The Budding of Christian Nationalism?

“The supposed Christian nationalists of today might confess a syncretic folk Christianity, but catechized and committed Christian churchmen devoted to systematically creating a substantive Christian state they certainly are not.”

Miles Smith
American Conservative Article

This is true but it does not prove what Smith is trying to prove to wit; that there really is little Christian Nationalism going on in America. All this proves is that Christian Nationalism is being expressed by people who would be better serving in the rank and file and not as the leadership.

The problem that Christian Nationalism has had, at least since the Tea Party phenomenon began, is that the rank and file are longing for this renewed Christian Nationalism but there have been no learned Christian leaders (a Cromwell or even a Burke) arise to fill that vacuum. God has provided that thirst for Christian Nationalism but he has not yet provided the catechized and committed Christian churchmen devoted to systematically creating a substantive Christian state. So, contra Smith, the problem is not an absent Nationalism. The problem is an absent leadership that can channel all this rank and file energy into something systematic and organized.

Out in America hinterlands, there is a brewing resistance to Leviathan and Babel that is grounded in something like Christian Nationalism. The problem is that there are no leaders to organize these disparate elements and fuse them into a coherent movement. It is the hope of Iron Ink to represent a stream of that movement–a small portion perhaps, but one that is potentially outsized in terms of its influence.  Further, it is the hope of Iron Ink that it will be a worthy shield upon which the wrath that represents the fear of grassroots Christian Nationalism will fall.

Rev. McAtee contra “Rev.” Royston & “Rev.” Shaver

“I know who he (McAtee) is but I don’t really know him. I don’t know his reason for not being with us (for our community Pastor’s meetings).”

Rev. Randy Royston
New Hope Community Church
Charlotte, Michigan
As appearing in a small regional subscription starved newspaper

Let me help you out Randy. I don’t attend your “Pastor Meetings” or your “Evangelical” Church gatherings because I don’t consort with Pentecostals, Arminians, and the generic clueless brigade. It is a stretch for me even to dance with Lutherans though for some of them I can at least learn the steps. I don’t consort with you and yours because it is my conviction that you people are almost the neediest of having a clue of what Biblical Christianity is.

You wouldn’t want me in your groups for the same reason that a fluffle of rabbits wouldn’t want an owl, eagle or hawk, gathering with them for “prayer and share.”

The small regional newspaper went on to quote another General in the clueless clergy corps;

Andy Shaver, lead pastor at Real Life Church in Charlotte, said white supremacy has no place in a church.

“I don’t think it’s okay for people in the community to get the idea that white supremacy is something the church stands for or even should stand for,” Shaver said.

“Listen friends,” he wrote on Facebook on Feb. 2, a day after the Southern Poverty Law Center released its annual hate map. “The Real Church of King Jesus stands for Christ and not a color. Any man that says otherwise is not a man of God. As a Pastor myself I boldly declare: White supremacy is not of God. The Bible does not support it, I condemn it, we will not allow it!”

Shaver said he’s not condemning McAtee, but he is condemning his viewpoint.

“That is not what the church stands for,” he said. “We don’t get to decide what the church stands for.”

Now Andy… I’m going to use small words so you can follow along at your own pace.

1.) Certainly, white supremacy as a doctrine that seeks to oppress other Christians from other people groups has no place in the Church. But then Andy I never said it did. I dare you to find any place where I said white supremacy has a place in the Church. You can’t. As such you are slandering and libeling me for insinuating that I did say it. But I’m not surprised by that Andy given your “abilities.”

2.) Andy Shaver couldn’t identify a “man of God” if Michael, Gabriel, and every Arc-Angel ever created came and tap-danced on his nose while he slept.

3.) A real man of God stands for God’s people as they are collected as belonging to any people group when there is an ongoing attempt to villainize and eventually genocide that people group. So a Christian minister who is ministering to White Christians will do everything in his power to protect White Christians from the attack of the enemy, whether that attack comes from useful idiots who don’t understand what it is we are facing. Right now there is an ongoing attempt to snuff out Christianity as it exists among the orthodox white community. A Christian minister must stand against that and against other ministers who are clueless.

Charlotte Christ the King Reformed Church Plays David to the SPLC, NPR, & Regional Newspaper Goliath Brothers

“The (SPLC) center has labeled Christ the King Reformed Church as “white nationalist,” which describes groups that “espouse white supremacist or white separatist ideologies, often focusing on the alleged inferiority of nonwhites,” according to the center’s website.”
Subscription starved small regional Newspaper
Actually, it would be more accurate to say that I am a white Christian nationalist. I do believe that Christian convictions when incarnated into a people and then their social order leads to peoples and cultures that are superior. If I think white people are superior it certainly is not because I think they are made of better dirt. If I think white people are superior it would only be because God in His grace chose White people to be His appointed civilizational vehicle to be perfumed with Christ. I have never spoken about the inferiority of non-whites without at the same time speaking of the inferiority of white people. Indeed, I wish I had a nickel for every time I’ve said that “white people are the stupidest thing on two legs” as demonstrated by their rebellion against the God of the Bible who has so richly provided and protected them through the centuries. So, I’m an equal opportunity basher of the inferiorities of all peoples, races, and cultures. What the SPLC doesn’t like is the sin of noticing the weaknesses of any culture that isn’t white.
I am not shy to say I am a white Christian nationalist if by white Christian nationalist one means what the founders wrote so long ago. Stuff like;
“Providence has been pleased to give us this one connected country to one united people, a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principle of government, very similar in manners and customs, without which a common and free government would be impossible.
John Jay
Federalist Papers
This same spirit lived on into the 20th century as seen by the words of President John Calvin Coolidge;
“There are racial considerations too grave to brushed aside for any sentimental reasons. Biological laws tell us that certain divergent people will not mix or blend. The Nordics propagate themselves successfully, With other races, the outcome shows deterioration on both sides. Quality of mind and body suggests that observance of ethnic law is as great a necessity to a nation as immigration law.”
John Calvin Coolidge
President of USA
In the end what other options are there? Shall I embrace some form of cosmopolitan Internationalism such as is seen in different flavors of Marxism? Shall I embrace some form of anarchy — a government that serves as the chrysalises from which the moth of Tyranny is born? Shall I embrace some form of Empire — a system that is universally oppressive? The only choice for social order organization that a white Christian has is some form of Christian white Nationalism. Just as the only choice for social order organization for any people and/or people group is a Christian nationalism manned by their people/ people group. Certainly, the continued growth of the Frankenstein that is WeiMerica (Weimar + America) is proof positive that multiculturalism can’t work apart from a totalitarianism that pins us all together with and by the bayonet. 
The SPLC is a Marxist organization and as a Marxist organization, their preference is going to be some kind of cosmopolitan Internationalism. But all Christians are taught by their faith to hate such an arrangement.
And so the SPLC as Goliath hates on the tiny David of Churches — Christ the King Reformed Church.

Being “Kind” to the Barefaced Barbarians?

“The timid civilized world has found nothing with which to oppose the onslaught of a sudden revival of barefaced barbarity, other than concessions and smiles.”

Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, Anne Applebaum (2007). “The Gulag Archipelago Volume 2: An Experiment in Literary Investigation”, Harper Perennial Modern Classics

Recently, I was part of a discussion which found as its theme the necessity to be kind in our speech regardless of what is being faced. Of course the point I kept trying to make is that the issue of kindness is not singular but multifaceted. For example, if I am speaking kindly to someone who is advocating the pursuit of egalitarianism I am at the same time, by default, speaking unkindly to those who will suffer underneath the boot of egalitarianism. A timid defense of patriarchy as God’s designed social order pursued out of a misplaced desire to be kind is at the same time to act unkindly towards God, His truth, and those who will be trodden down by our insistence on “kindness.”

Secondly, keep in mind that no matter how kind we are in disagreeing with the barefaced barbarians they are going still going to run screaming from the conversation that we were “not nice,” and were “unkind.” It is the nature of the current enemy to insist that all disagreement with them is, at the very least, a microaggression that leaves them feeling “triggered.” There is no amount of kindness that can be extended to these bare-faced barbarians which is not going to be turned into “oppression” in their minds. So, if we are going to be accused no matter what of being “unkind,” and of “microaggression,”  then we might as well, as they say, “get our money’s worth.”

Solzhenitsyn’s complaint captures my point. Here we are in the beginning throes of civilizational war, indeed right upon the cusp of when the hot war will soon start — a war that is against the God of the Bible’s order and structure — and we have people whose chief concern is being kind in conversation to the imps and demons who are seeking to claw down civilization and ultimately tear down Christ from His throne. This is misplaced timidity against the onslaught of a long-brewing revival of bare-faced barbarity. This is to add concern for being nice to Solzhenitsyn’s concessions and smiles.

Ecclesiastes teaches;

3. A time to kill,
And a time to heal;
A time to break down,
And a time to build up;

A time to love,
And a time to hate;
A time of war,
And a time of peace.

There is a time for unkind words to God’s enemies precisely as a means of being kind to God’s friends. Barefaced barbarity is not going to be halted by “please,” and “thank you.” Indeed, barefaced barbarity is not going to be halted by direct words directly spoken. However, direct words directly spoken to the barefaced barbarians who are God’s enemies will put them on notice that they will not conquer without resistance. Direct words directly spoken also may be a means by which God’s friends take heart and find their own courage to rise above ungodly “niceness,” and so speak the truth to the barefaced barbarians.

I should end with a codicil. This is not a call for insensitivity. Nor is it a call for being mean. It simply is a recognition that at this point in the fall of Western Civilization we have far greater things to worry about then being kind to the barefaced barbarians who would if they could, put us in re-education camps.

God, Duty, & Inferiors and Superiors

Eliminate the God of the Bible from your reasoning and obviously, you have eliminated all your duties to that God. However, there is more than that you have eliminated. Eliminate the God of the Bible from your reasoning and you have eliminated at the same time any notion of a transcendent order that requires your duty to any earthly relationship. If there is no God and so no duty to God there is no such thing as superiors and inferiors at all except as they are arbitrarily created and insisted upon. Such arbitrariness holds no obligation for those who would prefer their own arbitrariness to be followed and enforced. If there is no God and so no duty to God there is no absolute duty to parents, elders, teachers, or magistrates. The elimination of God requires the eventual embrace of either anarchism or its child, arbitrary totalitarianism.

The elimination of God and hence our duty to God requires several new obligations of duty;

First, we eliminate the whole category of superiors and inferiors. If there is no superior transcendent being then there exist no superior temporal beings except by way of arbitrary convention. Getting rid of God from our thinking means evaporating the whole notion of superior and inferior.

Second, we have a duty to eliminate all relationships that once required duty. Hence what follows is the vision of the equalitarian order where no man owes any other man anything because all are the same. If duty exists at all it is the duty to eliminate people who insist that the God of the Bible is and as such duty to His order is our duty.

Apart from God, one arrives at the social order we are pursuing. Apart from the God of the Bible and the whole transcendent anchored idea of duty to superiors and inferiors what ends is the duty of genders to one another, the duty of youth and aged one to another, the duty of superior races and inferior races to one another, the duty of students and teachers to one another, the duty of Masters and slaves to one another. Apart from God, one reaches the social order of the beehive and the anthill.