi-cult loving West, reality is too hard to face.
5. Islam 'invented' civilisation!
This is my personal favorite. The Arabs and Muslims have invented everything – according to Western Islamo-apologists – from ice cream, to flying, to math, to science, to medicine, to architecture and pretty flowers. Wow. Who would have guessed that the Muslim world which is mired in poverty, violence, hate, anti-Semiticism, anti-Americanism, corruption, failed economies, and totalitarian systems of civil organisation, is the heir to this resplendent and wonderful cultural civilisation ?! Islam's complete modern failure, makes it obvious that it was Islam and cultured, advanced, peaceful, and smiling Muslims who had created the modern world !
As Gregory Davis so rightly wrote in his great book referenced above, “The achievements of Islamic civilization are pretty modest given its 1300 year history when compared to Western, Hindu, or Confucian civilizations. Many Islamic achievements were in fact the result of non-Muslims living within the Islamic Empire or of recent converts to Islam. One of the greatest Islamic thinkers, Averroes, ran afoul of Islamic orthodoxy through his study of non-Islamic (Greek) philosophy and his preference for Western modes of thought. Once the dhimmi populations of the Empire dwindled toward the middle of the second millennium AD, Islam began its social and cultural "decline."
Muslims invented very little. They squatted for centuries on richer, more advanced and intelligent societies, starting with the Byzantine lands, Persia, northern India and then across what was once Romanised North Africa and Spain.
6. Most Muslims are peaceful !
My second favorite. How do you know ? Do you know what goes on in the minds of Muslims ? Ever been to a mosque ? Ever been exposed to Arab culture and its shrill demands to kill Jews ? How do you explain recent surveys of university educated Muslims – 40% of whom want Sharia Law in England for instance. Is that peaceful ? How do you explain the 18.000 Muslim attacks across the world since 2001 and the 1400 years of war, jihad and Islam's bloody borders ?
It is the ideology which counts and who controls that ideology. Someone's wish or demand that all Muslims are peaceful and happy, is simply not supported and is refuted by 1400 years of history and recent Islamo-fascism which is a global phenomenon, predicated on the idea - first espoused by Mohammed - that Islam will dominate the world. There is no proof that all Muslims are moderates and that all Muslims want co-existence.
These are some of the core myths which pervade Western society and education. They are utterly wrong. Islam is a direct threat to civilisation and even to Muslim's themselves. There is no chance of an internal reformation. It has been stated many times and needs repeating – Islam will only be reformed from without through exogenous change, initiated by military intervention. That is the reality, sad as it might appear to the legions of multi-cultural devotees and their cultural Marxist friends.
There are 3 general secular religions within Western Civilisation’s history which are going to destroy it. We see this destruction reflected in the opening ceremonies of the Paris Olympics in a Satanic display of perversion.
Religion of Reason: There is the cult of ‘reason’ and ‘rationality’ which leads to the ‘only truth’. This ‘monism’ of ‘reason’ is the only way to explain the universe, our existence and our lives. This singular ‘truth’ emanates from the Enlightenment and the Philosophes and finds expression in Positivism, Progressivism and Scientism which demands that the cult of ‘reason’ and ‘science’ rule society. In this process the immaterial and ‘unreasonable’, including all religions, are to be rejected.
Religion of Materialism: Materialism and extreme naturalism inform our universe. Materialism declares that mechanical processes, operating within ‘natural laws’ is all that matters. Morality, culture, emotions and the immaterial are irrelevant. Evolution, Marxism, most ‘science’, even economics and sociology are materialist theologies. They posit that the world at large, including society, yourself and nature, is impersonal, mechanical and dialectical. The Materialist theology is closely aligned with the religion of ‘Reason’.
Religion of Nihilism (and Sexual Perversion): As a fork from both the ‘Enlightenment’ and Materialism and finding expression in the 1960s cultural destruction which still redounds today, is the extreme positivism of hedonism and self-truth, especially as it relates to sex and gender. Homosexuals, Trans-genders, Nihilists, Benthamites, Fabians, Abortionists, cultural Marxists and others believe that there is no fixed, eternal truth or even ‘reason’ per se, especially about our biological and sexual reality and ‘rights’; and that the Church, and immanent patriarchal structures nullify our sexual and gender expression. It is akin to biological anarchy and is a form of hyper-irrationalism and is extremely unscientific. These irrational cults reject both reason and materiality. It is basically ‘be what you want, do what you want’.
The religions of Rationality and Materialism are close allies. The hyper-irrational positivity of homosexuality-transgenderism, its hedonism and sexual dysfunction is a reaction against both ‘reason’ and materialism as well as institutions which demand sexual morality and boundaries. Increasingly however as expected, ‘The Science’ along with governments and corporations, are mainstreaming the Satanic perverted cult of sexual degeneracy with a view to money and power.
This unreasonable and irrational cult disavows biological reality including chromosomes, DNA, mitochondria and bone structures and instead, builds its own distorted and quite perverted reality. In essence this hedonism can be classified as a mental illness given how out of touch with reality its members and theologies are. It also leads to paedophilia, child abuse and child castration. All of these are supposedly illegal and immoral but are increasingly supported by governments and ‘The Science’.
Much of the sexual perversion industry and monstrosity is now supported not only by immoral corporations looking at profits, but also by ‘Science’ with endless studies and propaganda supporting this immoral evil. This fact proves yet again just how useless much of modern ‘Science’ is. The ‘uber rational’ defending the bottomless evil and irrationality of sexual degeneracy.
As with most revolutionary furores, sexual degeneracy neither accepts reality, responsibility, morality, nor boundaries or limits. It was originally just ‘gay marriage’ and ‘love’. Now it is ‘we are coming for your children’. The fact that most of the population has little interest in its dogma, is for the sexual anarchist a call to violence and threats. Coercion through laws, state protection, endless propaganda and imagery demand that its members be treated as an elect. It is true to say that using state and corporate resources to elevate such mental illness to a religion is a form of fascism.
We see one the above reflected in the Paris Olympics opening ceremony, directed by a Gay Jew who obviously is a Christophobe and hates the Christian history of France. No stars of David in a jar of piss. No mocking Muslims for drinking camel piss or deflowering under-age girls. No mention of Muslim Jihad, rape gangs, or that Jews were all over the Pharma-fascism of Corona. No, just attack Christianity. How brave.
I would guess that not more than 10% of the French know who Clovis was; or can name the year of Charlemagne’s coronation as the Holy Roman Emperor. Few will know anything about the school of physics at Chartres, the first school of science in Western Europe; nor why St Denis was built and when. Few will care about Georges Bizet, Pierre Duhem, Descartes, or Saint Louis. But all will be saturated in the vomit and bile of the perverted sex and gender cult and many will accept it.
The importance of medieval and early modern French culture is now forgotten and rubbished. In the place of France’s long history, they shove sexual mental illness into your face and demand you kneel and obey as they tear down Christianity and the cross and erect a phallus in its place. The perverted queer Gestapo is uber alles.
The Paris Olympics is just another example of Western decline. A group of mentally ill people, evangelising their church of degeneracy and evil, parading the Satanic in place of the civilised. French history has nothing to do with such debauchery, promoted by the US empire and its allies as ‘reasonable’, ‘a right’ and ‘normal’. It is a sickness of the mind and a grand perversion, a modern Sodom and Gomorrah with the same guaranteed result.
And, it is all planned. It is part of the Cultural Marxist demolition of the West. Western Civilisation is imploding, the detonation set from within. The Olympics is just another statement of that fact.
Harold Berman’s ‘Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition’, clearly credits the medieval Church for building the foundations and structures of Western secular law. From the time of Constantine to the 11th century, the legal constructs of church and state were intermingled. There was no clear separation between the ecclesiastical and the secular.
This changed in the 11th century with Pope Gregory and the ‘Gregorian’ reforms. Pope Gregory identified that a King was a lay person and had no power to interfere with church affairs including appointing bishops or priests. The boundaries between church and state were clarified. Out of this division, based on a common foundation, arose separate legal edifices.
Church law possessed the most coherent body of legal codes in the world, much of it based on the 6th century Byzantine emperor Justinian and his ‘codex’. From the 5th to 11th centuries however, church law could not be termed a systematic and comprehensive legal code. It was instead a set of scattered commentaries, Biblical references, various exhortations, papal demands and it was regional in nature.
Over time, church canon law was produced to regulate ecclesiastical affairs and this in turn became the model for secular laws. Western church canon law became systematised after the Gregorian reforms in the 12th and 13th centuries. Prior to this creation of canon law in the high middle ages, legal codes per se did not exist in a coherent or logical manner in Europe. In most areas law was intimately linked with custom and even pagan practices (eg trials by fire or water).
By the 12th century canon law was taking shape. The monk Gratian produced ‘A Concordance of Discordant Canons’, written around 1140. This was the first systematic legal code in Western Europe. It was an enormous body of work. Gratian’s work was premised on reason and conscience, along with natural law and God-granted rights. These principles allowed a coherent legal structure to be shaped.
From Gratian and succeeding works, all aspects of society came under canon laws. Property, marriage, inheritance, rational trials, the discontinuance of pagan rites such as trial of ordeals by fire or water, the development of equality before the law, protection given to the poor and dispossessed, can be found in Gratian’s work. In essence the barbaric ‘law codes’ of Western Europe were replaced by canon law based on principles and reason. Universities which began in the 12th century had departments dedicated to the law and these scholars began to construct national legal codes based on canon law.
Canon lawyers were produced who used the canons to determine the criminality of a particular act, using legal principles still in use today. These lawyers were concerned with the intent of the act, various kinds of intent, and with moral implications of acts. Extenuating factors in criminal acts were also developed, including insanity and intoxication. Accidental and deliberate actions were separated. Contract law was also developed which is still with us today, enshrining and enforcing the legality of contractual consent.
Criminal law was another area of innovation during the 12th and 13th centuries within canon law and served as the basis for the secular equivalent. These were also deeply impacted by Saint Anselm’s 11th century exposition Cur Deux Homo, where he explains the rationality in the mediation of the God-man ending in atonement for our sins through the crucifixion. This doctrine of atonement rested on the concept that a violation of the law was an offense against justice and the moral itself. Punishment was necessary to restore both. Atonement is a central feature of all modern legal systems.
There is no doubt that the entire corpus of Western law is based on the medieval canon law. Almost every area of modern jurisprudence can trace its lineage to the canon law of the 12th century. The very foundation of Western law in its philosophy, is entirely Christian and Catholic including the principles of law, punishment, atonement, forgiveness, morality and justice.
In the early 4th century, during the reign of Constantine, at the time of Christianity’s great expansion, a famine struck the Roman world. About 30-40% of the population might have been Christian in AD 320. The famine caused plague to spread. The Romano-Christian response was charity. Without discrimination and with great energy, Christians brought food and medicine to the afflicted. What sort of religion would be so selfless thought non-Christian Romans? Many converted once they understood the faith.
Catholic charitable works would take several volumes to express. The list of those involved includes parishes, dioceses, monasteries, convents, monks, friars, nuns, and a long list of lay organisations. There is no peer in world history to Catholic charity. In fact, it is an obvious truism to state that Catholics invented the entire concept of charity and welfare. Stoicism for example, which contains echoes and similarities with Christianity never established any sort of charity and welfare. It demanded emotionless detachment and acceptance of fate. It was a fatalist philosophy.
Oblations to the poor developed at the very beginning of Church history. In the early church offerings to the poor were placed next to the altar at mass. On certain fast days there was a collection for poor relief. Fasting often induced wealthier Christians to invest money in poor relief. Saint Justin the martyr commented that the rich were not only converting but becoming ‘poor in spirit’ by sacrifices and donations to the poor.
Saint Augustine established a hospice for pilgrims, one of thousands in the Romano-Christian world. The early church ransomed slaves and had clothing ‘banks’ for the poor. Saint John Chrysostom and Saint Ephrem organised relief efforts during the waves of plague and famine. Christians, unlike pagans, never left the sick and wounded during times of plague, including burying the dead. Widows and orphans were taken care of by the early church, along with hospitals being built for the sick in the 3rd century AD.
Eusebius the 4th century ecclesiastical historian comments that the Christian's great deeds for the poor, sick and dispossessed led to many conversions. The pagans wondered what animated Christians to such works of charity and gentleness. The would make ‘inquiries about a religion whose disciples are capable of such disinterred devotion.” Julian the Apostate the mid-3rd century Roman emperor who persecuted Christians admitted, “These impious Galileans not only feed their own poor, but ours also; welcoming them to their agapae, they attract them, as children are attracted with cakes.”
By the 4th century the church began to sponsor the large-scale deployments of hospitals. Every major city possessed a hospital. They served two purposes, namely to take care of strangers and pilgrims; and to treat the sick and suffering. This ministering to human needs and illness on such a scale was absolutely unique in world history.
In places like Rome the Christian woman Fabiola, would go into the streets looking for the poor and sick and take them to the first large public hospital ever seen in Rome – the one she founded. Saint Basil the great in the 4th century established a hospital for lepers in Caesarea. No such institution had existed before anywhere in the pagan world. Throughout the mediterranean, monasteries played the role of medical institution and pharmacy. They became sites of medical learning and scholarship.
Catholic military orders like the Hospitallers became famous during the crusades and after for the size of their hospitals and the quality of their care – given to anyone Christian or not and free of charge. In Jerusalem alone, the Hospitaller hospital contained over a thousand beds, arguably the largest hospital ever constructed in a single location until the 19th century. The Hospitallers and other orders placed a premium on the care for the sick and injured. Their hospitals came to resemble the modern equivalent and delivered babies, surgeries, daily care, physician visits, food, baths and a regime of hygiene that would not be replicated until Semmelweis in the mid-19th century, namely cleanliness, the washing of hands and the endless changing and washing of sheets and bedding.
The entire premise of Western civilisation’s ‘welfare state’ is based on the Catholic Church’s massive investment in hospices, hospitals, orphanages, leper sanitoriums and the like. The scale and scope of the investment over 2000 years is unknown but it is certainly the largest investment in history by an institution until the modern welfare state. Lives were saved, souls converted, and society humbled and softened. The entire ethos of Western culture was improved. Yet, few if any today could be bothered to credit the Catholic church with this most important legacy and innovation – charity, love, succour and support.
“The word “virus” is derived from the Latin word for poison. Viruses are associated with all forms of life (bacteria, archaea, and eukaryotes). Viruses are infectious, obligate intracellular parasites whose genomes consist of either DNA or RNA. Virus genomes direct their own replication and the synthesis of other viral components, using cellular systems in appropriate host cells. Virus particles (known as virions) are formed by assembly from newly synthesized components within the host cell. Virions are the vehicle for transmission of the genome to the next host cell or organism.”
(Pellett et al, ‘Basics of Virology’, 2014, offering the standard description of a ‘virus’)
Note: Viruses are 250-400 nanometers in size. A nanometer is one billionth of a meter…a small fraction of a bacteria. Not a single isolated and purified virus can be shown. To satisfy your own curiosity you can send FOI requests to various health and governmental agencies and demand to see an example of a purified, isolated virus. They will reply that they don’t have such examples to show you.
One of the claims to support the worldview that ‘contagious diseases’ are spread by ‘germs’, is the ‘genocide’ of Ameri-Indians post-Columbus. It has long been established that the evisceration of Ameri-Indian culture, society and people was perpetrated through a mixture of war, slavery, and disease. Depending on your source, the weighting of war, slavery and disease in this catastrophe varies. ‘Virus hunters’ routinely invoke the post-Columbine era of Ameri-Indian civilisational destruction as ‘proof’ of ‘contagious’ diseases, passed on by White humans and their livestock, to Ameri-Indian natives. This theory is most certainly wrong and is entirely unproven and unsupported by facts or common sense.
Since the 1990s, it has become standard fare to vastly inflate the numbers of pre-Columbine (before 1492) Ameri-Indians in North and South America. The more rancid and extreme population estimates now range between 80-100 million Ameri-Indians in the Western hemisphere pre-1492 A.D. with a general scholarly agreement that 60 million might be a correct estimate. This number is however a conjecture and given the paucity of proofs, more likely a fiction, generated to impress and overawe the reader with the colossal scale of human genocidal destruction, initiated by Christian Europeans upon pagan Ameri-Indians. In this story some 50 million or more Ameri-Indians perished mostly through ‘germs’ over 3 centuries, or the same number who died in Europe from the Black Death in the 14th century, a plague caused by bacteria.
In the 18th and 19th centuries the estimate of the pre-Columbine population in the Western Hemisphere was 8-12 million. This is a more reasonable figure and less tainted by political motives and secular theology than post-modern estimates which provide no proof of numbers ranging from 60-100 million. Ameri-Indian society was a stone-age culture, with settled agriculture existing only in parts of Central America and the Andes ranges. There was no possibility that Central and South America, with a somewhat limited and primitive agricultural base, or North America, with a hunter-gatherer-foraging culture absent of urban centres, could have supported 60-100 million people. Claiming such population figures is unreasonable and unproven.
By contrast Europe in 1500 was a far wealthier, more advanced, civilised and agriculturally innovative culture and possessed maybe 60 million people. The 14th century episode of the Black Death or bubonic plague had erased about half the population. Even despite this catastrophe, it is unreasonable to posit that in 1492, the primal societies of the Western Hemisphere had a similar or even a greater population than a Europe which was littered with small-scale cities and complex agriculture and trade. The less advanced, pre-modern societies of the Americas could never have supported such a mass of people.
The best estimates are that maybe 1 million natives existed north of the Rio Grande pre-1492, some 3-5 million in Mexico and Central America and a further 4-5 million in South America. No cities or advanced agriculture existed north of the Rio Grande. The Aztec and Incan empires were slave-empires, with conurbations comprising the capitals of Tenochtitlan and Cuzco. Advanced agriculture outside of the capital territories were sparse and would never have supported some 50-90 million people. Contrary to historical rewriting there is no proof that massive farming or agriculture was endemic in the Western Hemisphere in the pre-Columbine period.
The Spanish conquered the Aztec and Inca empires with fewer than 1000 men. The annihilation of the Aztecs for example, was accomplished by the Spanish leading a ‘native’ army who had tired of Aztec tyranny, slavery, human sacrifice and exploitation. A few hundred men with guns cannot unseat an empire of some 5 million, or for the revisionist Marxist, the false claim of 30-40 million people. The same was true of the Spanish destruction of the Inca’s, a much-hated elite-aristocratic group, famous for brutality and savagery. It is simply not credible that a handful of Spaniards overthrew a region teeming with neo-Marxist figures of 30 millon or more people. The population of the Americas must have been in the 8-12 million range. ‘Native’ revolts as much as Spanish steel and guns overthrew the two principal empires of the Americas.
Guns and steel were important, but they can’t explain a population reduction of some 75-90% or 6-10 million, over a few centuries. The ‘consensus’ is that disease destroyed these societies far more completely than war and anarchy. For the ‘virus’ hunters the Ameri-Indians were decimated by ‘contagious’ diseases and are thus a totem and proof for the virus faithful. In this belief system, the Whites brought ‘new’ and novel ‘pathogens’ which the Ameri-Indians had no defence against, and they perished en-masse allowing the Spanish to seize power as the population was reduced and enfeebled through contagion.
As colonisation progressed, the carnage by disease accelerated until by 1900 only 10-25% of the baseline pre-1492 Ameri-Indian population remained. It is thus believed and promoted that ‘germs’ effaced 75-90% of the native populations. In particular the smallpox ‘virus’, along with flu and measles explain why the Ameri-Indians were largely exterminated.
Do any parts of these ‘agreed narratives’ make any sense? Did the advent of Whites, with their horses, cows, pigs and ‘infectious’ diseases really initiate ‘smallpox’ and other ‘great killers’, or were other factors at work? Have we got the entire history of ‘disease’ wrong? Do smallpox ‘viruses’ even exist for example? If not, what happened in the post-Columbine Americas?
According to ‘The Science’, the origination of the smallpox ‘virus’ is from bovines or cows, though the quack Jenner believed that ‘horse grease’ from the hoofs of horses, passed to cows from farm workers, was to blame. We are told that ‘influenza’ (Corona viruses) jumped from pigs to humans. Birds and fowl are also alleged to spread ‘influenza’, named ‘bird flu’. It is agreed that horses generated the ‘tuberculosis virus’. Livestock thus creates contagious diseases. When these were introduced into the Americas, so the theory states, contagions were unleashed on the native populations.
The theory around smallpox is:
· Bovines including dairy cows, supposedly suffer from Cowpox
· The ‘cowpox’ in the cow is a part of the genus orthopoxvirus
· The cowpox virus is zoonotic, meaning that it is transferable between species
· This ‘virus’ is supposedly related to the vaccinia virus causing ‘smallpox’ in humans
· In humans the smallpox ‘virus’ is called the variola virus
· Humans contract ‘variola virus’ from exposure cows in any form (milking, farming, slaughtering)
Smallpox has always been seized upon as a great killer of the Ameri-Indians. Smallpox as a virulent disease was supposedly passed on from bovines to humans through the activity of farming, including milking. Close contact is believed to be sufficient for the ‘orthopox virus’ to ‘jump’ species. Ingesting meat, dairy, skin, urine, faeces, or any animal detritus can lead to ‘smallpox’ in humans. Signatures of the disease include pustules or poxes on the hands and face.
For many with immature or compromised immune systems including young children, death can follow. The infection-to-death rate in the 19th century in the slums of the UK from ‘smallpox’ was low at around 0.4-1%. As many doctors commented in the 18th and 19th centuries, smallpox was not a particularly deadly disease if proper non-chemical treatment was given. Why then would the Ameri-Indians die in such numbers? The answer is always ‘lack of immunity’ due to not spending thousands of years with cows. Is this theory validated?
More here
According to modern propaganda, ‘economic thought’ as a discipline, arose only in the 18th century through the work of men such as Adam Smith, or David Ricardo. The ‘Enlightenment’, so goes the myth, generated ideas about ‘free markets’, individual pursuit of ‘liberty’ and economic exchange, and somewhat complex ideas about economics worked at the regional, national and international levels. Without such ‘genius’ and ‘innovation’ modern ‘economics’ would never have been birthed. So goes the fable.
Joseph Schumpeter, an economic historian of the last century, wrote a ‘History of Economic Analysis’ in 1954. In this book he pays homage to the medieval Scholastics who created almost all of what is later found in the ‘Enlightenment’ on economic theory.
“It is they (the scholastics or schoolmen), who come nearer than does any other group to having been the founders of scientific economics.”
There is nothing much ‘scientific’ about economics. Gross Domestic Product, developed by Kuznets in the 1930s and used today to gauge economic strength or vitality is a poor metric to assess a country’s economic output. GDP is just a spending algorithm, with public spending and state spending included which in essence is a false accounting, since state expenditure is either tax or debt. So much for ‘scientific economics’.
Schumpeter’s assessment is joined by other economic historians including Murray Rothbard, who in his celebrated books, stated that the schoolmen were brilliant social thinkers and economic analysts. The economic concepts of the schoolmen reached their conclusion in the ‘Austrian’ school of economics, dedicated to free market and libertarian ideals – the very opposite of what the Church is often accused of supporting. The Austrian school includes Carl Menger, Eugen von Bohm-Bawerk, Ludwig von Mises and F.A. Hayek who won a Nobel in economics in 1974.
The foundations of ‘modern’ economic analysis can be traced back to the 13th - 14th centuries. Jean Buridan (1300-1358), as Rector of the University of Paris, made very important contributions to the understanding of money and inflation. It was Buridan and those before him who first described money as a medium of exchange, a market-driven necessity, and not a state-produced product. Voluntary exchange and not government interdicts were the foundation of monetary value. The scholastics first described money as portable, divisible, durable with a defined value per unit weight that could not be debased.
Nicholas Oresme (1325-1382), a student of Buridan’s, is called the founding father of monetary economics, outlining a comprehensive regime of money creation and management in his, ‘A Treatise on the Origin, Nature, Law and Alterations of money’. This book is the most comprehensive approach to monetary analysis until the 19th century. It contains for example what is now called, ‘Gresham’s law’, which is the fixed value ratio between 2 units (gold, silver), or 2 currencies. If the government artificially undervalues one unit over time against the other, it will disappear from circulation. An example would be that if initially 15 silver units were equal to 1 gold unit, but this was changed to 10, the market would naturally stop using gold and use instead the now artificially created higher value of silver. Thus, the destructive effects of inflation were well known by the 13th and 14th centuries.
Spanish scholastics and theologians were well acquainted with the reality of high inflation. The quantity theory of money was formed by Martin de Azpilcueta (1493-1586), who wrote a history of the inflationary effects of American gold and silver on the Spanish economy, a key factor which led to Spain’s decline as an economic and military power, “Thus we see by experience that in France, where money is scarcer than in Spain, bread, wine, cloth, and labour are worth much less.”
Cardinal Cajetan (1468-1534) in 1499 wrote ‘De Cambiis’ or ‘On Exchange’, which vindicated the foreign exchange market from a moral standpoint. He also wrote that the current value of money is affected by its perceived future value and the predictions of future market strength. War, poor harvests, a looming state bankruptcy, extravagant public spending, rumours of large tax increases, an expanding or declining empire, disease, government competence or incompetence, a succession crisis, all these and many more would affect the currency’s value. This is now termed ‘economic expectations theory’.
Subjective value economics was also developed by the Church. This concept states that the real value of money is based on perception as much as real value. Also confidence plays an important role. Pierre Olivi (1248-1298) proposed a value theory based on subjective utility. He and others in the 13th century argued that the value of a good is derived from the subjective analysis of its utility or desirability. A pearl for example has a much greater perceived value than the utilitarian, practical working horse, due only to desirability and perception. Further elaboration of these ideas was developed by San Bernardino of Siena, a notable economic thinker in the 15th century and Cardinal Juan de Lugo (1583-1660), in the 17th.
Subjective value is an extremely important economic insight. It is not found in Smith’s works, where he attributes a good’s value to its labour content. This theme was picked up by Marx to elaborate his apocryphal analysis of economic Communism. The value theory of economics is the right approach to understand a unit’s value, not the labour theory of exchange. Smith and Marx have everything backwards. A good does not derive its value from the labour cost, but the labour expended on the good, derives its value from the customer’s valuation of the final product. Hence the pearl and horse analogy.
Alejandra Chafuen in, ‘Faith and Liberty: The Economic Thought of the Late Scholastics’ (2003), meticulously proves that the scholastics and medieval thinkers developed the ideas around free markets, free exchange, goods valuation, monetary policy, inflation and currency values. From prices and wages to money and value theory, the Scholastics anticipated all of the ‘Enlightenments’ propositions. Such Catholic innovations are well known to many scholars, but are deliberately kept out of the media, educational systems and textbooks.
