SSPX ethnosuicide

It is incredible the quantity of Christians in white nationalism. All of them are clueless that their religion is more evil than Judaism: as it implies ethnic treason.
These days the Christians on The Occidental Observer have been discussing traditional Catholicism in the form of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX). Although I left the below comment at the comments section, I am pretty sure they won’t pay due attention to the inherent problems in the religion of our parents—even if I manage to translate the ten volumes of Christianity’s Criminal History in the coming years!
 

______ 卐 ______

 
One Sunday during my August 2014 visit to London I visited the Drake House, where SSPX masses were held. I had to get to the last subway station in London, Wimbledon, to get closer to that house.
When I arrived at the parish I realized that it was not a common temple but a small and modest house adapted for religious services. Bishop Richard Williamson was not in London apparently. A gentleman from the London Forum whom I met on the trip had told them that someone coming from Mexico was going to visit them. The kindly people of that place that aspired to church had placed an image of the Virgin of Guadalupe in front of the community! I suspected they had put it for me, so I did not dare to tell them that I was an apostate.
When the service ended, I spoke with the head manager on days when Williamson was absent. He began to speak of the painting of the Virgin of Guadalupe as a miraculous image: just what I had heard a million times in Mexico! The traditionalist Catholics with whom I spoke at the Drake House knew who was Father Joaquín Sáenz y Arriaga. I told them that Father Sáenz had baptized me, but not that I had lost my faith. Sáenz, the priest of my family when I was a child, was also excommunicated for reasons fairly similar to Williamson’s excommunication.
I took a brochure from Drake House, ‘Our program of events’ among the propaganda booklets of the house. The brochure showed the picture of a fifty-year-old black woman on the cover. That was not all. The list of events at the Drake House included dancing from Brazilian Samba to African Dummers referring to events scheduled for mid-September. This in a city that has no longer white majority and where everywhere I saw mixed couples!
At a London Forum meeting I had heard wonders about Williamson’s anti-Semitic stance. When I met his faithful, I realized that the ultra-traditional group was ethnically as self-destructive as the ultra-liberal Argentinean pope.
So my friends [addressing TOO commenters], I must ask again: Has a Christian in this thread started to read my ongoing translations of Christianity’s Criminal History? I am doing it from the POV of white preservation of course.

14 Replies on “SSPX ethnosuicide

  1. I have heard many who do except the violence of Christianity (though they water it down to nothing much) but say that this only proves that their death cult is GOOD for the Aryan race because ‘Its might made it right’. You will find this argument everywhere on ‘pro-white’ forums.
    I am really getting sick of it.

  2. At least one commonsensical comment responding me at the TOO thread:

    César, I think that since Drake House is not actually a church, it is just a building which is rented out to several different groups including the SSPX. So the brochure is not produced by the SSPX, but the owners of the house who are advertising the other events taking place there. So it is a sign of the broader situation in that area of London rather than anything the SSPX can be blamed for.

    I’ll try to respond anyway…

  3. Cesar,
    I replied to your post on occidental observer but you never responded.
    I will expound my reply at greater length here.
    Why do you not apply your same hypothesis, which you articulate in your writings on the destruction of the Aztecs by the Christian Spanish, to the Christian defeat of European Paganism?
    In one case you make the argument that Christian Spaniards represented a more integrated psycho-class than the bicameral Aztecs who practiced human sacrifice and superstitious schizoid shamanism. You relate these types of schizoid cultures to the child abuse inherent in the practice of these religions of blood sacrifice.
    Obviously in order for such an integrated psycho-class as the European Christian to emerge and conquer the Aztecs, those same Europeans would have had to at one point in their own past overcome the aspects of bicameral minded schizoid culture present in their own early development.
    Human sacrifice, animal sacrifice, divination shamanism etc. are all aspects of pre-christian European pagan culture lasting well into the Roman Empire.
    Does not this same thesis apply in both cases?
    If the Christian Europeans, adherents a religion that ended all blood sacrifice, represented a superior and more integrated psycho-class than the Aztecs would not the the superiority of Christian Europeans over non-Christian pagans be an a priori assumption?
    Sacrifice of Vestal Virgins:
    “The most famous of the alleged examples of the dark superstition at Rome is of course that which is stated to have taken place after the battle of Cannae. Livy2 depicts a panic among the people on account of the defeats suffered at the hands of Hannibal, and of “the other portents,” especially the proved impurity of two vestals. One “sub terra, uti mos est, ante portam Collinam necata fuerat;” the other committed suicide, and a minor priest who was compromised was flogged to death in the comitium. The “Decemviri,” as they then were, had orders to consult their books, and also Fabius p38 Pictor, the annalist, was sent to Delphi to ask by what expiations the gods might be appeased, and the run of calamity stopped. Before he could return, “ex fatalibus libris sacrificia aliquot facta”; then comes a sacrifice like that attributed to 226 B.C. by Plutarch alone. It may well be asked whether he did not transfer the story of 216 to the year 226. It was thought, Livy says, that the gods were sufficiently placated by the offering, “minime Romano sacro.” These words resemble closely some used by Plutarch. ”
    http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Journals/JRS/2/Human_Sacrifices_at_Rome*.html
    Adult and Child sacrifice in the consecration of Walls:
    “A very interesting case of human sacrifice occurred in the Regal period that involved the sanctifying of the pomerium. When Servius expanded the city walls, a sacrifice was made of four individuals, buried beneath the old pomerium wall that encircled the Palatine Hill. Those bodies were only recently discovered after Carandini discovered the old Palatine pomerium wall. The four tombs included the usual ritual elements, dating to about 650 BCE. Tomb 1 was an adult male; age 30-40, with his head inclined and arms at his side. Along with him were buried two amphorae, a collana (necklace), one plate and two fibulae. Tomb 2 was a child laid in a sleeping position, along with one small amphora and two fibula. Tomb 3 was a young adult male aged 16-18, laid out like the older male. He was buried with one amphora; a large cup, two little cups, two plates, two pieces of bronze and one ring, all placed on the left side of the tomb. Tomb 4 was a female laid out in a fetal position, and oriented in a different direction from all the others. She was buried along with one amphora. These sacrifices were made because the old wall was being violated in the process of extending the pomerium with the new Servian Wall. ”
    Burying People Alive:
    “We know of three instances, recorded by Livy and Plutarch, where a ritual human sacrifice was performed at Rome. Two pairs of Gauls and Greeks, a man and a woman each, were buried alive in the Forum Boarium. The instances recorded took place in the years 228, 216 and 113 BCE. In each case these sacrifices were made in response to instructions taken from the Sibylline Books. The sacrifices seem to have been made to the Manes and Dii Inferi. ”
    http://home.scarlet.be/mauk.haemers/collegium_religionis/human_sacrifice.htm
    Exposure and Infanticide in Ancient Rome:
    http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199669431.001.0001/acprof-9780199669431-chapter-8
    Divination and Animal Sacrifice (Augury and Haruspex):
    https://books.google.com/books?id=rfPWAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA139&lpg=PA139&dq=ancient+roman+haruspex&source=bl&ots=eAmSR1lbyC&sig=CO_0HBniFO0GKJgLUn-FHuQm3UU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiGk7vz0uTYAhVV9GMKHVh6DXY4ChDoAQg1MAI#v=onepage&q=ancient%20roman%20haruspex&f=false
    Ver Sacrum (Sacrifice of everything born in the Spring, expulsion of children from society) and the Devotio (ritual sacrifice of a soldier to turn the tide of battle):
    https://books.google.com/books?id=9JJdqJ8YGH8C&pg=PA278&lpg=PA278&dq=sacrifice+everything+born+in+spring&source=bl&ots=JHk_vWNxry&sig=vrdNwJ_krgzDuQrKKUmLDjwfw2M&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiStui21OTYAhVN1WMKHYAlDl4Q6AEIOjAF#v=onepage&q=sacrifice%20everything%20born%20in%20spring&f=false
    Thank You for your Work.

    1. I wonder whether you really have read the whole of Day of Wrath, as I try to respond those issues there. (In a nutshell, the psychoclass of the Christians after Constantine was really regressive compared to the psychoclass of the Greeks in times of Pericles or the Romans in the times of Augustus.)
      And I didn’t know that you had responded at The Occidental Observer, which I even checked this morning. I’ll check again…

      1. I’ve been following your blog for maybe 4-6 months, so I have no idea if I’ve read everything you’ve written on the subject.
        Can you point me to where you address this issue specifically?
        It’s difficult for me to put this thought into words, so a clumsy attempt follows:
        I see a sort of providence in the emergence of a religion that has as it’s central facet the dogma of a final sacrifice that fulfills the metaphysical/psychic need for blood sacrifice and negates the validity for all other forms of sacrifice.
        “In a nutshell, the psychoclass of the Christians after Constantine was really regressive compared to the psychoclass of the Greeks in times of Pericles or the Romans in the times of Augustus.”
        Is the idea that there was previously a more integrated Roman psychoclass, which regressed, and was conquered by a more integrated Christian one? But that the Christian class that dominated, while better than the Roman form it came to dominate, is still less integrated than the Roman class that preceded the regression?
        Or is your argument that a superior Roman psychoclass was conquered by a regressive Christian one?
        If so does that not negate your thesis, namely that a more integrated psychoclass naturally dominates a less integrated one?
        If the Christian psychoclass was regressive why did the Roman psychoclass not maintain domination?
        Also by what criteria do you rank one above the other determining which is more integrated than the other?
        It seems to me in the final summation that natural selection decides which is superior and which is inferior and that history has already decided the case. However, I’m willing to be convinced otherwise if the argumentation and evidence is there.

      2. P.S. I posted the following at TOO, but my comment is awaiting moderation:
        Thank you for the compliment. I have responded to such kind of objections—very similar objections of what philo-Semite Lloyd deMause and one of his many Jewish pupils, Robert Godwin, say! (DeMause’s psychohistory is sort of secularised Judaeo-Christianity and somewhat anti-Greek and anti-Roman.) The response appears in my book Day of Wrath.
        For a more profound analysis of why after Constantine the West suffered a psychogenic regression from my ‘psychohistorical’ POV, see the series I linked above. The gist of our argument is even manifest in my today’s post on The West’s Darkest Hour, article 30 of ‘Apocalypse for Whites’.

      3. P.P.S. If you have not read any of the above (even the summaries), in a brief comment like this I can only compare what happened to the Greco-Roman world with what is happening today: Muslims are taking over Europe because Europeans are suffering, again, a psychotic breakdown or folie en masse—however primitive and backward the immigrant Muslins are.

    2. By the way, the first Christians were not European. They were mud bloods of the most repulsive constitution.
      C.T has shown pictures of these so called ‘European Christians’. Just look on this blog. They are there.
      You also ignore the fact that C.T commemorates the Christian Spaniards based upon a racial point of view. It was because the Spaniards were racially superior to the Aztecs that they were worthy of invading them and judging them. Not because they believed in a Judaised desert cult.

      1. That’s true, but AmericanusRex is trying to use what I say about ‘Psychohistory’, ‘psychoclasses’ and ‘psychogenesis’ to compare my POV on pre-Columbian Amerinds with what the Judaeo-Christians did to the Greco-Romans long go.
        The flaw in such criticism is shown in my comparison with today’s Muslims and the more advanced Europeans (Europeans who nowadays are mentally ill, IMO).

        1. Yes, but anyone with half a brain can tell how his argument is ridiculous.
          This line of thinking proceeds from a mind-set akin to a bacillus with cerebral palsy.