The Priest as a Scientist. Only in Christianity does one find the religious leading science.

The foundations of science were laid by the Church.

Sunday, April 21, 2024 by Ferdinand III
Full Article

Only in Christianity do we find distinct markers of piety and intelligent rationality, mixed together in a great pot-pourri of intellectual and emotional ferment.  The organisation and both immaterial and material concerns of monks and nuns is one such marker.  A second is the role of the priest as a scientist during the Middle Ages.  Few if any cultures can boast one, none can reference both.  We take it for granted in our modern world suffused in material wealth, much of it concentrated with the few, saturated as it is with debts both present and future; that everyone throughout history has had the time and leisure to become educated, explore and discover.  This is obviously a fiction.  ‘Learning’ and naturalist investigation was always the prerogative of the rich and idle. 

What is unique in the Western experience is the role of the scientist-priest.  Running a church and a parish is a full-time job.  It involves the spiritual and religious guidance of the laity, but also, the management of buildings, finances, people, and material affairs.  It is in effect, the equivalent of running a business.  Seen from this viewpoint there was not much time for idle-intellectual speculation or forays into complicated naturalist endeavours.  Yet throughout the Middle Ages, the Catholic Church produced a vast quantity of learned priests who transformed world history through intellectual, social, scientific, mathematical and mechanical innovation.

Sadly, much documentation pre-dating the 1200s has been destroyed through arson, war, pillage or natural decomposition.  Tonnes of Latin manuscripts also lie unread in various crypts and archives across Europe waiting for translation.  What we do know is that the 13^th century was a cauldron of sophisticated education and inquiry, surely built on previous centuries of experimentation and effort.  Roger Bacon a Franciscan who taught at Oxford, was greatly admired for his work in maths and optics.  He developed a scientific method and emphasised the importance of experiment and observation.  He identified that long standing customs and popular opinions were too often, obstacles to truth.

Saint Albert the Great (d.1280), was a Dominican monk educated in Padua, who taught in Germany and at the University of Paris.  One of his students was St. Thomas Aquinas.  Besides teaching Saint Albert was the Bishop of Regensburg for 2 years and led the German Dominicans for many years.  Albert was justly famous for his naturalistic investigations, experimentation and applied mathematics.  As with Roger Bacon he developed a coherent method of investigation which focused on mechanical proofs.  Outputs from Saint Albert traversed the areas of physics, logic, metaphysics, biology, psychology, and natural science.  He refused to accept scientific ‘authority’ at face value, an attitude completely missing in our ‘modern world’.

Robert Grosseteste was another famed monk and chancellor of Oxford as well as a Bishop of Lincoln in England.  He was deeply influenced by the school at Chartres and by Thierry in particular.  He was probably the first priest-scientist to codify and write down his scientific experiments and the steps taken within each experiment.  These methods and approaches were passed on down and were duly copied by scientists in the 17^th century.

There are dozens of similar priest-scientists that are of great importance but rarely mentioned in history books.  Father Nicholas Steno (d 1686) defined the science of geology, an area which is still suffused with problems and incorrect assumptions.  In particular he scientifically examined fossils, rocks and geological strata, overturning the existing myths and a priori conclusions through careful research and applied experimentation.  He was the first person we know of who believed that the Earth’s history could be known from its rocks.

The Jesuits as a religious order, until the advent of their subversion in the modern era were famous throughout the world for scientific, mathematical and astronomical observations.  Father Matthias Rici became, circa 1610, the de-facto Chancellor of China through his demonstration of Western science, astronomy, maths and geographical knowledge.  He was famous within China for teaching Chinese scholars not only scripture but advanced scientific ideas, including astronomical observations and calculations.  Many Chinese converted to Catholicism due to Rici’s piety, Christian virtues but also due to the scientific achievements that the Christianised West could display to the pagan East.

The priest as scientist, academic and innovator is a Christian only invention.  For 1000 years from the demise of Rome and its takeover by the German tribes, to 1600, the Catholic Church was at the vanguard of every important development in Western Europe.  From its moral salvation, to responsible citizenhood, to the rise of the welfare state including hospitals, poor relief, orphanages; to ending both White and Black slavery; to the creation of universities and the foundations of maths and science; to the grander of faith and life expressed in art, architecture literature, learning; to its centrality in industry, technology and agricultural revolutions; the priest as savant is what enabled and ennobled Western civilisation.

The Cathedral School at Chartres

A pivotal moment in the development of Western science and rationality

Sunday, April 14, 2024 by Ferdinand III
Full Article

Developed during the 11^th century, the Cathedral school of Chartres was a seminal innovation in Western civilisation and the development of real science (not the faux science of materialism, fraudulent data and metaphysics).  Inspired by the work of the polymath and scientist Pope Sylvester in the late 10^th century, Chartres provided a foundation for scientific excellence during the 11^th century under the leadership of Fulbert a former student of Sylvester.  During the 11^th and 12^th centuries this school at Chartres was at the forefront of naturalist and scientific inquiry.

Fulbert and other academics at Chartres were versatile and fluent in the areas of medicine, logic, mathematics, and astronomy.  Pagan concepts along with more modern Christian innovations suffused the school.  In the western façade at the Cathedral of Chartres one can still see today the liberal arts as taught in the 11^th century, reflected in the statues of Aristotle, Boethius, Cicero, Euclid, Ptolemy, and Pythagoras.  This façade was created by Thierry of Chartres in the 1140s, to represent the influence, learning and education from the ancients and pagans.  There was no conflict between Christianity and science, either ancient or modern.

This school along with many others built during the 12^th century, pursued the quadrivium as part of the seven core courses.  The quadrivium included arithmetic, geometry, music and astronomy.  The patterns of God’s perfect creation and the natural laws of perfect harmony were investigated, pursued and contemplated.  The trivium of grammar, rhetoric and logic, comprising the rest of the 7 core courses, made the expression of thoughts and conclusions from the study of these patterns, possible and intelligible.  Man was invited to understand and glory in God’s created cosmos.

One of the most important contributions by Chartres was its systematic appraisal of nature as an autonomous creation, operating to fixed natural laws.  Natural causations were to be utilised to explain how nature functioned.  Gone were the gods and spirits of rocks, planets and movements (Aristotle, pagan naturalism).  In their place scientific explanations had to be offered for the physics of nature, the movement of objects, the patterns of weather and seasons and the obvious design and cycles of life one could see in nature itself.  It was a gigantic movement away from the incorrect physics of the ancients and polytheists to a rational investigation of reality and nature.  This rational approach only appeared in Catholic Europe.

The famed scientist and philosopher Adelard of Bath (1080-1142) was a student at Chartres.  He commented that rationality is what makes us human.  The rational beauty of the universe pace Adelard demands an appreciation and understanding.  Knowledge was a gift from God.  William of Conches another student and scientist at Chartres agree emphasising that natural phenomena must be understand without recourse to the invocation of the supernatural.  This attitude is why Christianity built modern science and the pagans and naturalists failed in the same endeavour.

Thierry and his successors at Chartres thankfully dispensed with the pagan notion that celestial bodies were divine.  The Muslim Al-Lah for example, is historically an idol representing moon and celestial worship, common in the Near East reflected in the name Baal found in the Old Testament and associated with evil.  The schools at Chartres believed that the planets were formed of material substances, not semi-divine characteristics and that they served a purpose in the firmament that needed to be discovered.  Under Thierry and his successors, we can see the beginnings of true science and physics.

‘Averroists’, or those who followed the incorrect philosophy of Averroes the Muslim philosopher, were also dealt with by the Chartres school.  Averroes believed that Aristotle was correct in his belief that the Earth was eternal.  This contravenes common sense and the Bible, in which the Earth and the universe must have been created.  Saint Thomas Acquinas, basing his work in part on the output from Chartres reconciled Aristotle with Catholicism, providing in essence scientific and logical proofs in his synthesis to prove the existence of God and the created universe. 

After Acquinas’ death the Bishop of Paris issued the Condemnation of 1277, books and works that professors at the University of Paris were forbidden to teach.  The condemnations targeted erroneous Aristotelian beliefs.  Pierre Duhem the great historian of science believed that the Condemnations opened the path for real science to flourish.  It forced academics and thinkers to break out of the prison walls of Aristotelian belief and pursue new and fresh paths of discovery.  This energy and vitality led to the astronomy, physics and laws of inertia and motion developed in Paris and Chartres by Robert Grosseteste (13^th century) and Jean Buridan (14^th century), amongst many others. 

The age of naturalist science was born in the 11^th century in Western Christendom.  This epochal achievement is seldom recognised or understood.

The Church and the rise of 'Science'

Only in Christendom was science built and sustained

Sunday, April 7, 2024 by Ferdinand III
Full Article

The Shroud of Turin and the physical appearance of Jesus Christ

Above average in height, not grand, not imposing. The only begotten Son and a carpenter.

Sunday, March 31, 2024 by Ferdinand III
Full Article

The New Testament, unlike many ancient biographies, remains silent on the physical description of Jesus Christ. For the Gospel writers, it seems, His teachings and actions held far greater weight than His outward appearance.

However, as Christianity flourished amongst the Gentiles, a question arose: what did the Saviour look like? Early Church writers, from the second to the third centuries concluded that Jesus possessed “an unattractive appearance,” even seeming “unremarkable” or “rather bland.” This perspective stemmed from a literal interpretation of Isaiah’s prophecy: “He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain. Like one from whom people hide their faces He was despised, and we held Him in low esteem” (Isaiah 53:3).

Tertullian, in his treatise “On the Flesh of Christ,” summarised these early views:

“...Only the words and deeds, the teachings and virtues of Christ as a man, caused wonder. Had some peculiarity of body been observed in Him, it too would have caused astonishment. But there was nothing remarkable in His earthly flesh; it merely served to highlight the true worth of His other qualities. For they said: “Where did this Man get this wisdom and these mighty works?”' (cf. Matthew 13:54) — even those who looked with disdain upon His appearance, so lacking was His body in human grandeur, let alone heavenly splendour. Though our prophets are silent on His unattractive appearance, His own sufferings and the reproaches He endured speak of it. The sufferings, in particular, testify to His human flesh, and the reproaches, to its unattractiveness.”

Christ the Pantocrator. Russia, 18th century

However, this notion was later revised. By the fourth century, Saint Jerome noted that “the very radiance and greatness of the hidden Deity, which shone even on His human face, might attract those who looked at Him at first sight.”

“The Fairest among the sons of men”

The “Letter to Emperor Theophilus,” attributed to John of Damascus in the eighth century, portrays Jesus as having a “tall stature, arched eyebrows, beautiful eyes, long nose, wavy hair of pleasant colour, black beard, wheat-coloured face like that of His Mother, elongated fingers, and sonorous, sweet, gentle voice, magnanimous and patient.”

Late Byzantine author Nikephoros Kallistos offered in the fourteenth century a yet more detailed account:

“I will describe the appearance of our Lord, as it has come down to us from antiquity, and as far as possible in the description. His face was very beautiful. His height was seven full spans. His hair was golden, not too thick, and slightly wavy; His eyebrows were black, but not completely round. His eyes were dark and seemed to radiate a soft golden light. His nose was elongated; His beard was golden and not very long. His head hair, on the contrary, He wore quite long, because the scissors never touched them, just as no human hand ever touched them except that of His Mother... He was slightly stooped, but His body was well-proportioned. His skin colour resembled that of ripe wheat, and His face, like that of His Mother, was rather oval than round, with a slight blush; but through it shone dignity, the wisdom of soul, meekness and calmness of spirit never disturbed.”

Icon of Christ, painted according to the instructions of the venerable Paisius of Mount Athos

Medieval Europe saw widespread circulation of the apocryphal “Letter of Lentulus,” which offered a detailed description of Jesus’ physical form:

“A man of tall stature and noble bearing, His countenance both dignified and expressive, such that whosoever looks upon Him must both love and fear Him. His hair is wavy and curling, of a shade slightly darker and most lustrous where it falls upon His shoulders, parted in two after the custom of the Nazarenes. His brow is smooth and marvellously serene; neither wrinkle nor blemish mars the beauty of His face, which is further graced by a becoming flush upon His cheeks. His nose and lips are formed with perfect propriety. He possesses a full beard, brown in colour, matching His hair, not long, but divided in twain. His eyes are clear and appear to change colour according to the light. He is awe-inspiring in His reproofs, gentle in His exhortations, a Man both loving and beloved, lively yet ever serious. No man has ever seen Him laugh, though He has been observed weeping on numerous occasions. His hands and other limbs are without blemish. His speech is measured and weighty. He is humble and gentle, the fairest among the sons of men.”

History of the Shroud of Turin

While the initial notion of Jesus' unattractiveness relied on scripture based on the literal understanding of Isaiah’s prophecies, the later ideas of His beauty likely drew inspiration from established iconographic tradition, where Jesus was typically depicted as possessing a noble and serene appearance.

The tradition of depicting Jesus with a noble and serene appearance did not solely stem from human imagination. The proliferation of iconographic imagery of Jesus Christ dates back to the fifth and sixth centuries. This period also coincides with the story of the discovery of the “Acheiropoieton” (Greek for “Not Made by Hands”) image of Jesus Christ, identified with the Shroud of Turin.

Spas Nerukotvornyy (Saviour Not Made by Hands). Moscow. Third quarter of the 14th century

The Shroud depicts the figure of a middle-aged man of approximately 170 centimetres in height, possessing an elongated face, straight combed long hair, a moustache, and a beard. This physical description aligns closely with how Jesus is portrayed in most canonical Orthodox icons. Additionally, the numerous bloodstains upon the Shroud are interpreted by some as evidence that it once enveloped a man who had been scourged and crucified.

However, the authenticity of the Shroud remains a subject of ongoing debate. Some propose it formed due to moisture evaporating from the deceased's body. Others suggest that radiation or sunlight played a role. However, examinations reveal no traces of paint, eliminating the possibility of a human-made image created with pigments, either in ancient times or the Middle Ages. This strongly suggests the image is not a human creation.

This conclusion is supported by the observation that the image is more vivid in areas where the cloth was in close contact with the body, whereas it appears fainter in areas where there was a gap between the cloth and the body.

The Shroud of Turin

All three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) mention the Shroud (σινδών) in which Jesus' body was wrapped for burial. John, however, uses the term “linen cloths” (ὀθόνια).

The Shroud’s documented history begins in 1353 when French knight Geoffroi de Charny declared its possession. In 1452, it was acquired by Duke Louis I of Savoy and housed in Chambery, where it endured damage in a fire in 1532. Since 1578, it has resided in the Turin Cathedral.

The debate regarding the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin is still ongoing among academics.

A complication arose in 1988 when radiocarbon dating placed the Shroud’s origin in the 13th century. The validity of these findings has been repeatedly challenged and scientifically refuted. Notably, a 2013 study conducted by Professor G. Fanti of the University of Padua employed a combination of cutting-edge techniques — infrared and Raman spectroscopy, alongside chemical and multiparametric mechanical analysis. This study yielded results suggesting that the Shroud may, in fact, date back to the time of Jesus Christ.

The Shroud of Turin

Another argument against the Shroud’s origin as a mediaeval forgery lies in the placement of the bloodstains. During the Middle Ages, the common belief was that crucifixion involved nails driven through the palms. Consequently, a forger would likely have depicted the wounds in this manner. However, the bloodstains on the Shroud reside in the wrist area, aligning with the recent understanding that during the time of Christ, nails were typically driven through the wrists, not the palms.

The Mandylion in Edessa and Constantinople

Furthermore, the tradition of the Holy Mandylion pre-dates the declaration of the Shroud’s existence by Geoffroy de Charny. This image held significant importance in the Christian East, with its first documented mention arising during the siege of Edessa in 545 AD. Church historian Evagrius describes desperate citizens using the “God-given Holy Mandylion” in their defence. This act, involving holy water sprinkled on the image and then on the rampart built by Khrosrow, enabled them to set fire to the rampart, leading to Khrosrow’s ignominious retreat three days later.

Spas Nerukotvornyy (Saviour Not Made by Hands). Icon. Novgorod, 12th century

For four centuries, the Holy Mandylion served as a revered relic in Edessa, attracting numerous pilgrims. In 944 AD, it was transferred with great ceremony to Constantinople. There, it was placed in the palace temple of the Virgin Mary of Pharos where it remained for centuries. However, its trail fades after the city’s fall to the Crusaders in 1204 AD. It is likely that, similar to other Eastern Church relics, the Holy Mandylion ended up in the possession of Western Crusaders and was taken from Constantinople.

The Shroud of Turin and the Edessa image - same or different?

A question remains: is there a link between the Shroud of Turin and the Holy Mandylion of Edessa (Constantinople)? For a significant period, this connection was rejected. Primarily, this stemmed from the vast difference in their depictions. The Shroud portrays a complete body imprint, whereas historical descriptions and accounts suggest the Holy Mandylion solely presented an image of Jesus Christ's face.

However, a new interpretation emerged in the latter part of the 20th century, proposing that the Shroud and the Mandylion represent the same object. This theory hinges on the presence of transverse folds on the Shroud. They indicate that the Shroud was folded eight times and stored in a folded state for a long time.

Proponents of this theory argue that the Edessa Holy Mandylion could correspond to the facial region of the Shroud. When displayed to pilgrims in Edessa and later Constantinople, it is conceivable that only this section of the folded Shroud was revealed, creating the impression of a solely facial image.

Several literary sources strengthen the connection between the Shroud and the Mandylion by suggesting the presence of Christ’s actual burial Shroud, not just a facial image, in Constantinople until 1204.

Hagia Sofia by Charalampos Laskaris

Nicholas Mesarites, the sacristan of the Church of the Mother of God of Pharos, directly mentions the “grave shrouds of Christ” in 1200: “They are made of linen, a cheap, simple material, still imbued with myrrh, rising above decay, because they have enfolded the immeasurable, dead, naked, anointed after the Passion.”

Robert de Clari, in his early 13th-century work “The Conquest of Constantinople,” specifically mentions a church (Virgin of Blachernae) housing the Shroud “in which the Lord was wrapped.” This Shroud, according to de Clari, displayed a visible image of Christ every Friday: “which would rise every Friday so that the likeness of Our Lord would be visible.”

Theodore Angelos, writing to Pope Innocent III in 1205, further strengthens the claim: “The Venetians divided among themselves treasures of gold, silver, and ivory, while the French did the same with the relics of saints and the greatest relic — the Shroud, in which Our Lord Jesus Christ was wrapped after His death and before His resurrection. We know that these relics are kept by their captors in Venice, in France, and other places, and the Holy Shroud is in Athens.”

Further indicating the potential link, several sources suggest that the Edessa Mandylion depicted not just the face, but Christ's entire body.

A 10th-century Latin manuscript contains an account originating in the 8th century, mentioning the presence of a cloth in Edessa displaying “not only the face but the whole body” of Christ.

Additionally, the presence of bloodstains on the Holy Mandylion is documented in various sources. A particularly compelling piece of evidence comes from Archdeacon Gregory of Hagia Sophia in 944, notably, his discourse for the transfer of the Mandylion from Edessa to Constantinople. Gregory explicitly refers to the Holy Mandylion as a “supernatural image”:

“For it is not painted by the means with which the art of painting creates images, granting the mind the ability to grasp the original form: painting creates a complete likeness with various colours, highlighting the cheeks with a blush, the lips with bright scarlet, drawing the first down of youth with a shining black colour, the brow with a beautiful colour along with the eye; combining colours (it depicts) ears and nose, mixing colours — the hollows of the face, shading the chin with a circle of hair threads. ... But this image... is impressed only by the agony of the pre-death struggle on the life-giving face, streaming like clots of blood, and by the finger of God. They are truly beautiful colours that have created the imprint of Christ, adorned with drops flowing from His side. Both are filled with teachings: there is blood and water, there is sweat and form. Oh, the resemblance of these things! For they have come from the same. But the source of living water should also be seen in His image, and it, teaching, moistens the formative moisture of sweat, which every body emits, like a spring that gushes forth as if from vessels, moistening the tree of life.”

Archdeacon Gregory’s statement clearly mentions blood traces not only on Christ’s face but also corresponding to the wound in His side (John 19:34). This suggests that the Shroud bears an image of Christ’s entire body, not just His face.

Holy Shroud by Victor Vasnetsov

A potential counter-argument arises: given the Jewish tradition of washing the deceased before burial, wouldn't this negate the presence of bloodstains on the Shroud? Researcher R. Jackson addresses this:

“Jewish law outlined four circumstances where washing the deceased was prohibited. Firstly, violent deaths with bloodshed prevented pre-burial washing. Secondly, this applied when a non-Jew inflicted the death, which aligns with Jesus’ Roman crucifixion. Thirdly, those executed for religious crimes were exempt from washing. Finally, the outcast category, encompassing those no longer considered part of the community, also faced this exemption. Therefore, fulfilling all four conditions, washing the body would have been strictly forbidden.”

The available evidence strongly suggests that the Edessa Mandylion and the Shroud of Turin are the same, albeit folded eight times. However, the possibility cannot be entirely dismissed that they are distinct objects.

The Gospel of John provides intriguing details, mentioning both “the burial cloths” and “the cloth that had been on Jesus’ head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself” (John 20:7). Perhaps a separate cloth covered Christ’s face during burial, acquiring an image similar to the Shroud. In this scenario, the facial image on both cloths would be identical.

The Shroud of Turin, a fifth Gospel

The Shroud of Turin transcends a mere relic, often referred to as the “fifth Gospel.” It offers strong corroboration for elements within the Gospel’s narrative of the crucifixion, adding crucial details. The Shroud reveals evidence of at least two distinct floggings, aligning with the mentions in Matthew, Mark, and John. Contrary to popular depictions, the Shroud suggests the nails were driven through Jesus’ wrists, not his palms.

The Shroud embodies the image of the “man of sorrows and acquainted with grief” (Isaiah 53:3). We see a wounded body, hands crossed at the waist, the face bearing a majestic serenity.

Icon “Do Not Weep for Me, O Mother”

This depiction resonates with the Russian icon, “Do Not Weep for Me, O Mother,” and the corresponding Greek iconographic type, “Extreme Humility.” Here, Christ lies partially unclothed, “as if truly laid upon the Shroud,” presented frontally with crossed hands upon his abdomen. The wounds of the crucifixion are evident, His head lies straight, and a cloth partially covers his lower body. This imagery portrays Jesus prepared for his entombment, not as a deceased figure standing upright, but as one lying down, viewed from above.

The widespread adoption of this iconographic type around the 12th century suggests a strong connection to the image once visible in the Church of the Virgin of the Pharos in Constantinople.

Source

The Scholastics and Rationalism

No Church, no universities, no scientific tradition.

Sunday, March 24, 2024 by Ferdinand III
Full Article

Much derided by the ‘Enlighteners’ from the poorly named ‘Enlightenment’, an era largely weaponised as propaganda by protesters and atheists, the age of ‘Scholasticism’, running from the 12^th to 16^th centuries was absolutely essential for the development of Western civilisation.  Logical, rational deductions were at the heart of Scholasticism, and this age of inquiry bequeathed, universities, natural science, optics, physics and advanced mathematics.  Scholasticism includes work done at the universities, but also in the society at large, all of it, or a great deal of it, funded by the Church.  Hence the animus from the ‘Enlighteners’.

Scholasticism however defined, was at its core, as an ethos, dedicated to rationality.  Reason was viewed as the indispensable tool in theological and philosophical study.  The use of the dialectic, borrowed from Platonic dialogues was the core of how issues were assessed.  There would be a problem statement, opposite arguments were presented, followed by a resolution.  The resolution did not appeal to authority or scripture, but reason and logic.  Objections would be answered, and the author’s own ideas presented as well.  This schema was followed well into the 20^th century. 

The earliest known Scholastic was probably Saint Anselm the archbishop of Canterbury (1033-1109).  In his Cur Deus Homo Anselm examines how God became man using logic and natural science.  He also developed a rational proof for the existence of God, known as the onto-logical argument.  For Anselm the existence of God is implied in the very definition of God, since God is ‘that than which nothing greater can be conceived.’  God cannot exist just in our minds because a greater being could be justly conceived who was real and existed in reality.  God must logically exist in reality and be beyond our comprehension in scope and perfection.

Another early Scholastic Peter Abelard (1079-1142) wrote Sic et Non or Yes and No C 1120.  He assembled a list of apparent contradictions from the Bible and early Church fathers, using reason to resolve the contradictions and forcing his students to logically answer the supposed discrepancies with logic.  Abelard was famous for his dedication to reason and structured logic to build up proof for the one-true-faith and the veracity of scripture.  He aligned Aristotelian logic with that of the Church and commented that he would stop being a philosopher if that meant being cut off from the truth of the Catholic Church.  

His student Peter Lombard (1100-1160) wrote Sentences, which next to the Bible became the central textbook for students of theology for the next 500 years.  This book is a systemic exposition of the Catholic faith, discussing everything from God’s attributes to sin, grace, the Incarnation, redemption, virtue, the sacraments, death, judgement heaven and hell. 

Abelard and Lombard’s work was further developed by the angelic doctor, St Thomas Aquinas in the 13^th century (1225-1274).  The greatest metaphysician in history, Aquinas reconciled the logic and systems of Aristotle with that of the Church.  The Summa Theologica raised and answered thousands of questions and objections in theology and philosophy.  He proved that Aristotle could be readily harmonised with Catholic teaching.  He also offered 5 proofs for God’s existence, a must read for Catholics in any age, using reason and physics.

Aquinas resolutely shows that there is always an uncaused cause.  A cause that is not itself in need of a cause.  From this uncaused cause, proceed all other causes.  This first cause is of course God.  God is the one self-existing being whose existence is part of his very essence.  He depends on nothing prior to himself to exist.  Using physics and natural science, Aquinas explains how this works in the physical as well as the immaterial world. 

Aquinas, Lombard and Abelard all studied at the university of Paris.  In fact, the dense network of Catholic universities which would cover Europe by 1350, provided ‘rivers’ of intelligent inquiry, innovation, and scientific treatises of all varieties.  This intellectual tradition was entirely unique in world history.  The university system was dominated not by appeals to authority as in today’s schools, but by the rigour of logical dissertation and argumentation. 

No Catholic Church?  No university system, no scientific tradition. 

The Church and Medieval Universities

No Church. No University system. As dead simple as that.

Sunday, March 10, 2024 by Ferdinand III
Full Article

It is amusing to hear the self-proclaimed, Atheist-Rationalist-Globalist-Humanist (aka Communist) usher forth with declamations of moral and intellectual superiority, over the undressed, stooped, toothless, superstitious, moronic, childish religious peasant, because he/she/zhe has a Phd from a University – an institution built by the Catholic Church.  The irony is of course lost on the egocentric self-worshipper. 

Along with eye-glasses, time and the printing press, not to mention the practical usage of electricity which led to modern devices, the devout worshipper of stuff happens, random chance and ‘The Science’ would not have the means, methods or avenues to accumulate he/she/zhe’s random degree.

The Middle Ages developed education at a far higher more formalised and rigorous level than any other epoch in world history until the 19^th century.  The formation of universities was a new phenomenon utterly unique in global history.  Nothing like it existed in pagan Greece, Rome, Arabia, China, India or the Americas.  The institutions of today were built and are modelled on the medieval.  Catholic Christian Europe was the only era in history which showed a consistent and reverent desire if not obsession, with the preservation, extension and improvement of knowledge.

The earliest universities began to appear in the early 12^th century, sited in Bologna, Paris and Oxford.  Each university might adopt a particular focus – medicine at Bologna, law at Paris, natural sciences and theology at Oxford or Cambridge.  Each school had well defined programs, with the length of degree study not dissimilar to what we have today.  Medieval universities were chartered legal corporations, self-interested in quality and in developing ‘craftsmen’ for teaching, much as guild would develop an apprentice into a ‘craftsmen’ for that particular guild and skill set.

Most universities offered the seven liberal arts, civil and canon laws, natural philosophy, medicine, and theology.  These courses created what is now called a ‘Renaissance of the 12^th century’, leading directly to the great scientific, naturalist and theological developments of the 13^th.  Huge translation efforts saved countless ancient artifacts from extinction.  Geometry, maths, logic, metaphysics, natural philosophy, Aristotelianism, medicine, legal studies all flourished.  Justinian’s 6^th century codex of civil law was rediscovered, improved and became the basis for much of secular law and indeed medieval and modern canon law. 

The papacy and Church at large were instrumental in building these cathedral schools.  Enormous investments were made by the Church in the construction of buildings, the funding of salaries and expenses, the on-going maintenance and repair, the administration and the development of courses and degrees.  Given their corporate status, the universities were run as a business, influenced and often-allied with the State, but determinedly independent of secularisation and secular powers.  That is obviously no longer the case today and our education system is far worse off being entirely dependent on State whims.

By the year of the poorly named ‘Reformation’ of 1517, around 81 universities had been granted a private charter across Europe.  Of these, 33 had a papal charter, 15 a royal, 20 possessed both, and 13 had no charter.  These universities could not grant a degree without the approbation of either the Church, the King or monarch, or both.  If issued with a degree from the most famous universities such as Bologna, Paris or Oxford, the ‘master-degree’ holder was able to teach anywhere in Europe, with his degree stamped with ‘ius ubique docendi’. 

Universities usually added social and economic power and gravitas to their towns.  Economic activity was generally enhanced by the arrival of thousands of students.  Conflicts with local townspeople were not uncommon, including brawls, street fights and physical conflict.  The Church and secular rulers usually extended protection to students and offered legal help in litigation with locals. 

Importantly the Church stood up for the freedom and liberty of both the university as a separate corporation, independent from secular power and for the rights and freedoms of students to engage in inquiry and pursue their studies.  By the mid 13^th century, the Church had defined a right called ‘cessatio’ which it protected the rights of students and faculty to work and study in safe and well maintained premises including proper habitation for the students.  Students and faculty were protected from abuse, larceny and deceitful practices in the provisioning of accommodation, food and supplies.

Universities enhanced upward social mobility and the diffusion of knowledge.  Most students came from modest backgrounds, they were not the rich and elite.  Many were young, aged 14 to 20 and the most popular degree course was law.  Over time the positive impact of a university on a town was so substantial that towns began to compete to attract a university to relocate or to build up the funds to start a new one.  The University of Padua was built in 1222, from a diaspora of disaffected scholars from Bologna.  A variety of grants and privileges from the secular state to universities became the norm, in order to develop and grow the university. 

Universities today are now everywhere and accepted as 'normal'.  There is nothing inevitable about this institution or the vast networks of such schools which dominate many towns and cities across the world.  The concept of the university, its purpose, its curricula, its culture of inquiry was only built in Catholic Europe. It is a simple fact to state the truth -  No Catholic Church, No University system. 

The Monks and the medieval industrial revolution

No Catholic monks. No modern Europe.

Sunday, March 3, 2024 by Ferdinand III
Full Article

During the Middle Ages, the monks were the great stimulators of industry, commerce and technical advancements.  Standardise forms of writing, the use of Hindu numerals in place of cumbersome Roman numbers were vital to the transmission of ideas and concepts, not to mention maths and science.  Practically as well, the monks were the great distribution channels of industrialisation.

The Cistercians for example were famous for their skill in metallurgy and agricultural technology.  Every monastery had a model factory, larger than the church itself usually, using waterpower to drive the complicated machinery on its floor.  Machinery on this scale had never been seen in industry, at any time in history. 

Iron deposits were mined and sent to the monks to be forged into iron implements using such technology.  Cistercians organised surplus market sales of iron and were usually the leading producers of iron tooling in any given region.  Slag from the furnaces were used as fertilisers, given the phosphates contained in the waste.  Agricultural yields increased accordingly.

The monks were involved in mass industrialisation.  The mining of salt, lead, iron, alum, gypsum, or metallurgy, quarrying marble, running cutler’s shops, producing glass works, metal plates, forging, all were subjected to the monks energy, research and skill.  The monastic ‘network’ allowed such innovations to be rapidly distributed throughout Europe.

In the early 1000’s a monk attempted man flight (Eilmer), flying some 600 feet in a glider.  In the late 1600s a Jesuit, Lana-Terzi, was the first to describe how vessels could physically fly through the air, using geometry and physics as theoretical proofs.  The first large clock on record was built by the future Pope Sylvester I in Madgeburg in 996.  Richard Wallingford an abbot at Saint Albans created the first mechanical clock in the late 14^th century.  In addition to accurate time-keeping this close could predict lunar eclipses.

At Rievaulx Abbey in Yorkshire, the Cistercian monks were on the verge of building the world’s first blast furnace, interrupted by the confiscation of monastic property and assets during the reign of King Henry VIII.  These furnaces had the heat to produce large scale cast iron - a feat that would need 300 years to be repeated.  In essence these monks may have been able to usher in the industrial revolution, centuries earlier than it occurred.  The impact on society and development would have been tremendous. 

The unknown secret about the Catholic era is that there was a massive industrialisation from about the 11^th to 15^th centuries.  This created in part, the ‘agricultural’ revolution, which textbooks still admit occurred dating from the 11^th to 13^th centuries.  This agricultural development went hand in hand with the industrialisation of Europe. 

The more productive use of land and soil was due to the monks’ innovative iron tooling, and also to field rotations, crop rotations and the planting of crops better suited to the environment, soil and climate.  Massive areas of forest and wild lands were cleared, ploughed and developed.  Irrigation was promoted, drainage developed, fertilisers and phosphates used, husbandry bred, and the resulting output of meat, grains and cereals allowed the population to expand, wealth to accrue and cities to develop.

It is a clear and obvious fact that without the monks and the Catholic Church, Western civilisation would never have industrialised or ‘agriculturalised’ and would have been rendered at the same low level of socio-economic development as that of the pagan Roman empire. 

The Monks who built Western Civilisation

The 'Enlightenment' can't hold a candle to these men and women.

Monday, February 26, 2024 by Ferdinand III
Full Article

Anathema to the ‘Enlightenment’, or to those who self-proclaimed their own greatness and ‘light’ using in their entirety, the ideas, concepts, culture, science, maths and even social wealth from the medieval-era as a foundation, is the story of Catholic monks and how they saved, built and extended civilisation.  Nothing can be more repugnant to the so-called ‘rationalists’, or ‘positivists’ than the rational, positive fact that it was the Catholic Church who saved and created Western civilisation.  Every single facet of the modern world was formed in the medieval. 

The monks are largely to thank for this.  As Christ stated, ‘Seek ye first the kingdom of heaven and, all these things shall be added unto you.’  The history of monasticism is that story.  Dating from the 3^rd century, individual Catholic men and women committed themselves as consecrated virgins, to lives of prayer and sacrifice, looking after the poor and sick and tending to the moral rottenness of society at large.  Saint Paul of Thebes and Saint Anthony of the desert, who lived during the mid-3^rd century until the 4^th, are early examples of this ascetism.  Saint Anthony’s sister was a consecrated nun.  Anthony retreated to the desert to achieve spiritual perfection and acolytes flocked to him forming a community, called ‘cenobitic’ monasticism. 

Eastern monasticism greatly influenced the Western, whose founder, Saint Benedict of Nursia established 12 small communities of monks at Subiaco, and after, the iconic monastery at Monte Cassino.  In about 529, the composed the famous rule of Saint Benedict, universally adopted in some form, by all succeeding cenobitic communities.  All were equal, a sustainable peasant-level standard of living was maintained, work and education emphasised, and charitable efforts mandatory, including poor relief and hospice care.  The purpose of the monastery was to cultivate a spiritual life, and to work out salvation in an environment under a suitable regime, which imitated in part, the life of Christ.

As time went on, the monks became the beacons of learning, progress, industry and welfare.  By the beginning of the 1300s, the Benedictine order had supplied 24 Popes, 200 cardinals, 7000 archbishops, 15000 bishops, and 1500 saints.  It could boast some 37000 monasteries across Europe.  A great many of the European great, good, not-so-good but wealthy and powerful had joined the order between 500 and 1300, including some 20 emperors, 10 empresses, 47 kings, and 50 queens.  The Benedictine impact on the general culture was colossal.

Not only were the monks the great saviours of classical writing and the arts, transcribing and safeguarding texts from the pagan, ancient world that would have been lost, they were the leaders in the practical arts.  The agricultural restoration of Europe and its ‘agricultural revolution’ which starts in the 10^th or 11^th centuries, is due to the work of the monks. 

The monks, including Augustinians, Franciscans, Dominicans Cistercians and Benedictines, converted wildernesses, cleared forests, drained marshes, pursued the breeding of sheep, cattle and pigs; and innovated technology and soil management.  Every monastery was a veritable agricultural college and engine for the region surrounding it.  Standards of living rapidly improved, health and diets were augmented, and trade was facilitated.  Roads, bridges, markets were all constructed in domains around a Benedictine monastery. 

Manual labour expressly demanded by the rule of Saint Benedict played a central role in the monastic life.  Tasks and hard work were the channels of grace and opportunities for penance and self-mortification.  Draining swamps, long viewed as sources of disease, not only benefitted the region, it led to the development of drainage, dikes and water management.  Fertile agricultural land was developed from these enormous efforts across the width and breadth of Europe.

Into these agricultural fields the monks poured new crops, industries, or production methods which were unique and innovative.  They reared cattle, horses, and brewed beer and raised bees and fruit.  In some regions the corn trade was exclusively built by the monks.  In Italy they created cheese making, in Ireland salmon farming, in many locations great vineyards.  Reservoirs of water, used during droughts, were built.  Peasants learnt irrigation and the breeding of husbandry from the monks.

Technological sophistication was deployed in building and architecture.  Water and wind powered mills and systems spread across Europe thanks to the monks.  Machinery thus became embedded in European life and pursued as an integral part of a developing economy and society.  Waterpower was used to crush grain, sieve flour, full cloth, and tan textiles.  By the 12^th century, the Cistercians alone had some 742 monasteries across Europe, all of them famous and linked in this technological revolution.  Iron and mineral development was financed and worked by the monks, blast furnaces were created by the 11^th century and smithing was everywhere. Advanced metallurgy was transforming Europe by the 11^th century.

Unlike the pagan worlds of antiquity, mechanisation and machinery flourished in the medieval era, on an enormous scale.  There was great progress in science where Aristotle is finally overthrown through observational evidence, and real physics, unknown to the ancients is developed by the 13^th century.  We can add in universities, the 7 core courses of study, maths, optics including the invention of eyeglasses, polyphony and music, string instruments such as the violin or cello, standardisation of writing and art, mechanical clocks, stained glass, the chimney and hundreds of other innovations, all propelled forward by monks. 

It is unlikely that any of the egotistical self-obsessed ‘geniuses’ of the Enlightenment could have invented any of the above. 

The Carolingian Renaissance or was it the Dark Ages?

No Carolingian Renaissance, no Civilisation.

Sunday, February 18, 2024 by Ferdinand III
Full Article

The Franks under Clovis in the early 6^th century converted from paganism passing by Arianism which denied the divinity of Christ, to Catholicism.  In the 8^th century the Church blessed the Frankish transfer of power from the Merovingian dynasty to that of Charles Martel or the ‘Carolingians’, who had saved Eurupe from Islamification with his victory at Tours in 732 A.D.  The Church enabled the peaceful transfer of power from the decrepit Merovingian house to that of Pepin the Short, Charlemagne’s father in 751 A.D. 

Under the influence of Church, the Carolingians would become the great builders of Christian civilisation.  Charlemagne (r. 758 – 814 AD) was probably the greatest ruler in medieval history.  The myth is that he could not write and was unlettered, but this undoubtedly a fiction.  A man of his standing and background would have been educated and literate.  Charlemagne expanded Frankish Christendom into Switzerland, Germany and northern Spain and protected the Church in Italy, from the predations of the pagan Lombards – the main reason why the papacy was keen to have a strong Christian state and ally in Francia, and why it agreed to the transfer of power from the Merovingians to the Carolingians.

Charlemagne invested what today would be billions of £ into education, schools, arts, literacy, the arts and social welfare projects.  It was a far reaching and transforming investment to both further Christianise and civilise Frankish society.  This ‘Renaissance’ extended through the reign of his son Louis the Pious (r. 814-840).  A central figure in the Charlemagnian Renaissance was the English monk Alcuin, educated at York by the Venerable Bede, the great saint and ecclesiastical historian.  In 781 Charlemagne appointed Alcuin to lead educational and other social reforms.  Alcuin was fluent in Latin a pre-requisite during the early medieval period for correspondence, and schooling.  In fact the oldest surviving copies of most ancient Roman literature are dated to this period and shortly after, when Carolingian scholars rescued them from oblivion.  Without this contribution most if not all of Roman literature would be lost.

Alcuin and the system he founded, was built on the Roman model of education and the 7 liberal arts.  There was the quartet of astronomy, music, arithmetic and geometry and the trivium of grammar, rhetoric, and logic.  This system provided the groundwork for everything that as followed in European education and university creation. 

The Carolingians invented the Carolingian script, an innovation in writing that had a major impact on European development.  This standardised script notation ended the confusing mixture of largely unintelligible or hard to decipher scripts across Europe.  The Carolingians added punctuation, lower- and upper-case letters, sentence and paragraph structures and spaces between words.  Without this innovation civilisation was unlikely to have developed as it did.  It leads directly to the printing press.

In building and art the Carolingians were very confident that their civilisation would greatly surpass that of Greece and Rome, and so eventually it did.  Beset by the Muslim, Viking and Avar invasions of the 8^th and 9^th centuries it is a wonder it not only survived but thrived.  Catholic monasteries were built and extended, manuscript copying proceeded at a fast pace, and thanks to a common script, all manner of scientific collaboration began between the monks sited far apart.  Schools were opened across the Frankish empire attached to a Church or monastery and for the first time in history the average person may have had the chance at some formal education. 

Christopher Dawson the great historian of Western culture relates,

“It was the great monasteries, especially those of Southern Germany, Saint Gall, Reichenau and Tegernesee, that were the only remaining islands of intellectual life amidst the returning flood of barbarism which once again threatened to submerge Western Christendom.  For, though monasticism seems at first sight ill-adapted to withstand the material destructiveness of an age of lawlessness and war, it was an institution which possessed extraordinary power.”

The monasteries could recover from and repair the devastation enacted by and in the secular world.  Pagans and barbarians would sack, reduce, arson and destroy 9 out of 10 monasteries, but it only one survived, it would be the seed to replant and regrow the other 9. 

These pagan barbarians sacked monasteries and Churches, destroying their books and libraries, their manufacturing and agriculture, their schools and hospices.  Yet the monasteries, the buildings, the libraries, the schools, the hospices and hospitals were rebuilt and often improved.  This preservation of civilisation as the horrific barbarian invasions from Muslims, Viking, Avars and Saxons to name but a few, which enveloped the Western world for 2 centuries is an unappreciated phenomenon.

The monks not only saved civilisation but produced one of the great Popes – Sylvester (r 999-1003).  He was the most learned man in Europe with a breadth of knowledge that included astronomy, science, Latin literature, mathematics, music, philosophy and theology.  Sylvester and the Church began to invest in astronomy and scientific investigation including naturalism. 

The development of physics and complex geometry flowed from this investment, culminating in the new physics of Nicholas Oresme and the school of Paris in the 14^th century, about a century after the incorrect physics of Aristotle was decisively overthrown.  But few know this.  From Charlemagne to Sylvester is a direct line of civilised progress.  Today both men would be categorised as White supremacists, phobic, anti-science and racist. 

The Catholic Church, a light in the darkness of pagan barbarism.

No Church, no modern Europe.

Wednesday, February 14, 2024 by Ferdinand III
Full Article

The entire medieval period, from 500 AD to 1500 AD was ‘christened’ by Atheists and many Protestants as a ‘Dark Age’.  This propaganda has been relentless since the poorly named ‘Enlightenment’ when self-obsessed and largely historically ignorant personalities decided to elevate themselves and their contemporary progress against the backdrop of a sinister, corrupt and brooding Church.  In real scholarship no one accepts the appellation of a ‘Dark Age’, certainly not from the 8^th to 16^th centuries.  This was a long age of survival, renewal, and energy, punctuated by revolutions in science, agriculture, war, the arts and governance. 

The agnostic historian Will Durant, along with many others defended the Church from these baseless accusations including the charge against the Church for the social retrogression of the 6^th and 7^th centuries, especially in the ‘West’.  Most people don’t understand that the Byzantine Christian empire of the ‘East’ was rich, powerful and expansionary during this period, culminating in the rather ruinous and expensive wars of Justinian in Italy and North Africa in the mid-6^th century.  These wars retarded and degraded the ‘West’ and caused extraordinary turmoil from war, disease and social destruction. 

These conflicts were not the only source of Western dislocation.  Germanic tribes post 476 AD and the takeover of the Roman empire by the Goths, continued to pour into Western Europe.  These pagan incursions transformed the entire scene and upended the social and political landscape within the former Western Roman empire.  This had nothing to do with the Church.  In fact and in reality, without the Church the ‘West’ never would have withstood this onslaught and never would have developed along the lines and structures it did.

“The basic cause of cultural retrogression”, Durant writes, “was not Christianity, but barbarism; not religion but war.  The human inundations ruined or impoverished cities, monasteries, libraries, schools and made impossible the life of the scholar or the scientist.  Perhaps the destruction would have been worse had not the Church maintained some measure of order in a crumbling civilisation.”

This is rather obviously true. 

The Germanic incursions emanated from various tribes who were rural and nomadic.  There was no written literature, no settled life, no political organisation and no technological development.  Rome for all its faults as a white-slave trading premised empire, did possess a legal system with a large corpus of laws and precedents, codified by Justinian I.  The Germans did not.  The Justinian codex, based on centuries of legal activity became the basis for Western Europe’s legal systems.  This legal heritage was built and saved by the Church.  No such history informs the Germanic tribes who were first and foremost nomadic warriors or at best semi-settled militarists.

Christoper Dawson, “The Church had to undertake the task of introducing the law of the Gospel and the ethics of the Sermon on the Mount among people who regarded homicide as the most honourable occupation and vengeance as synonymous with justice.”

The most significant event in Western European medieval history is likely the conversion of Clovis King of the Franks in around 496 AD.  Compelled by his powerful wife who was a Christian to adopt the faith, the conversion by all accounts was a real and honest conversion by Clovis to Christ.  The entire Frankish tribe soon converted en masse, and Christendom had secured the support of the most powerful of the Germanic tribes who would forge the future state of France.  Of course, the ending of pagan naturalism and superstition would take many generations and entail hard work from Catholic missionaries and priests.  Eventually the light of Charlemagne would shine on France, Italy and parts of Germany, and Christianity would be further spread eastwards, through missionaries like Boniface and through interminable wars with the heathen and pagan Saxons.

Without the guidance of the Church all would have been lost in Western Europe during the 5^th and 6^th centuries.  Pope Gregory the Great was instrumental in salvaging civilisation in Italy during the early 6^th century.  The ongoing efforts of conversion and guidance in Gaul can be read in St Gregory of Tour’s ‘History of the Franks’ and that of the Anglo-Saxons in England, in the Venerable Bede’s ‘Ecclesiastical History of the English People’.  Saint Boniface undertook these efforts in Germany and reformed the Frankish church in the 740s as well. 

People today are mostly ignorant about the benefices and fundamental importance of the Church during the long medieval era.  The reality is quite simple: no Catholic Church, no modern Europe.

The Indispensable Catholic Church

If the Catholic Church did not exist, there would be no European civilisation.

Sunday, February 4, 2024 by Ferdinand III
Full Article

Christophobia and anti-White racism are the only acceptable forms of discrimination and bigotry, in the fast declining ‘West’.  In our fake-news, fake-science world, nothing is off limits if you want to ridicule or slander Christianity or Whites.  The same standards don’t apply to Muhammad’s cult, Muslims, pagans, Hindus, Asians, Blacks or non-Whites.  As far as the average person’s ignorance goes, the Catholic Church was a repressive, superstitious, idiotic, power-mad, totalitarian entity, that warped and distorted mankind, or he/she/zhe-kind’s ascent to the sunlight uplands of the Age of ‘Reason’ which has led to the philosophical conundrum ‘what is a woman’?

In reality, the Catholic Church built Western Civilisation.  The ‘Dark Ages’ are atheist and Protestant propaganda, a theory built on lies, illiteracy and a deep hatred of what transpired before the 17^th century.  Suffice it to say that the supposed ‘scientific revolutions’ were all constructed on about 800 years of painful effort by the Catholic Church.  There is no argument against this fact acknowledged by historians during the past century including A. C. Crombie, David Lindberg, Edward Grant,, Stanley Jaki, Thomas Goldstein and J.L. Heilbron. 

The Catholic Church never repudiated the pagan legacies of Greece, Rome or of the Germanic tribes which dominated Europe from the 5^th century onwards.  Without the Catholic Church saving these legacies and building upon them, Western civilisation – notwithstanding its current demonic and parlous state – would never have existed. 

The Catholic contribution to ‘Science’ went well beyond theory, so beloved by modern ‘science’, to proofs and physical experimentation, now demoted by modern ‘science’ as inferior to arcane maths.  Nicholas Steno initiated the organised study of geology.  Athanasius Kircher began Egyptology.  Giamba Riccioli was the first person to measure the rate of acceleration of a freely falling body.  Roger Boscovich was the first to elucidate atomic theory.  Jesuits so dominated astronomy, seismology and the study of earthquakes that these were often referred to as the Jesuit ‘sciences’.  Some 35 craters on the moon are named for Jesuit astronomers, and mathematicians. 

In summary, the Roman Catholic Church gave more financial aid and social support to the study of astronomy over 6 centuries, than any other institution in history (Heilbron).  The Church’s role in the development of maths, science, technology and engineering is one of the best kept secrets in Western Civilisation.  The above examples are a tithe of what could be listed.

We can take the monks as an example.  Without the monastic orders beginning in earnest in the 6^th century (St Benedict and his order), it is unlikely that Western Civilisation develops.  There is hardly a significant endeavour in the advancement of civilisation during the Middle Ages, that did not involve monks.  In every sphere of society, the monks dominated development.  There is no parallel to this in history.

Education and universities were developed by the Church – unique in their scope, outlooks and geographical density.  These Catholic built universities dating from the 12^th century, were foundations for learning in medicine, natural philosophy, the sciences, maths and law.  Without them the entire direction of European development would be hindered and reduced. 

Western law, both national and international is a gift from the Church.  International law rights start in the 16^th century with Vittoria and La Casa who defended the rights of indigenous Americans to their land and bodies.  Church Canon emanating from the age of Justinian (6^th century) is the basis for all the legal codes of European states.  It was the Church who reconciled and unified disparate systems and ideas and formed legal jurisprudence as a system and entity of arbitration and peace-making.  Legal rights, personal rights, individual rights come directly out of the Catholic Church and pre-date the theories of Locke and Jefferson by some 500 years. 

Even in economics, the theories of Smith and Ricardo were preempted by the Late Scholastics of the 14^th – 16^th centuries, especially the Spanish theologians.  Joseph Schumpeter named these Catholics as the founders of modern economics.  So they were.  Trade, price points, utility, demand and supply, government intervention, the impacts of taxes and other distortions were all discussed, debated and put into different frameworks by the 16^th century.  Because much of this innovation was Spanish and Catholic it was ignored.

The Catholic Church’s commitment to the poor, both in spirit and in physical need has no parallel in history.  The first welfare systems were built by Catholics and the very ideas of hospitals, hospices, orphanages and charity to all who need it, were Catholic creations stretching back to the first century A.D.  Indeed, one of the mainsprings of conversion in the centuries following Christ’s crucifixion was the social fact that Christians took care of their neighbours.

The pagan culture of might-makes-right, infanticide, polygamy, endless warring, barbarity, a legal system which benefitted only the rich, a society in which half the population were slaves in some form or other, was opposed by the Church which preached the opposite. 

To take physics as a case in point, it is obvious that the pagan world’s pantheistic naturalism was an impediment to real science.  Gods or demi-gods were according to the ancients, behind all movement, bodies and objects.  Once you remove this pagan myth, real science can begin. 

As proven by Pierre Duhem, physics as a discernible science, can be dated to at least the 13^th century when Oresme dethroned Aristotle and removed pantheism from observational reality, building the basis of the laws of inertia and motion, later used by Galileo and Newton.  In most areas far from producing science, pagan cultures retarded its development.

It was not only the Church's mission from God to save Europe from the barbarity of the Musulman Jihad, it was also the Catholic Church’s mission to educate, civilise and teach the barbarians inside the gates.  

The first half of Sura 2: Christophobia and Islam's hatred of Christians.

33% of the first part of Sura 2 is Christophobic. Enriching? Tolerant? Or is it simply what it is.

Sunday, January 28, 2024 by Ferdinand III
Full Article

We are told by the Marxists, Secularists, and cult worshippers of the state, the warm [weather fascists], the homosexual, the feminists, and sundry other worthies, that Islam and perforce all Moslems are pro-Christian 'extremists', spending most of their day eagerly kissing, embracing and loving their 'brothers' and co-equal 'people of the book'. These big–brains would have us believe that Moslems love Christians more than themselves – a difficult proposition for a cult that is so egotistically self-absorbed that badly drawn cartoons about Muhammad spark riots and death. In the real world, we have seen how historically for 1400 years, Christians have been enslaved, slaughtered, raped, and confined to second-class dhimmitude status within the Moslem world. 

Does the Koran promote this hatred of Christians? Is there Koranic Christianophobia? Curious minds would like to know.

• Number of verses in Sura 2: 286
• Number of verses in the first part of Sura 2: 120
• Number of verses of Christophobia in the first part of Sura 2: 39

 % of Christianophobic verses in the first part of Sura 2 of the total: 33 %

[Much of this Sura is also Anti-Semitic of course]

Sura 2 or the Heifer is one of the last 'revelatory' chapters given by the archangel Gabriel, he of Gospel fame, to Muhammad, on behalf of the former family deity and moon idol Hub'Al, recast by Muhammad as the monotheistic Al-Lah or 'The One'. Being one of the last 'communications' with the divine, Sura 2 is of great importance in the Koran and within Moslem liturgy. Over half of this Sura is Christianophic with at least 15 % of this chapter, or some 44 verses [bare minimum], being openly violent and preaching the physical destruction of the Christians. Combined these examples of Christianophobia appear to be a surprisingly large and intolerant amount from a cult dedicated to peace and brotherly love:

 “There is lots of compulsion within Islam and Sura 2. 44 verses make the following clear. The Jews and Christians are inferior to Moslems. Unbelievers [Christians and Jews], are in league with Satan, blind, greedy and stupid. Due to this Moslems can kill them. Allah wants Moslems to war against the Unbelievers and destroy them since they are sinners and a threat to the Allah cult. Even if Moslems do not kill the Unbelievers, all unclean sinners and criminal polytheists will burn in hellfire on Judgement Day. If Moslems turn away from their duty they will be viewed as part of Al-Mushrikun or an idolator. They will thus be punished. Allah can do this since Allah knows all and Allah is acquainted with everything which transpires in the material and spiritual realms. The 'good' humans and those destined for paradise are therefore those who simply follow the Allah cult and its creed.....This is the main message of the Moslem cult. A religion this is not." 

Christianophobia is particularly rife in Sura 2, as the chapter makes lurid claims about the superiority of Moslems over Christians. Contrary to the lame-brain media expostulation that Moslems deeply covet friendship with Christians, admiring them as 'people of the book', Moslems look down upon Christians as inferiors, and the reference, 'people of the book' is a pejorative, since within the Koran the book of the Jews and Christians is always described as corrupt, stupid, immoral, 'wrong', 'erroneous' and satanic. The only 'book' worth reading is of course the Koran, not the Torah or Bible. Read the following carefully. It is very obvious that the 'book' of the Christians and Jews is utterly wrong, according to Moslem theology:

It is quite obvious that the Jews and Christians are 'hypocrites' who pretend to worship Al-Lah, but in fact reject him. They deceive the Allah, and will disbelieve. Jews and Christians will thus be tormented in this life and the next for rejecting Al-Lah's guidance.

Jews and Christians must not only fear the Al-Lah thing and worship it, but also venerate Muhammad. Muhammad replaces Christ in effect, and the Muhammad-Al Lah nexus, replaces the Trinity. If a Christian does not revere the Koran, in which it states very clearly that both Al-Lah and Muhammad are to be followed for salvation, they are damned to hellfire. Further Islam demands that Christians recognize that Muhammad is foretold by Isiah and other prophets, indeed he replaces Christ as the fulfilment of Jewish and Christian theology. Denying this will earn the good Christian a place in Moslem hell.

Fear Al-Lah, and obey Muhammad. In other words reject completely your own Christian worship, practices and beliefs.

Jews and Christians rejected the Al-Lah idol, and will now receive their punishment. This is rather obtuse since Judaism as a monotheistic endeavour dates from the Hebraic traditions beginning with Abraham circa 2250 BC, or a mere 2900 years or so before the advent of Islam. Christianity pre-dates the Meccan cult by 600 years. Yet in the fantasy-world of the Koran, the Al-Lah idol and his book, existed long before either of these monotheistic systems were developed. This is very convenient for a supremacist cult which usurps history and common-sense and says 'we were first, and we are therefore better'. It sounds like the chanting of a 5 year old.

If a Jew or Christian denies that Muhammad is mentioned in the Torah or gospels, or that he is the last and most supreme of the prophets, they are doomed to hellfire.

Jews knew that Muhammad was insane and illiterate, and therefore the Koran or Muhammad's recitals a mass of gibberish and plagiarized copy [hence the admonition from the Al-Lah thing that anyone making up a Koranic verse will be punished 2:79]. Such claims must have greatly annoyed Muhammad and so he 'reveals' the above verses to negate criticism of the Koran being a fantasy mixed with plagiarized verses from the Torah, Gospels and Arab pagan prayers.

The Christians are clearly warned here to believe in the Allah, not to engage in the idolatrous practice of worshipping the Trinity, and not to question Koranic inconsistency, such as abrogation, or new verses replacing old ones [the Satanic verses are a clear example of this].

Muhammad's illiteracy about Judaism and Christianity is obvious and enormous. A simple example is this claim that Jews and Christians are doomed to hell since the two sects cannot agree on the meaning of the same 'book'. This is ridiculous. In Christiant theology the Old Testament predicts the New, with the 39 books of the Old Testament supporting and confirming the 27 books of the New Testament. Jews focus on the Torah and Old Testament, Christians in the 7^th century, on the entire corpus of 66 books, with the end of prophecy being the life, death and resurrection of Christ. Demanding that a Christian stop worshipping the Trinity is similar to demanding a rejection of imbibing water and food.

The above is obviously incorrect. Jews and Christians do not state that the other 'follows nothing'. They worship different ideals and 'proofs'. Christians embrace the Old Testament. They don't regard it as 'nothing'.

The main ideal of this Sura is found in the following verses, where Muhammad demands that Christians and Jews worship himself and Al-Lah and discontinue their polytheistic, pagan practices.

If Jews and Christians reject Muhammad, 'the plain warner' they are going to hell. Period. Islam is the only 'truth' and replaces the Torah and gospels [2:119]. Al-Lah cannot produce a son, and cannot be a part of a Trinity [2:116]. Al-Lah simply does what he wants [2:117] and will tell you what to do. Jews and Christians should give up their erroneous ways and embrace Muhammadanism:

The above is important. Al-Lah is telling the most important human in history, Muhammad, that the Jews and Christians will never willingly convert to Islam or the cult of Muhammad. This sets the stage for the next development of Christianophobia within Sura 2 – the call to Jihad against the polytheistic Trinity worshippers, a theme which takes up a lot of ink in the book Recital, one supposedly dedicated to peace and love.

Christianophobia within Sura 2 verses 1:120: 39 or 33 %

  4-7, 9-10, 13-20, 23-24, 27-28, 41-42, 62, 64-65, 89-90, 95-96, 105, 108-109, 111-116, 118-120

 =======

Sura 2 and Slavery. All Muslims are slaves to the Al Lah and its will.

No free-will in Muhammadanism.

Sunday, January 21, 2024 by Ferdinand III
Full Article

Sura 2 is the longest Sura in Mohammed's totalitarian charter named the Koran or 'Recital'. Recite, memorize, obey.  Good Moslems need to accept the existence of being a 'slave', a slave to the Al-Lah (celestial or moon deity of Mecca) and of course Muhammad himself, the only spokesman for the Al Lah and the last of the prophets.

How liberating.  Or not.

A religion by definition frees the mind, the body, the spirit and invokes rationality in the construction of social and ethical programs.

Not so with the Koran.  Just shut up and follow the great man Muhammad.  Free-will?  That would be tainted with the ideas of white privilege.  Dispense with that civilizational racism already.  All cultures are relative.  Protagoras and the pre-Socratic sophist philosophers said so.

The use of the nouns, slave or slaves, runs throughout the width and breadth of the Koran.  There are about 420 pages in the Koran.  The plural 'slaves' appears on 226 of them and 'slave' singular, is cited on 109 pages.  Together 'slave' and 'slaves' are found in 335 pages or about 80% of the Koran.  At the verse level these terms comprise 5% of the verses out the Koranic total of 6236.  It does appear that this Al-Lah thing, idol, Hub'al, Muhammad, is rather preoccupied with slavery.  

Witness the ravings in Sura 2 about slaves usually married with violence against the hated Unbelievers:

002:090 URL  How bad is that for which they have sold their ownselves, that they should disbelieve in that which Allah has revealed (the Qur'an), grudging that Allah should reveal of His Grace unto whom He will of His slaves.  So they have drawn on themselves wrath upon wrath. And for the disbelievers, there is disgracing torment.

All humans are just slaves of Al Lah.  Those who disbelieve or who commit ‘shirk’ namely a less than enthusiastic piety or outright ‘rebellion’ against the Al Lah are doomed to hell. 

002:186 URL   And when My slaves ask you (O Muhammad SAW) concerning Me, then (answer them), I am indeed near (to them by My Knowledge). I respond to the invocations of the supplicant when he calls on Me (without any mediator or intercessor). So let them obey Me and believe in Me, so that they may be led aright.

002:207URL  And of mankind is he who would sell himself, seeking the Pleasure of Allah. And Allah is full of Kindness to (His) slaves.

Muhammad is referenced as the penultimate slave of course with the usual and rather idiotic refrain 'peace be upon him', whenever his hallowed name is invoked.  This for a man who slaughtered, butchered, murdered, slave-traded, erected so to speak a large personal harem, and died fat and covered in gold, poisoned, or strangled [or both] by his own men.  

For the Al Lah, Muhammad is the slave prima inter pares.

002:023 URL    And if you (Arab pagans, Jews, and Christians) are in doubt concerning that which We have sent down (i.e. the Qur'an) to Our slave (Muhammad Peace be upon him), then produce a Surah (chapter) of the like thereof and call your witnesses (supporters and helpers) besides Allah, if you are truthful.

The above Sura is interesting.  The Jews, Christians and other pagans living in Arabia, knew that Muhammad was a fraud.  The endless miracles of Christ were still fresh in the cultural memory.  Show us a miracle of healing or resurrection would be the cry against Muhammad.  The Al Lah responds through Muhammad that the Koran itself is the greatest of all miracles.  It is a weak and disconsolate rejoinder. 

2:221 states a Muslim slave is superior to a non-Muslim.  Being a beaten, subjected and debased human who is purportedly Muhammadan is superior to a free-thinking, independent non-Muslim.

002:221 URL    And do not marry Al-Mushrikat (idolatresses, etc.) till they believe (worship Allah Alone). And indeed a slave woman who believes is better than a (free) Mushrikah (idolatress, etc.), even though she pleases you. And give not (your daughters) in marriage to Al-Mushrikun till they believe (in Allah Alone) and verily, a believing slave is better than a (free) Mushrik (idolater, etc.), even though he pleases you. Those (Al-Mushrikun) invite you to the Fire, but Allah invites (you) to Paradise and Forgiveness by His Leave, and makes His Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) clear to mankind that they may remember.

In a similar vein in 2:177 we see a reference to freeing slaves – as long as they join the cult of course.  One of Muhammad's first converts was his personal black slave. Islam is famously racist, with those entering hell possessing 'black faces' and Kaffir originally designating a black slave – one of the lowliest life forms in the Moslem hierarchy. Free your slaves to join the cult of Al-Lah, and your 'Lord' will be pleased, as long as you know that you must fight for him or it:

002:177 URL    It is not Al-Birr (piety, righteousness, and each and every act of obedience to Allah, etc.) that you turn your faces towards east and (or) west (in prayers); but Al-Birr is (the quality of) the one who believes in Allah, the Last Day, the Angels, the Book, the Prophets and gives his wealth, in spite of love for it, to the kinsfolk, to the orphans, and to Al-Masakin (the poor), and to the wayfarer, and to those who ask, and to set slaves free, performs As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and gives the Zakat, and who fulfill their covenant when they make it, and who are As-Sabirin (the patient ones, etc.) in extreme poverty and ailment (disease) and at the time of fighting (during the battles). Such are the people of the truth and they are Al-Muttaqun (pious - see V.2:2).

So, slavery is the new freedom in the Koran.  Free yourself by submitting to Al-Lah and Muhammad!  Then all the blessings of the Meccan moon deity will be bestowed upon your person in the male-Moslem heaven, with eternal delights to occupy your time. The Koran has nothing to say about what female Moslem 'slaves' will get from the Al-Lah thing.

In Moslem jurisprudence the Koranic 'legal' ideal of an eye for an eye, is usually followed and believed by the more pious.  If you commit a crime against a Moslem's slave than he has a right to commit a similar action against your slave.  This 'Law of equality in punishment' is a pre-iron age code, which historically can be traced far beyond the Babylonian times of 1700 B.C.  It is crude and not a program of jurisprudence but one of simplistic reciprocation.  Today of course the relativists accept this rather banal code as an alternative form of 'justice' embedded in the various implementation of Sharia or Koranic 'law'.

002:178 URL    O you who believe! Al-Qisas (the Law of Equality in punishment) is prescribed for you in case of murder: the free for the free, the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. But if the killer is forgiven by the brother (or the relatives, etc.) of the killed against blood money, then adhering to it with fairness and payment of the blood money, to the heir should be made in fairness. This is an alleviation and a mercy from your Lord. So after this whoever transgresses the limits (i.e. kills the killer after taking the blood money), he shall have a painful torment.

Slavery was and is rife within Islam. The Islamic irruptions were in large measure the attack on sophisticated civilizations by barbarous desert peoples seeking wealth, booty, women and manufactured products.  Slavery is accepted as a de-facto part of existence within Islam.  Sex enslavement of white women, millions of whom were taken over 1400 years to populate harems and households were a driving factor in the Musulman Jihad.  It is rather curious then, that a cult focused on pre-modern slavery and its attendant immorality, is deemed to be a religion.  

For the record Muslims and Blacks still own millions of slaves today in East and Central Africa. 

The Slaughter of the Christian innocents in Nigeria. No one cares.

Including the Churches. Not a single sermon against the massacres.

Sunday, January 14, 2024 by Ferdinand III
Full Article

Beginning on the evening of December 23 and continuing till the morning of Christmas Day, Fulani Islamist militia groups systematically slaughtered scores of Christians in co-ordinated attacks in two districts of Plateau State, in Nigeria’s predominantly Muslim Middle Belt. The dead were mostly women and children, and included a number of physically challenged individuals who were unable to run and who were therefore burnt alive.

Statistics gathered by Barnabas Fund have set the total death figure at nearly 300, the worst anti-Christian violence seen in Nigeria in years.

The carnage was unimaginable. Some 25 remote and widely scattered villages were targeted. In total more than 1,500 homes were burnt, eight churches destroyed, many hundreds of people injured and 30,000 displaced. This was one of the darkest days in recent Nigerian history.

Witnesses said that it took up to 12 hours after the attacks started for help to arrive. A former Nigerian chief of army staff said this was because government troops were working alongside the attackers. A number of others were killed in other northern Nigerian states during the same Christmas season.

Most of us did not hear about the more recent massacre until well after Christmas Day, and many of us not till after New Year’s Day, the main reason being that it received next to no coverage in the British mainstream media.

The Guardian was one of the few UK newspapers that reported on the mass killings. However, like almost all other secular news media that bothered to pick up on the story, it failed to note that the victims were mainly Christians.

The absence of television coverage has been more notable still. Major channels like ITV, Sky and Channel 4 failed to notify its viewers concerning the massacre. As did the BBC, who, while living up to its policy of almost never covering Islamic attacks against Nigerian Christians on its television news broadcasts, might at least have been expected to include a short report in its online news forum, if only for the purpose of counteracting anyone daring to raise a complaint for non-coverage.

The Guardian, like Reuters and the German newspaper Die Zeit, partially blamed climate change for the murders, stating that ‘Competition for natural resources between nomadic herders and farmers, intensified by rapid population growth and climate pressures, has exacerbated social tensions and sparked violence.’

But those with a deeper understanding of the Nigeria scenario insist the timing had clear religious undertones. Attacks against Christians during major celebrations such as Christmas and Easter are not uncommon in northern Nigeria. The chairman for the Plateau chapter of the Christian Association of Nigeria said the assailants sent letters to the villages in advance, warning them they ‘will not celebrate Christmas, but run away with their rice’. He expressed surprise that security was not able to act on such prior warning.

The chairman of the Para-Mallam Peace Foundation also expressed exasperation with secular explanations. ‘A terrible genocide is taking place in Plateau State, but it is being window-dressed to look like a clash between farmers and herders,’ he said. ‘Sadly, false and misleading narratives are created while rivers of blood continue to flow.’

A Roman Catholic priest who heads a charity helping Christians start small businesses in areas where they have been heavily persecuted, mainly by Muslims, said that blaming the attacks on climate change ‘is the narrative of the post-Christian globalist West. How could they dare admit there is a genocide going on in Nigeria perpetrated by Muslims against Christians—it would demand action.’

The recent atrocities follow a number of other mass killings over the past two years in Nigeria. Across the Middle Belt, at least 2,600 people were killed in 2021 alone. It is estimated that in the last 14 years, more than 52,000 Christians have been murdered in Nigeria because of their faith.

In addition to murders, a recent report claims that as many as five million Christians in Nigeria have been displaced or moved to internal refugee camps within the country and at least 18,000 churches across the country have been set on fire, along with over 2,200 Christian schools.

If such widespread slaughter were being perpetuated against any other religious or ethnic minority in the world – especially a Muslim minority – one might expect widespread media alarm and news coverage. It is of course, a different story when Christians are the victims, and especially so when Muslims are the perpetrators. Then it becomes a politically incorrect incident the world conveniently prefers to ignore. A curious blend of media muteness, disinformation and communication censorship.

Update January 10, 2024

Tragically, the brutal massacre of Christians that started at Christmas has carried over into the new year. Over the past couple of weeks, the slaughter of Christians in Nigeria has been an almost daily occurrence. Yet still the world fails to acknowledge this heinous massacre.

Sura 2 or ‘The Heifer’ and Christophobia.

Mein Koran is more Christophobic than it is anti-Semitic.

Sunday, January 7, 2024 by Ferdinand III
Full Article

In the unlikely event that a Westerner will bother to read Mein Koran to find out what the cult of Muhammad is all about, we can list some vehement anti-Christian or Christophobic verses contained in this unholy book and chapter 2 including: 146, 159, 161-163, 174-176, 190-191, 193, 212, 216, 217, 221, 244, 256-258, 272, 274, 276, 286.  Some 15-20% of this chapter or Sura is decidedly Christophobic.  The rest is the usual incantation to conquer, dominate, enslave, control and Jihad.

·       A general analysis of Sura 2 is here. 

·       Robert Spencer’s book on the Koran and an analysis of Sura 2 is here.

·       Sura 2 hate speech is here.

·       Sura 2 and its advocation of slavery (including the enslavement of Christians and Females) is here.

·       Examples of Jihad within Sura 2 is here.

Within ‘The Heifer’ the famous verse of 256 is displayed.  It is this tortured verse which provides almost all the standard bromides used by Muhammadan apologists to excuse the ‘real Islam’ from the ‘extremist Islam’.  The Koran is the Koran.  There is no light, moderate or extremist version of Mein Koran.  It says what it says.  Have a look at verse 256 and see what it really states:

There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path.  Whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower.

The Muslimophiles and ignoramuses only quote this fragment, ‘There is no compulsion in religion’.  This is used when Muhammad’s cult is weak.  ‘Don’t compel me to accept your religion or paganism’ the Muslim pleads, as Muhammad did in Mecca when his cult of miscreants and deviants were confronted by the ruling elite of Mecca and told to halt their activities which were hurting trade and pilgrimages to the Kaaba or shrine of celestial idols worshipped by Arabs including the moon deity or the Al ilah or Lord of Mecca (Hu’baal). 

But read on.  The right path, i.e. the Muslim or Muhammadan path is obviously the only way to go.  Whoever disbelieves the Taghut or the pagan worship of other idols, and embraces the Al Lah of Mecca or Muhammad’s family idol Baal, will be blessed and exalted.  This includes Christians who worship the Trinity which is viewed as a blasphemy and a polytheism (see Sura 13) by Muhammadans.  Christ is not divine in the Koran; he is just another prophet and one who apparently was a Moslem, prophesising the rise of Muhammad.  Yes, the Koran is that illiterate. 

The above verse 256, is therefore not a statement of tolerance but the exact opposite.  But if not exhausted by reading one verse and not pressed for time to return to Tik Tok and Instagram, the curious reader may bravely sally into the next verse, 257.

Allah is the Wali (Protector or Guardian) of those who believe. He brings them out from darkness into light. But as for those who disbelieve, their Auliya (supporters and helpers) are Taghut [false deities and false leaders, etc.], they bring them out from light into darkness. Those are the dwellers of the Fire, and they will abide therein forever.

Not much tolerance in that verse.  If you are ‘Taghut’ or a follower of any other ideology, other than Muhammadanism, including being a Christian or Jew, you will dwell in hell-fire forever.  If not exhausted and demoralised by reading two verses the intrepid thought-crime committer can continue to verse 258 and be told that Abraham or Ibrahim, the patriarch of the Hebrews was of course a practicing Muslim, some 2600 years before the cult of Muhammad was conceived.  Such a demented, distorted world-view is apparently entirely rational for a believing Koranian.   

Have you not looked at him who disputed with Ibrahim (Abraham) about his Lord (Allah), because Allah had given him the kingdom? When Ibrahim (Abraham) said (to him): "My Lord (Allah) is He Who gives life and causes death." He said, "I give life and cause death." Ibrahim (Abraham) said, "Verily! Allah causes the sun to rise from the east; then cause it you to rise from the west."  So the disbeliever was utterly defeated. And Allah guides not the people, who are Zalimun (wrong-doers, etc.).

So here we have the madness of Mein Koran.  Abraham, Christ, all the prophets and even Christian saints and apostles, were Muslim.  Contemporary Christians who do not accept this and who reject the Muhammadan cult and who believe in Taghut, are ‘Zalimun’ defined by Mein Koran as criminal polytheists who are evil and unclean.  Zalimun must be destroyed.  That is what this book states.  The insanity and intolerance do dazzle. 

The Christophobia in Mein Koran is an obsessive theme.  This hatred of the Christian was and still is an animating force for Muslim expansion, and imperialism, both inside Western states who were once nominally Christian and inside Muslim states who do not tolerate Christianity and do not allow its evangelisation or spread.  The book is the problem.  The hatred of Christians is the problem.  Tolerance indeed.