Fletcher points out that “[t]he Anglo-Saxon ascendancy lost ground not only to post-war migrants but also to the large Irish minority whose social status rose”. Interestingly, in the Federation era, McGregor notes that the Irish had been “resistant to comprehensive Anglicisation” while remaining “generally receptive to the myth of Britishness”.208 But since the Sixties, the Irish have played a militant role in the rise of the Australian republican movement. In 1999 a referendum was held to determine whether Australia should sever its constitutional ties to the British monarchy to become a republic. Leftists were pleased to see that non-British migrants joined Irish-Australians in lending disproportionate support to the Yes vote.209 Fully forty-five percent of the vote favoured a republic.
By that time, of course, the Anglican Church no longer viewed the survival of British-Australia as a vital theological issue. Indeed, by the Eighties, Anglican leaders were determined to avoid the perceived “dangers of remaining tied too exclusively to their heritage”. Accordingly, Bishop Reid of Sydney expressed fears in 1983 that “in another generation Anglicans will be seen as an Anglo-Saxon sect”. Rather than become an ethno-religious ghetto for “White Australian Anglo-Saxon Anglicans,” the Anglican Church chose to fashion “a new and dynamic national church” open to people of any and all races and ethnicities.210
British-Australia is clearly down but it has not yet been counted out. Both the monarchy and the church can once again help to revive the fortunes of the Anglo-Saxon race.
A Postmodern Pan-Angle Confederation?
It has taken Anglo-Saxon Protestants hundreds of years to dig themselves into the black hole now inhabited by the invisible race. It will take at least a century to climb out again. During the New Dark Age looming ahead of us, the political, cultural, and economic landscape of the world will be transformed utterly.
The gargantuan, impossibly complex structures of corporate neo-communism are likely to fail. In the long emergency which follows any such collapse, the search for resilient communities will foster a new tribalism.211
The monarchy and the church — which together created the English nation over a thousand years ago — will be the essential medium for the postmodern rebirth of the Anglo-Saxon race. Anglo-Saxon Protestants must shed the bad habit of looking to the corporate welfare state to preserve and protect their collective identity. The modern state has been captured by the cosmopolitan elites presiding over the globalist system of corporate neo-communism.
Sooner or later, the time will come when Anglo-Saxon Protestants in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and even the UK recognize that their collective interests can best be served by detaching or disestablishing both the monarchy and the church from the state apparatus.
Anglo-Saxon Protestants in the old British dominions need not fear the advent of republican constitutions. The British monarch will remain the head of the Anglican Church throughout the diaspora. Outside and apart from the state, a Christian King will serve as defender of the ancient blood faith of the Anglo-Saxon race. A postmodern confederation of Anglo-Saxon Protestant tribes acknowledging allegiance to a new-modelled British monarchy will become the stateless incarnation of the Pan-Angle union imagined by men such as Sinclair Kennedy in the early twentieth century.
According to Montesquieu, honour is the generative principle of monarchy.212 By honouring selected subjects, by conferring upon them ranks, titles, and pre-eminences denied to others not so favoured, a king can regenerate an Anglo-Saxon aristocracy. In an earlier book, I have tried to show how an aristocracy might thus be reinvented in the least expected area of corporate governance.213
It may seem far-fetched to suggest that through the Anglican church in England, Australia, and even in America the Holy Spirit will once again irradiate the Anglo-Saxon Volksgeist. But Anglo-Saxon Christians of the early twentieth century certainly never expected to see their island race laid low by the dregs of the Third World now flooding into their homelands.
Who is to say that we are not on the cusp of a new Golden Age in which Anglo-Saxon Christian tribes unite to serve the King while the King serves God? The rebirth of Christian nationalism may well become an adaptive response to the crisis facing Anglo-Saxon Protestants over the next century.
Anglo-Saxon Christian Nationalism
White nationalists frequently blame Christianity for the universalist drive to transcend the biocultural realities of race and ethnicity. But that is not the whole story.
No one can deny, of course, that “[e]arly Christianity was committed to universal, values,” if only because it sought very consciously to transcend Jewish national particularism. But, as Adrian Hastings points out, the spiritual vision of a heavenly, new Jerusalem “could not negate an equally pervasive quality of incarnatedness, rather it reinforced it”. As one second century writer put it, the body, the flesh, might “hate the soul…all the same the soul loves the flesh”. Moreover, Hastings adds, that “Pentecost thus established a program which was both universal and particularist, providing full justification for translation of the scriptures and rites of the Church into any and every language”.214
This program was in accordance with Christ’s Great Commission (Matthew 28:19) “to go and make disciples of all nations”. In the course of his own mission to the gentiles, Paul explained that God made “every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings, so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each of us” (Acts 17: 26–27). Historians have demonstrated that the “evolution of English and other national identities in the Middle Ages” owed an enormous “debt to specifically biblical and Christian influences.” The strong particularist loyalties which came to dominate Europe challenged “the universalist vision of Christian society which had hitherto shaped” the European mind, but they “were themselves a product of Christianity”.215
Hastings affirms that the “forces within Christianity and society encouraging the rise of nations and nationalism were at work within every ecclesiastical tradition and almost every part of Europe”.216 For much of the twentieth century, however, the forces of Christian universalism rose into prominence once again. In the wake of two destructive world wars, both Catholics and mainline Protestants began to view the forces of nationalism as a blight on Christian civilization. Hastings concludes, however, that “a false universalism is now an even greater threat, a succumbing to the globalization, economic, cultural, and political, sweeping the world under the pressure of capitalism and American military dominance”.217 Effective resistance to the crassly commercial cosmopolitanism of corporate neo-communism will emerge when the particularistic Volksgeist of Christian nations incarnates the ecumenical spirit of the holy, catholic, and apostolic church, each in its own manner.
Marooned in their propositional republic, American WASPs are fixated on the universalistic ideal of Christian charity. Such pathological altruism has suppressed the particularistic principle of honour — a traditional manifestation of the love of God found deep in the heart of the European nobility. The divinely-ordained mission of both the British monarchy and the Anglican Church, therefore, must be to promote a Christian way of life grounded in what Edmund Burke called “the charity of honour”.
Conclusion
A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Partly-inbred and relatively large in numbers WASPs may be, but they are also a hopelessly dysfunctional extended family. Without a healthy racial consciousness to prevent further self-harm, dishonourable WASPs remain a threat to the restored unity of European Christendom.
Anglo-Saxon Protestant men of honour will not remain an invisible race. A postmodern Christian ethno-theology will foster the spiritual rebirth, or palingenesis, of the Anglo-Saxon race. Nowhere is that regenerative mission more urgent than amidst the decaying ruins of the American Republic.
A new age will have dawned when Jared Taylor�
��s Anglo-American kin-folk join Anglo-Australians to sing “God Save the King.”
6: Looking Backward: The Bible as the Word of God
Part One: Initial Thoughts
Introduction
In late 2012, I decided to appeal my long-delayed pass (PS) grade in THL106 Introduction to New Testament Studies — one of the courses I took in second semester 2011 at United Theological College (UTC) before I was suspended for expressing views deemed to be “offensive” to female and ethnic students.
Readers will recall that I was convicted of blasphemy in an inquisition lasting almost a year. As a consequence, the guardians of the academic cult of the Other barred me from UTC classrooms for the whole of 2012.
Adding insult to injury, the College endlessly procrastinated before posting my final grade in THL106. Repeated enquiries regarding the delay were ignored by both the course coordinator and the College Principal. It was over a year after I handed in the final assignment that I finally discovered that I had been given a bare pass (PS).
Up to at least mid-year, the grade was still listed as pending on my transcript. Sometime between then and early November, somebody somewhere entered my unit result online. I received no notification, either by letter or by email. I can’t help but see both the inordinate, unexplained delay and the derisory pass grade as part of the “hostile learning environment” custom-crafted for anyone exposing academic “anti-racism” as a genteel code word for anti-White bigotry.
With plenty of time on my hands, appealing the grade seemed well worth the effort. Especially since Charles Sturt University, the mother institution of UTC, charges only the cut-rate price of $65. The fee is not a bribe, however. Au contraire, I would get my money back — if the appeal succeeded. Of course, I’ve already had a brush with the CSU brand of politicized justice, so I was not at all confident that I would get a fair go.
But, in my own experience as a working academic, it was standard operating procedure in examiner’s meetings to query a student’s grade in one course if it seemed out-of-line with his grades in other courses. In my case, my pass grade in THL106 stands in stark contrast to the Distinction and High Distinctions I received from lecturers in other courses — awarded even after clashing with them in classes and seminars.
I can’t be sure what caused Matthew Wilson, the lecturer in THL106, to lose his academic cool. He was a casual appointment more than likely influenced by his full-time colleagues to regard me as a thought criminal both before and after I was suspended. The nature of the final assignment in THL106 provides another clue as to what may have clouded his professional judgement.
In the subject outline and in class, the lecturer made it clear that the final assignment was to be a personal statement about the central faith assertion that the Bible is the Word of God. In responding to that invitation — indeed, order — to get things off my chest, I fear I may have fed him far too much red meat.
By the end of the 2011 academic year, it had become perfectly clear to me that the multi-racial classroom at UTC is a base camp for combatants in the cultural war being waged against my people in Australia. My final essay simply applied that personal insight to my experience in the New Testament Studies classroom.
Unfortunately, after inviting me to give him my best shot, the lecturer refused to man up and take it on the chin. Instead, I believe, he took the coward’s way out: sending me a cyberspace raspberry, months after the University had already pulled me out of the ring.
As a small counter-strike in the culture wars at UTC, I launched my grade appeal into the dissident right corner of the internet. I invited readers on Richard Spencer’s first alternative right website to read the two constituent elements of my final assignment: first, my Initial Thoughts on the Bible as the Word of God; and, second, my Concluding Reflections on the Higher Criticism (i.e. the governing methodology of Bible Studies at UTC).
I asked readers to assess both pieces in the light of the guidelines for Assessment Item # 3 as excerpted below from the Subject Outline. Part One appeared first and Part Two soon followed. Having read both, readers might then, if they wish, grade the assignment out of 40.
I had already completed two assignments in the course before handing in the third essay. Each of those received a Credit grade. (I wasn’t happy about those grades either, but that’s another story). Accordingly, I had accumulated 42/60 marks already (i.e. 21/30 + 21/30). To receive a PS grade, my final assignment (which I never got back) must have received a mark somewhere in the range 8/40 to 22/40.
Readers were asked to judge for themselves whether the final essay was worth any more than 22 marks, or even as much as 8. If nothing else, the exercise provided readers with an introduction to what passes for academic theology these days.
Here are the guidelines for Assessment Item # 3 in THL106. (Immediately thereafter readers will find my first stab at thinking about the Bible as the Word of God and the lecturer’s comments on my initial thoughts):
Assessment Item # 3
Task
There are three parts to this assessment item. Each part is to be included in an essay to be submitted at the end of the semester. In this essay, you should attempt to integrate your understandings of biblical interpretation as they have developed during the semester.
V. Initial thoughts. By the end of the second week of semester, write about 500 words in which you reflect on the classic faith assertion, “The Bible is the Word of God”. The first tutorial discussion should help you to identify some of the issues which you will want to include in this section. Make it your own statement, in which you set out how you see the Bible at the start of your studies this semester, and how you currently approach the task of interpreting the Bible. You should submit this statement to the lecturer in week 3, to receive informal feedback and suggestions about issues which you may wish to “flag” for special attention during the semester.
B. Analysis of methods of interpretation. You should begin to accumulate material for this assignment from week six onwards. Then, as you come into the final weeks of the semester, you should write about 1,000 words in which you explore and analyse four methods or approaches to interpretation which have been studies in this subject. In each case, you might explore questions such as:
a. In what way(s) is this method or approach important?
b. What is positive and affirming, for you, about this method or approach?
c. What is challenging or problematic, for you, about this method or approach?
d. What questions do you have regarding this method or approach?
e. How might this method or approach be used within your cultural context? Would it cause difficulties for people within that context?
You may not be able to address every one of these questions to every one of the four methods or approaches chosen. You should exercise you [sic] discretion to highlight the questions and issues which are most significant for you, in each case.
C. Closing reflection. After you have completed the above two parts, you are ready to write a concluding section to the essay, of no more than 500 words. In this conclusion, you should comment on the initial thoughts which you wrote early in the semester, noting where your ideas have changed, been challenged, or been strengthened. This is to be a personal reflection in which you analyse your learning during the semester. In it, you might state whether there are aspects of your initial statement with which you now disagree; positions which you now hold more firmly; statements about which you have made discoveries; matters about which you have additional questions; and so on. This reflection will be assessed on evidence that indicates you have been thinking critically about your position, i.e. you have been judging, re-assessing and evaluating your thinking.
Rationale
This essay will require students to reflect on their learning during the semester and integrate material covered in the subject with their own understanding of scripture.
In the second week of semester the class discussed
the Basis of Union for the Uniting Church in Australia as a starting point for our initial reflections on the topic. I did, in fact, use section 5 of that creedal statement as the launching pad for my own argument.
The Bible as the Word of God
The Uniting Church’s understanding of the relationship between the Bible and the Word of God appears to reflect the combined impact of the Reformation and the Enlightenment: churches have become private, voluntary associations; the Old Faith has been pushed out of the public square and religious experience is confined to the private, inner life of individuals. The Bible, accordingly, is no longer the sacred charter of an ecclesiastical authority presiding over a way of life, a communion, and faith practiced in public and in private by all manner of men and women. For the Uniting Church, the Bible is merely the medium through which we hear witnesses to the Word of God, the divine Logos incarnate in Jesus Christ. Accordingly, this liberal theology no longer views the Bible as a warrant to baptize all the nations so as to expand the spiritual dominion of Christendom to the ends of the earth.
The combination of an individualist soteriology with the social gospel now characteristic of mainstream Christianity is bound up with a futurist eschatology which treats the biblical narrative as an unfinished story that will end only with the Second Coming of Christ. Moreover, given the diversity of forms and genres in the Bible, individual members of the Uniting Church are free to give more weight to the testimony of some witnesses then they do to others. Needless to say, the “traditional” Protestant attitude towards the role of tradition as an aid to understanding the Word of God complicates matters, further distancing us from the possibility of seeing the unity inherent in the story told by the Bible from Genesis to Revelation.
Dissident Dispatches Page 16
