web analytics
Categories
Judeo-reductionism Real men

Are monos to blame?

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in the Jude’s eye,
but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

What I said in the previous entry has left me so upset this morning that I have been going around and around in the dining room outside my library that can barely be seen in this photo.
At this time members of my family went to the christening of one of my white cousins who, instead of getting married and reproducing as God intended, adapted a completely Indian baby. The father of that cousin, whiter than me, is one of the most conservatives of the family. But here conservative Catholicism is completely blind to issues of race.
Latin America is gone, but in my desperate pacing in the dining room for what happens in England, I thought that the monocausalists were, in part, responsible for the problem, including a regular commenter of this site (see here), who cannot even see that all the native English who are now cheering the ape wedding are guilty of high treason.
I would define strict monocausalism as the doctrine that preaches on the Internet that Jews are one hundred percent responsible for the Aryan decline, and the latter completely innocent.
It’s a psychotic doctrine, which can only end up in lots of internet sites (see my recent entry that links them all) whining and whining about the latest villainy the Juden did—not daring to move a finger to settle accounts.
On the other hand, for bicausalists like me, who blame the Aryan more for their sins (having embraced the Christian ethics and worshiping Mammon), rather than whining as girls, the natural thing would be to do something. And if direct action is a little premature this very day, as we are broke, at least prepare for war in a legal way. (For example, working hard to save precious metals that will give us more than a thousand percent of purchasing power after the dollar crashes; money to buy guns.)
But the monos don’t do any of that. They just bawl and bawl. By believing that the Jews are responsible for each and every one of our evils, instead of seeing the beam in their own eyes, they just bawl through the length and breadth of the internet because these poor whites are completely innocent!
I’ll be honest: I can no longer read The Daily Stormer and other online newspapers because, after a few months, complaining without doing anything sickens the hell out of me. There are things that cannot be discussed on the internet. Wouldn’t it be good to come together to a place to discuss what we are going to do when the system pops? Why don’t you visit Mexico City as tourists: here there’s is zero antifa because all Iberian whites that remain are castrated. They’re like my cuck relative. What’s the point of continuing to complain if you do nothing?
If white nationalists abandoned their monocausalism to convert to the true religion, Hitlerism, what happened in England and many other places would not hurt us so much. It is obvious that our enemies are going to suffer, and suffer a lot in the not too distant future.
That would boost our morale…

Categories
Aryan beauty Evil Feminized western males

Royal ape wedding

I do not want to see a single picture of this sin against the holy ghost in the media.
The level of evil of this era has no limits.
Yesterday a white nationalist complained to me by email because I blame Christianity—not wanting to see that Christianity promoted miscegenation since Constantine. Here in Latin America, the first president of Paraguay even came to prohibit marriages between Iberian whites: they had to marry an Amerindian, Negress or Mulatta. That genocidal Orwellianism will soon reach your shores!
Except for a single donor in Australia I do not receive donations precisely because I dare to tell the truth: the religion of our parents is involved to the marrow in white decline, more than Jewry itself.
There was a time decades ago when, after seeing the English women, I wanted to emigrate to England to marry one of them.
The fact that there has not been an attack today, right on the island where the Aryan woman reached its zenith in beauty, shows that the white race will perish—for sure it will perish: they have already lost their will for survival!
I have visited England several times throughout my life. Yesterday I was indulging in the fantasy to immolate myself by doing something heroic but the thought arises: I, who am not an Englishman, giving my life so that the natives themselves not only will not value the sacrifice, but put little candles to honour those who committed a sin against the holy ghost?
As horrific and bloodcurdling as it may seem for my character as a warrior, I have no choice but to continue with these exasperating translations about Christianity: what fried the brains of the white race (and white nationalists still don’t want to see).
My character is not being a writer. I would like to be that warrior I will probably never be because there are no comrades in arms left in the West.
Only faggots.

Categories
Karlheinz Deschner Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums (books) Painting Theology

Kriminalgeschichte, 66

Sant’Agostino nello studio by Vittore Carpaccio (1502)

 
‘Genius in all fields of Christian doctrine’
[Augustine] often dictated at the same time discussions to several writings: 93 works or 232 ‘books’, he says in the year 427 in his Retractationes (which critically contemplate, so to speak, his work in chronological succession), to which we must add the production of his last years of life, in addition to hundreds of letters and sermons, with which he ‘almost always’ felt dissatisfied.
The intellectual production of Augustine was overrated, particularly from the Catholic side. ‘An intellectual giant like him, only the world offers it once every thousand years’ (Görlich). Maybe from the Catholic world! However, what he calls ‘intellectual stature’ is what serves him, and what serves him is detrimental to the world.
Augustine’s existence precisely reveals it drastically. However, J.R. Palangue praises him as ‘a genius in all fields of Christian doctrine’. And Daniel-Rops goes on to say: ‘If the word genius has any meaning, it is precisely here. Of all the gifts of the spirit that can be fixed analytically, none was missing; he had all, even those that are generally considered mutually exclusive’. Who is startled by such nonsense is called malevolent, malicious, ‘a creeping soul’ (Marrou). However, even the father of the Church Jerome, although out of envy, called his colleague ‘a little latecomer’. In the 20th century, the Catholic Schmaus flatly denies Augustine’s genius as a thinker.
The thought of Augustine? It is totally dominated by ideas of God, partly numbed by euphoria, partly terrified. His philosophy is, basically, theology. From an ontological point of view, it is based on hypotheses without any foundation. And there is a multitude of painful absences.
Augustine, whom Palangue praises saying: ‘With a flap he rises above any superficial objection’ usually is a prodigy of superficiality. Also the ‘professional orator’ of yesteryear (and today!) cheats through rhetorical tricks. He contradicts himself, especially in The City of God, a work with a strong influence of Arnobius that appeared between 413 and 426, his ‘magnum opus’ as he says, where he sometimes equates and others clearly differentiates his own fundamental concepts: ‘Roman Empire’ and ‘Diabolic State’. Or ‘Church’ and ‘God’s State’.
When he was a young Christian, he believed that miracles no longer occur, so that ‘no one is raised from the dead anymore’; when he gets old he believes otherwise. Already in 412 he had the idea of ‘collecting and showing everything that is rightly censured in my books’. And so, three years before his death he begins, since everything was ‘altered’, a complete book with rectifications, Retractationes, without really ‘rectifying’ everything. In any case, he introduced 220 corrections.
However, as many times as Augustine ‘rectified’ something, he refuted others’ work, placing the heading of many of his writings a ‘Contra […]’.
At the end of the 4th century he attacked the Manichaeans: Fortunatus, Adeimantus, Faust, Felix, Secundinus, as well as, in another series of books, Manichaeism: of which he himself was formally a follower for almost a decade, from 373 to 382, although as ‘listener’ (auditor), not as an electus. In three books Against Academics (386) he confronts scepticism. From the year 400 on he criticises Donatism; from 412 Pelagianism, and from 426 semi-Pelagianism. But next to these main objectives of his struggle, he also attacks with greater or lesser intensity the pagans, the Jews, the Arians, the astrologers, the Priscillians and the Apollinarians. ‘All the heretics hate you’ he praises his old rival Jerome, ‘just as they persecute me with the same hatred’.
More than half of Augustine’s writings are apologetics or have a controversial character. On the other hand, while, being a bishop, in thirty years he only once visited Mauritania, the less civilized province, he travelled thirty-three times to the incredibly rich Carthage, where, apparently as compensation for his modest convent diet, he liked copious lunches (for example roasted peacock); talk to important people and spend whole months with colleagues in hectic activity. The bishops already lived near the authorities and in the court, and were themselves courtiers; Augustine’s friend, Bishop Alypius, was arguing in Rome until the saint’s death.
Peter Brown, one of the most recent biographers of the leading theologian, writes: ‘Augustine was the son of a violent father and an inflexible mother. He could cling to what he considered objective truth with the remarkable ingenuity of his quarrelsome character’.
It should be noted that the increasingly violent aggression of Augustine, as manifested in his dispute with the Donatists, could also be a consequence of his prolonged asceticism. Before, as he himself confessed, he had had remarkable vital needs, ‘in lewdness and in prostitution’ he had ‘spent his strength’, and later he had energetically conjured ‘the tingling of desire’. He lived a long time in concubinage, later he took a girl as a girlfriend (she had almost two years to reach the legal age to get married: in girls twelve years) and at the same time a new darling. But for the cleric sexual pleasure is ‘monstrous’, ‘diabolical’, ‘disease’, ‘madness’, ‘rottenness’, ‘nauseating pus’, and so on.
Apart from that, was not he also feeling guilty about his long-time companion, whom he had forced to separate from himself and his son?

______ 卐 ______

Liked it? Take a second to support The West’s Darkest Hour.

Categories
Blacks Committee for Skeptical Inquiry Intelligence quotient (IQ)

Letter to the SI editor

May 17, 2018
Kendrick Frazier, Editor
Skeptical Inquirer
Dear Mr. Frazier,
In 1994 we met at the Seattle conference and in the following year you accepted an article of mine ([Full name], 1995. “Bélmez Faces Turned Out to Be Suspiciously Picture-like Images.” Skeptical Inquirer 19. 2, Mar/Apr: 4).
Although I no longer subscribe to the magazine, today I saw the articles on the CSI page about a number for this year, “A Skeptic’s Guide to Racism.”
As far as I could read online, none of the contributors seem to have a notion that, in IQ studies, both Asians and whites are ranked above blacks.
Since the publication of The Bell Curve by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray, people interested in science know that IQ studies on races are not pseudoscientific. The late scientist Philip Rushton even found other very fundamental differences between Asians, whites and blacks.
Why was none of this mentioned in Skeptical Inquirer? Is it that the contributors to the magazine do not even know what Charles Darwin himself wrote about blacks?
[Full name]
Mexico City

CC: Benjamin Radford, Deputy Editor

Categories
Alexander the Great Ancient Greece Aristotle Philosophy Story of Philosophy (book) Will Durant

The Story of Philosophy, 8

Aristotle and Greek science

 

Under Plato he studied eight—or twenty—years; and indeed the pervasive Platonism of Aristotle’s speculations, even of those most anti-Platonic, suggests the longer period. One would like to imagine these as very happy years: a brilliant pupil guided by an incomparable teacher, walking like Greek lovers in the gardens of philosophy. But they were both geniuses; and it is notorious that geniuses accord with one another as harmoniously as dynamite with fire. Almost half a century separated them; it was difficult for understanding to bridge the gap of years and cancel the incompatibility of souls.

On the same page Durant adds that Aristotle

was the first, after Euripides, to gather together a library; and the foundation of the principles of library classification was among his many contributions to scholarship. Therefore Plato spoke of Aristotle’s home as “the house of the reader, ” and seems to have meant the sincerest compliment; but some ancient gossip will have it that the Master intended a sly but vigorous dig at a certain book-wormishness in Aristotle.

After an unquoted paragraph Durant writes:

The other incidents of this Athenian period are still more problematical. Some biographers tell us that Aristotle founded a school of oratory to rival Isocrates; and that he had among his pupils in this school the wealthy Hermias, who was soon to become aristocrat of the city-state of Atarneus. After reaching this elevation Hermias invited Aristotle to his court; and in the year 344 b.c. he rewarded his teacher for past favours by bestowing upon him a sister (or a niece) in marriage. One might suspect this as a Greek gift; but the historians hasten to assure us that Aristotle, despite his genius, lived happily enough with his wife, and spoke of her most affectionately in his will. It was just a year later that Philip, King of Macedon, called Aristotle to the court at Pella to undertake the education of Alexander. It bespeaks the rising repute of our philosopher that the greatest monarch of the time, looking about for the greatest teacher, should single out Aristotle to be the tutor of the future master of the world.

You can imagine treating white women like barter today? But it was healthier than Western feminism.

Philip had no sympathy with the individualism that had fostered the art and intellect of Greece but had at the same time disintegrated her social order; in all these little capitals he saw not the exhilarating culture and the unsurpassable art, but the commercial corruption and the political chaos; he saw insatiable merchants and bankers absorbing the vital resources of the nation, incompetent politicians and clever orators misleading a busy populace into disastrous plots and wars, factions cleaving classes and classes congealing into castes: this, said Philip, was not a nation but only a welter of individuals—geniuses and slaves; he would bring the hand of order down upon this turmoil, and make all Greece stand up united and strong as the political centre and basis of the world. In his youth in Thebes he had learned the arts of military strategy and civil organization under the noble Epaminondas; and now, with courage as boundless as his ambition, he bettered the instruction. In 338 b.c. he defeated the Athenians at Chaeronea, and saw at last a Greece united, though with chains. And then, as he stood upon this victory, and planned how he and his son should master and unify the world, he fell under an assassin’s hand.

Durant ignored what I know about psychoclasses: different levels of childrearing from the point of view of empathy toward the child. It is disturbing to read, for example, that according to Plutarch, Olympias, Philip’s wife and the mother of Alexander, was a devout member of the orgiastic snake-worshiping cult of Dionysus. Plutarch even suggests that she slept with snakes in her bed. Although Oliver Stone’s film of Alexander is Hollywood, not a real biography, the first part of the film up to the assassination of Philip is not that bad as to provide an idea of the unhealthy relationship between Olympias and her son.

“For a while,” says Plutarch, “Alexander loved and cherished Aristotle no less than as if he had been his own father; saying that though he had received life from the one, the other had taught him the art of living.” (“Life,” says a fine Greek adage, “is the gift of nature; but beautiful living is the gift of wisdom.”)

But was it wisdom? The real ‘wisdom of the West’ only started with a politician like Hitler and, on the other side of the Atlantic, a white supremacist like Pierce. Ancient philosophers ignored the dangers involved in conquering non-white nations without the policy extermination or expulsion.

Categories
Christendom Conservatism

Take your pick

I was amused in the first hours of this day with the classification, in White Right Hub, of several blogsites where we learn that Mark Steyn is a ‘Normie’ and the Zimmermann Blog a ‘Crypto Jew’. There is a useful category, ‘Borderline Alt Right’ that includes Taki’s Magazine. But I especially liked the category ‘Alt Christian Cuck’ which includes the following:

Brother Nathanael
Lasha Darkmoon
Millennial Woes
Occidental Dissent
Political Cesspool Radio Show
Thermidor
Vox Popoli

What I enjoyed the most, however, is the classification of Ned May’s blogsite Gates of Vienna as ‘Gates of Tel Aviv’! According to the criterion of the admin non-labelled sites, which includes my own one, apparently are okay.

Categories
Committee for Skeptical Inquiry Parapsychology Pseudoscience Science Turin Shroud

On the Turin Shroud, 4

One of the problems with pseudosciences is that, to refute them, almost a career in refutation is required. When in November of 1989 the group of sceptics known then as CSICOP visited Mexico City, I was completely lost in the paranormal. However, unlike people in general I always had a predisposition for honesty, in the sense of being able to change my worldview if coming across facts and solid arguments based on facts.
The visit of CSICOP to the city where I live changed me in many ways. The sceptic who had published a critical book on the Shroud, Joe Nickell, had been unable to come. But for the first time I spoke with the professional critics of parapsychology: two academic psychologists whose hobby was to read all the important journals of parapsychology, and publish their critique in specialized journals. It was because of their work that I learned the enormous amount of dedication that the refutation of a single pseudoscience, such as parapsychology, requires.
But the problems do not end with finding a couple of motivated sceptics. Their criticism may be true, but the popularization of the criticism was difficult to divulge, especially previous to the Internet. In 1989, for example, the Skeptical Inquirer was only sold by subscription, a smaller magazine and more pleasant in its reading than what is currently sold in newspaper stands. Very few knew the work of Nickell and other sceptics on the Shroud. What the market wants are the paranormal claims big time; not taking the sweets away from children. Consider this candy for example:

Jerusalem, Friday before Passover, c. AD 30. The body of a crucified man lay on a slab in a rock-hewn tomb just outside the city walls. It had been placed there by Joseph Arimathea, a secret disciple of the man Jesus, and Nicodemus, another member of the Sanhedrin who brought a large amount of spices to be placed in the folds of a new linen shroud. Joseph placed a great stone in front of the tomb and left in a hurry as the Sabbath was fast approaching.
Sometime during the following night and before the first glimmers of dawn of the first day of the new week, there was a quick flash of blinding light. The stone before the tomb was jarred away; the body vanished, but on the slab remained the Shroud with strange images of the man some called the Son of God.

The passage was not written by a believing sindonologist, but by a sceptic portraying what believers want to hear. With that paragraph David Sox opened the first chapter of his book The Shroud Unmasked, published immediately after the Carbon 14 tests revealed that the relic had been manufactured in the Middle Ages. However, this is where you see the huge advantage that believers have over sceptics in a market society.
Scepticism does not sell. What sells well are sweets for adults who are still children.
The copy I have of Sox’s book, which I read in 1989, is made of cheap paper. If we compare it with the elegant books of Ian Wilson, with whom Sox worked closely, Sox’s book seems, at first glance, extremely modest. Nonetheless, despite the quality of the paper and the covers, given that Sox does not violate Occam’s razor his books are more relevant to understanding the relic of Turin than those of his popular colleague.[1]
I am tempted to rephrase what Sox says in The Shroud Unmasked but here I would just like to quote, in addition to the passage above, the first paragraph of the introduction:

There were times when I thought I’d never live to see the day the Turin Shroud faced its obvious test. The road to carbon dating has been long, contentious and convoluted. There are those who will not appreciate mine and other’s efforts to have this test. That’s their problem.
When you open Pandora’s Box, you have to be prepared for whatever comes out. I have always wondered why many so fascinated with the Shroud mystery were afraid to see the end of the story.
This volume explores the road to the test, and recognises there is undoubtedly more yet to come in the Shroud story. At least now that the identification of the cloth with the historical Jesus has been removed, the new sleuths into the mystery can be more objective than most observers have been in the past.

Update of 21 May 2018: Further thoughts about the relic, and the correspondence that a real scientist addressed to me, will appear: here.
__________
[1] Wilson violates it by lucubrating a hidden history of the shroud from the 1st century until its actual appearance in the Middle Ages, as we shall see.

Categories
Kevin MacDonald

The Cofnas debate

See Counter-Currents’ fair summary of the Nathan Cofnas debate with Kevin MacDonald. Why has this been such a boring debate to follow?
Very simple: The Jewish problem (JP) is best addressed starting with a recount of Greco-Roman history, as Evropa Soberana does in what I have been calling the masthead that guides The West’s Darkest Hour in the open sea. MacDonald’s The Culture of Critique lacks such a broad scope. It navigates in a closed channel, as his whole trilogy ignores the Christian problem (CP) that in essence is an offshoot of the JP.

Researching the JP historically, since the beginning as I do also in my comments of the Kriminalgeschichte series, and how it metamorphosed into the CP, is far more entertaining: a sort of unified field theory that only the priests of the 14 words are starting to glimpse.
To provide a single example. Compared to the kikes that MacDonald analyses in The Culture of Critique, a single Christian such as Augustine has been more influential in the deconstruction of the West. No doubt I’ll continue to translate Deschner’s chapter about this Father of the Church.

Categories
Moses (fictional Hebrew lawgiver)

Subtitle changed


I just removed the subtitle of this site (‘Christians are the ultimate conclusion of Judaism’) to make room for a new one.
In 2015 I wrote a brief entry about what a ‘priest of the 14 words’ should be, with three guidelines. The previous guideline was left hanging: here and was depured recently by an anonymous priest of the 14 words: here. Today I’d like to modify the 2nd guideline:

§ 2

Unlike Adolf Hitler, who, as a politician, had to deal with Judeo-Christians, the priest of the 14 words not only eludes them: he is a purist regarding every tail that comes from Judeo-Christianity. Example of tails: a failure to see God as an Aryan-eater Spider; to continue believing in the existence of the afterlife, or to ignore the history of the 4th and subsequent centuries in which the Judeo-Christians tried to assassinate every vestige of the Greco-Roman culture.

From this angle, it is obvious that even some commenters who have praised me should be avoided by this priest, as the belief in God or the hereafter (in the sense of the soul as an immortal particle) prevents them from reclaiming the West with the ferocity of the priest.
I would also like to add another guideline:

§ 4

The priest of the 14 words subscribes a Nordicism that was the common sense of eugenicists in North America and in Europe, including the Third Reich, prior to World War 2. What the priest wants is to produce a new Reich whose futuristic Arcadian stage will resemble the paintings of Maxfield Parrish; not the mudbloods of which there are millions on both sides of the Atlantic.

This is just the beginning. I have to produce a New Decalogue that includes the hanging guideline and others.
What stands between Moses’ old Tablets and Zarathustra’s new, half-written Tablets is Christian ethics of course, including the ethics of some regular visitors. But I am curious. Among regular visitors, is there someone prepared to follow the already written guidelines?

Categories
¿Me Ayudarás? (book) Child abuse Karlheinz Deschner Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums (books)

Kriminalgeschichte, 65

Below, an abridged translation from the first volume of Karlheinz Deschner’s Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums (Criminal History of Christianity). For a comprehensive text that explains the absolute need to destroy Judeo-Christianity, see here. In a nutshell, any white person who worships the god of the Jews is, ultimately, ethnosuicidal.

 
Augustine, the spiritual guide of the Church of the West, was born on November 13, 354 in Thagaste (now Souk-Ahras, Algeria), of petit-bourgeois parents. His mother, Monica, of strict Christian formation, educated her son in Christian thought, although she did not baptise him.
His father, Patricius, a pagan whose wife ‘served as a lord’, ‘became a believer towards the end of his temporary life’ (Augustine); he barely appears in all his work and Augustine only mentions him on the occasion of his death. Agustin had at least one brother, Navigius, and perhaps two sisters. One of them, when she was a widow, ended her life as the superior of a convent of nuns.
As a child, as a curious anecdote, Augustine did not like to study. His training began late, ended soon, and at first was overshadowed by coercion, beatings, useless protests and the laughter of adults for it, even his parents, who harassed him.

 
Editor’s Note:
This 15th-century painting of Niccolò di Pietro of Augustine taken to school by his mother is very deceptive. Scholars generally agree that Augustine and his family were Berbers, an ethnic group indigenous to North Africa. I find it extremely annoying and surreal how, after Christian takeover, Aryans meekly submitted their worldview to non-Aryans—and more annoying that even white nationalists continue to be blind to these facts!
Yesterday I modified my site previously called Fallen Leaves in order to start adding entries there, in which I rebut what a Mexican theologian said about the Shroud of Turin (which I will eventually translate for my shroud series in WDH). Previously, that site collected entries in English about child abuse, which was my specialty before discovering white nationalism in 2009.
I cannot avoid the idea that the mistreatments that Deschner mentions to the pubescent Augustine influenced his late theology. For example, a good part of my book ¿Me Ayudarás? is an analysis of my father’s misguided defence mechanisms—how he defended himself internally against the bullying at home and at school when he was a child. The point is that, if someone does not process these traumas, as an adult he will try to take revenge on innocents by repeating the abusive behaviour. I am sure that, had my father not been martyred as a child, he would not have launched invectives (‘To the eternal fire…’) as an adult when he spoke in the family.
I have read Augustine’s Confessions and I remember some passages in which he describes how his parents made fun of him while praying to avoid the bullying and beatings at school. I daresay that, had Augustine had an ‘accomplice witness’ as a boy, he would not have rationalised as fiercely as he did the doctrine of hell: where he put even unbaptized infants for eternal torment.
Deschner continues:

____________

 
At seventeen, the young man went to Carthage, rebuilt under Augustus. A rich bourgeois, Romanian, had supported the father of Augustine, who died at that time, allowing the son to carry out his studies. To tell the truth, he did not do it very hard. ‘What I liked’, admitted in his Confessions, was ‘to love and be loved’. He was seduced by ‘a wild chaos of tumultuous amorous entanglements’, he wandered ‘aimlessly through the streets of Babel’, he wallowed ‘in his mud, the same as in delicious spices and ointments’ while the Bible did not appeal to him either because of its content or its form, which seemed too simple.
Although he went to church, he went there to meet a female friend. And when he prayed, among other things he asked: ‘Give me chastity but not yet ’. He feared, indeed, that God would listen to him and ‘heal me of the disease of the carnal appetite, which I wanted to satiate rather than extirpate’. At eighteen he became a father. A concubine, who lived with him about a decade and a half, gave him a son in 372, Adeodatus (gift of God), who died in 389.
Augustine, whom on the night of Easter on April 25, 387 Ambrose baptised in Milan together with his son and his friend Alypius, was appointed in 391, despite a desperate opposition, presbyter of Hippo: a millennium-old port city, the second largest seaport in Africa. And in 395 Valerius, the old Greek bishop of the city, who spoke bad Latin, names him illegitimately, so Augustine confesses, ‘auxiliary bishop’ (coadjutor) contrary to the provisions of the Council of Nicaea, whose eighth canon prohibits the existence of two bishops in a city.

______ 卐 ______

Liked it? Take a second to support The West’s Darkest Hour.