If We Want To Defeat Islamism, We Must Recover Christianity


Forbidden. Ten years in jail. Brutal enforcement. See Islam start to recede fast in a matter of one or two decades.


I will leave the duckduckgo-ing to you, but in the last days three news have emerged: the French justice system has rejected the ban on the “burkini”. In Britain, a proposed ban on Friday prayer in jails has been abandoned. Lastly, in Germany it has been pointed out that a ban on full-face cover might trigger a ban on Father Christmas costumes (the extreme ones, which cover all the face behind a very thick fake beard). 

The reasons for this are all too obvious: taken in isolation, the Western system of freedoms opens the door very wide to an – ultimately always – aggressive Muslim invasion. Our Western democracies have no legal antibodies protecting them from the infection of Islam. The bacteria are actually invited to enter the body, in the name of freedom. 

Mind, I do think that, at some point, the body will react. When the fever breaks out in earnest, the body of Western democracies will, in fact, start to produce the necessary antibodies all right. This must be so because – as we have seen all too clearly in the past in Germany, in Spain, and in Italy with the RAF, the ETA and the Brigate Rosse respectively – European democracies have a successful record of “bending the freedoms” with overt or covert operations meant to – not to put too fine a point on it – “do what you gotta do”. I have read of these “adaptations” concerning Germany (Stammheim anyone?) and Spain (with the covert ETA killings). I have lived them directly, concerning Italy, in many ways. 

However, I do not think that this reaction will happen until a point has been reached where the pain is substantial and widespread. A pity, because there is a much simpler way to stop this cancer from exploding.

The way is to recognise the special place owned by Christianity in the West. Nay, the acknowledgment of Christianity as not only religious, but cultural matrix of the West. This special role would, without a doubt, justify a special treatment without this causing the cherished principles of freedom of expression, freedom of religion etc being imperiled.

The realm of applications would be vast: for example, it is allowed to dress as Father Christmas (thus completing covering one’s face in public) but not to wear a burka. It is allowed to wear a catholic veil on one’s head, but not a chador. It is allowed to build monumental churches,  but it is not allowed to build purpose-built mosques. It is allowed to have Sunday laws, but it is not allowed to have “Friday laws”. There are Christian public holidays, but no Muslim ones. There is no right to interrupt work for Muslim prayer times. Halal meat is forbidden because of the cruelty to the slaughtered animal.

The list is very, very long.

All this would stem, in a perfectly reasonable way, from a fundamental principle: the West recognises traditional Christian customs as its cultural blueprint, and protects them accordingly. This is what many Countries did in the past both when they had Catholicism as State Religion (Italy) or they hadn’t (the German Halal ban in the Nineties). They did this without anyone questioning their democratic credentials. They did this following one of those thinking principles which might be unspoken, but are deeply felt; that are, in fact, unspoken exactly because they are deeply felt.       

There would be no need to kick out anyone per se. But there would be need to enforce these rules whatever the noise – or worse – made by the Muslims. When enough perverts and atheists have been massacred, I think there would be a number of them actually ready to embrace this thinking without hesitation.

Also, the same rules would have to apply to every non-Christian religion: Hindu, Sikh, the whole lot.

The West is Christian. Get on with it, or leave. 

Will it happen? Again, at some point the pain will be acute enough to cause something of the sort to happen. The “cultural heritage way” would be the easiest, most peaceful, most efficient way to deal with the cancer of Islam. 

The sooner atheists understand this, the better for all of us. 




Posted on August 29, 2016, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. 4 Comments.

  1. Good thinking Mundabor. Not so sure about the return to Christianity part but certainly much pain will proceed action. My guess is that your concept will be a realized as a prohibition of any public demonstration of any religion as the natural reaction to Islam since our Christian leaders are too weak to lead the cause and courageous Christians are too few.

    • That would be more of the same disease: treating the good just like the bad. And it would mean the end of processions, public devotions etc.
      Let’s hope our elected cuckpresentatives are smarter than that.

  2. The Book of Revelation prophesizes a kind of one-world religion that relies on international economic and political power to thrive and dominate — and that opposes Christianity. Given the Catholic Church’s political ambitions and views of its role over governments throughout history, why shouldn’t it be involved with — let alone oppose — such a prophetic development?

    If you think that’s not possible, just look at Pope Benedict XVI’s encyclical, “Caritas in Veritate.”

    Moreover, just look at how many other churches have allowed themselves to be co-opted by political elites. The Russian Orthodox are in Putin’s hip pocket, just like they were under the Tzars. Mainline and liberal Protestantism has bought the “Progressive” political agenda hook, line and sinker. Evangelical Protestantism, at least in the United States, has tried to reach some sort of accommodation with the GOP for about 35 years, now. A major reason Europe is spiritually weak is the existence of “state” churches.

    The question no longer is whether Francis thinks this way; that’s obvious. The question is whether he represents a substantial segment of opinion among the College of Cardinals — at the very least.

    • I am not sure about the hip pocket, though.
      The way I see it and have read about, the close collaboration of church and state is deeply ingrained in the “Russian soul”, it is part and parcel of the way most Russians see themselves. The Orthodox do help Putin; but Putin helps them like no other in around 100 years, and helps them very powerfully to re-Christianise the country.
      Now obviously it would be best that the Country be Catholic. But I don’t have the impression the Russians see the Russian Orthodox church as “sold out”. There is a reason why the Kremlin used to be (I think still is) the seat of both the political and the religious power.


%d bloggers like this: