web analytics
Categories
Psychology So-called saints

Augustine, 6

BOOK IX: With his mother and friends he returns to his native Africa

‘…where I had offered you as a sacrifice, my old self’ Augustine writes in this chapter. He didn’t realise that his ‘new self’ was what psychologists today would call the false self: his relationship with his god, to whom he speaks in the second person singular, was a maternal introject—not his true self! But now imbued with his false self, the absorbing mother within him, he writes: ‘My heart was fire’ and ‘now I was disgusted by those who rebel against the Scriptures’: a preamble to the destruction of the works of Celsus and Porphyry ordered by Emperor Theodosius II.

After his ‘conversion’ Augustine wrote to Ambrose and signed up to be baptised, so he, his mother and Alypius, who would also convert to the cult of the Galileans (Emperor Julian’s term), returned to Milan.

We also brought Adeodatus, my natural son, born of sin. You had gifted him well. He was barely fifteen years old… His intelligence left me speechless.

A little later, Augustine devotes some interesting pages to how his grandparents had educated his mother, and how they had turned her into a puritan: through mistreatment. I was especially struck by these words, which are understandable if we imagine the African heat, where the family grew up: ‘Apart from the hours when they ate soberly with her parents, she wasn’t allowed to drink even water, even if she burned with thirst’. But I find it very strange that in his book Augustine didn’t tell anecdotes about his siblings. What did he want to hide from us? What we do know is that his mother had fulfilled her mission:

She said to me: ‘My son, as far as I am concerned, I no longer find pleasure in this life… There was only one reason why I wanted to stay a little longer in this life. I wanted to see you as a Catholic Christian before I died. My God has fulfilled this desire even more fully than I wished. I see you his servant, who despises the happiness of the earth. What am I doing here?’

I don’t remember my answer well. What I do remember is that, barely five days later—not many more—she fell into bed with fevers… At fifty-six years of age and thirty-three years of mine, that pious and holy woman was released from her body.

It is very significant for those of us who research mental disorders to read, a couple of pages later, a retrospective recollection when her mother was still alive:

And she also reminded me with emotional affection that she had never heard a harsh word or insult against her come out of my mouth.

But he would take out his pent-up rage with his theological pessimism, so opposite to that of Pelagius. The following year Adeodatus died (had the great doctor of the Church treated his son well?) and the narrative part of his Confessions ends. The rest of the next four chapters are mere homilies for new converts.

If we ignore them (books X to XIII of his Confessions), it seems very significant that Augustine ended his book with this great account of his mother. As my father told me, ‘Faith is suckled’. And as Monica told her son: ‘Where I was’, in her dream of the rule, ‘there you were’. The rest—the coming theology of Augustine—followed from there.

No wonder that the year Augustine died, 430 c.e., was the year in which the Dark Ages began. When I see the astronomical damage done to the white man by the Imperial Church, that Church of which Augustine was its great architect, I increasingly admire Nietzsche’s The Antichrist. Unlike Cervantes, Goethe, Dante, Shakespeare and Augustine himself, the German philosopher was a ‘man against his time’, a poet against the Christian Age. Now, thanks to new ways of refuting Christianity besides Nietzsche’s—Richard Carrier’s mythicism and the autobiographical genre I want to inaugurate (which precisely shows that faith is indeed a programme installed in us by our parents)—, the mental virus for the white man implanted by deranged theologians could, potentially, cease to infect us.

Giovanni di Balduccio, Tomb of St Augustine in Pavia, Italy.

Categories
Autobiography Sex So-called saints

Augustine, 5

I read the Confessions almost a quarter of a century ago during a two-week voyage on a cargo ship bound for Europe. It was a time when I wanted to find an Englishwoman to marry. It is worth noting what I wrote then in the Atlantic Ocean:

2 October 1991

I’ve been dreading staying goof off: finishing the two books I have halfway through the trip.

I need to reconcile myself with Augustine and New Spain (Paz’s book). That would be, indirectly, a reconciliation with dad, since he is both.

 

BOOK VII: He begins to read the epistles of St Paul

Augustine begins this chapter by saying that he no longer conceived of the deity in the form of a human body, and then goes on to say something which again shows that all this talk of his later conversion is false, since he was already, in his youthful way, a good Christian:

My heart adhered firmly to the faith in your Christ… My soul was not willing to abandon it; rather every day it was more and more steeped in it.

And four pages ahead:

My faith believed also in Christ, our Son and Lord… These beliefs were already intact and firmly rooted in my soul.

It is not surprising that at this point Augustine’s extreme theological rationalisations had already begun. First he dispatches the problem of evil, and then he reconciles the irreconcilable: the Torah with Paul.

It was with great eagerness that I picked up the venerable Scriptures inspired by your Spirit, particularly those of your apostle Paul.

As I said in the first entry, Augustine was a man of his time. He followed, to its ultimate consequences, the misguided steps of the Caucasoid Christians of his time: something that speaks volumes about imperial Rome in the 4th century.

The next chapter is the most famous of his Confessions. The whole book shows how dead the Aryan soul was then, as it is dead now. If it hadn’t been dead it would have prevented the Judeo-Christian flourishing. Already in this chapter Augustine uses so many metaphors taken from the Bible that a reader unfamiliar with it would find himself without understanding much.

To understand the next chapter we have to imagine Augustine in a terrible struggle with himself à la Gollum in The Lord of the Rings: a titanic struggle in which the maternal introjects won out (remember Nietzsche’s aphorism: ‘Christianity gave Eros poison to drink. He didn’t die but degenerated into a vice’).
 

BOOK VIII: ‘Conversion’ in the garden of his house

I will now tell how you freed me from the bonds of my carnal desires.

Augustine recounts how an African named Ponticianus saw Paul’s epistles on Augustine’s desk and began to speak about Antony, the Egyptian monk. Remember the passage in Deschner’s book about this monk:

Athanasius did not just adorn his Vita Antonii (St Anthony or Antony was a monk who played an important role in the conversion of Augustine; was the archetype of the lives of Greek and Latin saints, and for centuries inspired the monastic life of the East and the West) with increasingly crazy miracles, but he also falsified documents in the worst of styles.

When Ponticianus left, Augustine rationalised this visit of the African as follows: ‘You brought me once more face to face with myself, forcing me to look myself in the eye so that I might see my iniquity and abhor it’. He was already thirty-two years old and, comparing his erotic conduct with that of the Egyptian monk, he confessed:

In my inner house a great strife was being waged… I turned to Alypius saying loudly: ‘We, on the other hand, wallow in flesh and blood’.

He, stunned, stared at me in silence…

The house where we were staying had a small garden. So I withdrew to the garden and Alypius followed in my footsteps.

Augustine realised that ‘there are, therefore, two wills in us’. In psychoanalytic language, we could say that it was a struggle between the super-ego instilled by his mother (Thou shalt not fornicate, etc.) and his natural call to Eros, which in the pagan world wasn’t that sinful. ‘As I was deliberating whether to consecrate myself to the service of the Lord…’ That is, feeling the call to follow in the footsteps of a monk would mean no marriage, a life condemned to celibacy.

And from this moment it would no longer be licit for me to do this or that? What was it, my God, that I was suggesting with those words ‘this and that’? What sordid things! What indecencies!

But Augustine doesn’t get graphic. He fails to confess what exactly it was. Let us remember that he had already said: ‘To love and be loved was the sweetest thing for me, especially if I got to enjoy the beloved´s body…’ Gollum continues:

Do you intend to live without these things?… ‘Shut your ears to the filthy whisperings of your members, and you will be mortified. They speak to you of delights, but not according to the law of the Lord your God’.

This struggle within my heart was nothing other than the struggle of myself against myself. Alypius was still beside me, silently awaiting the outcome of this new agitation in me.

I got up and he stood stunned in the place where we were sitting. I threw myself, as best I could, under a fig tree and gave free rein to the tears, which flowed like two rivers from my eyes, an acceptable sacrifice to you, Lord.

The Conversion of St Augustine by Fra Angelico.

I hurriedly retraced my steps to the place where Alypius was sitting, for I had left the book of the Epistles of St Paul when I got up from there. I picked it up, opened it, and silently read the first passage that fell before my eyes. It said: No gluttony and drunkenness; no lust and wantonness; no rivalry and envy. Rather put on the Lord Jesus Christ and do not concern yourself with the flesh to gratify its lusts.

I didn’t want to read any more, nor was it necessary. In an instant—no sooner had I finished reading the sentence—all the darkness of my doubts vanished, as if a light of assurance had taken possession of my heart.

Then we went to see my mother.

We told her everything, with great joy on her part. And as we told her the story of what had happened, she, jubilant and leaping for joy, blessed and glorified you… For she saw that you had granted her much more than she used to ask of you with her tearful and pitiful moans. In such a way you converted me to you that I no longer desired a wife nor harboured any hope in this world. I was firm in that rule of faith which many years before you had shown her that I would embrace. It was thus that you turned her weeping into joy [Ps 30:11], far more fulfilled than she had wished. A sweeter and more chaste joy than she had expected to find in the grandchildren born of my flesh.

In Augustine’s mind, the inversion of Greco-Roman values was now complete.

Categories
Sex So-called saints

Augustine, 4

BOOK V: Going to Rome and then to Milan

I want to speak now in the presence of my God of that twenty-ninth year of my life… Night and day my mother offered you for me the sacrifice of her heart, flooded with tears.

My mother, who wept bitterly at my departure and accompanied me to the seashore… wanted me to stay or to take her with me…

What a mother!… You made the rivers of tears that my mother shed for me dry up, watering the earth beneath her face every day. She was reluctant to return home without me, but that very night I hoisted the sails, leaving her alone crying and praying… You didn’t do what she asked of you then, so you could make of me what she always asked of you…

As soon as I arrived in Rome, a bodily illness brought me to the brink of the grave… Had it happened, where would I have gone but to the fire and torments that my deeds deserved according to the justice of your law… My mother would never have recovered from such a wound. I have no words to express the love she had for me.

But that wasn’t healthy love. For those who have read my Letter to mom Medusa, it is like believing that the love my mother felt for me as a teenager was healthy!

That chaste and sober widow, so given to almsgiving, servant of your saints, who never left a day without offering at your altar, went to church twice a day morning and evening, never missing a day.

Pages later Augustine confesses:

I believed that your only-begotten Son and our Saviour was something like the shining body of your substance for our salvation. I felt nothing else of him but what I could imagine in my vanity. I thought that with such a nature he couldn’t be born of the Virgin Mary without mingling with the flesh…

The Manichaeans said that the books of the New Testament had been falsified by persons unknown, who wished to impose the Jewish law on the Christian law…

I arrived in Milan and went to see Bishop Ambrose… I refused to entrust the cure of my soul’s illnesses to these philosophers, in whose books the saving name of Christ didn’t appear. I opted, therefore, to become a catechumen in the Catholic Church.

 

BOOK VI: His mother catches up with him in Milan

By this time my mother had already come to my side. Her piety had given her the strength to follow me over sea and land…

Her heart wasn’t startled or troubled with joy when she heard I had done much of what she tearfully asked me to do. I saw myself free from falsehood, though I hadn’t yet reached the truth. Sure as she was that you would grant her the rest—for you had promised her all—she answered me, full of serenity and with a heart full of confidence, ‘by my faith in Christ, I hope to see you a faithful Catholic before I leave this life’.

This is what she told me. I ran with more solicitude to the church, hanging on Ambrose’s lips. She loved that man as an angel of God… She loved him greatly because he could lead me to salvation. [Ambrose for his part] was full of praise for her when he saw me, congratulating me on having such a mother.

Then Augustine tells us of his new friendships:

I had met Alypius on my arrival in Rome and we became such good friends that he came with me to Milan. He didn’t want to be separated from me… Nebridius too… had come to Milan for the sole purpose of being with me and thus be able to search for truth and wisdom… I was now thirty years old…

I thought I would be very unhappy if I lacked the caresses of a woman… Alypius was not in favour of my marrying… He, for his part, was, in that city very chaste… As for me… I was wounded by the disease of the flesh…

Alypius couldn’t quite understand how I, whom he truly admired, could be so attached to those sexual pleasures… I wanted to marry at all costs… I had already asked for the hand of a girl who was almost two years younger so that she could get married.

A cute nymphet! (today it would be called paedophilia). But Augustine entered into a concubinage with a woman older than the precocious brat:

And she left me the natural son I had had with her… I couldn’t hold out for the two-year term.

An idealised painting of ‘Saint’ Monica and her grandson, Adeodatus: Augustine’s only son.

Categories
Homosexuality So-called saints

Augustine, 3

Roman sculptural group showing Castor and Pollux or, according to other authors, Orestes and Pylades.

BOOK IV: He becomes a teacher of rhetoric at Tagaste

For the space of nine years—from the age of nineteen to the age of twenty-eight—I deceived myself and deceived others… We were after the vanities of popular glory, the applause of the theatre, the public contests, the contests of hay wreaths, the games of spectacles, and the intemperance of concupiscence.

These were times when Augustine made a living by rhetoric, which he himself calls ‘the art of deception’, and lived with a woman; times when he took part in a recital of dramatic verse. Let us remember that the full title of his future magnum opus, unlike the way publishers abbreviate the copies we buy in bookshops, reads De civitate Dei contra pagans. In his Confessions he speaks of

…Venus, Saturn or Mars. We are led to believe that man—who is flesh and blood and proud rottenness—is guiltless.

But in his hometown a great misfortune befell him. His soulmate, a young lad of his age, fell ill and passed away. ‘My soul could not live without him’, Agustín confesses, ‘weeping flooded me’. See image above. Interestingly, Augustine uses Greco-Roman imagery when he writes: ‘Orestes and Payloads, who wanted to die for each other, or both of them together, because they considered it the worst death to live apart from each other’. He adds:

I was his second self. How well the poet expressed it when he said that his friend ‘was half his soul’ [Horace, Odes, I, 3,8]. I felt that my soul and his were but one in two bodies. I was horrified at having to live because I didn’t want to live half-heartedly. And perhaps this was also the reason for my fear of dying, so that the one whom I had loved so much would not die completely.

Was Augustine bisexual? Throughout the centuries Christian commentators don’t want to see it. That is one of the problems not only with biographies from Christian pens, but of history in general: those who write provide us with a Christian or neochristian slant. In my library there came to be three editions of the Confessions but in none of them did the translator, or whoever prefaced the book, suggested that these words of Augustine would evoke the homoeroticism of Orestes and Pylades, or Castor and Pollux.

I carried my soul torn to pieces and dripping with blood, a weight that neither I myself was able to carry, nor did I know where to put it. Neither the charm of the woods, nor the soft perfumes of a garden could soothe it. Nor did I find peace in song, or play, nor in splendid banquets, nor in the delights of bed and home, nor even in books and verses. Even light itself was a horror to me, and everything that wasn’t what he was, was unbearable and hateful. My only rest was moaning and tears, and when I stopped crying, I felt the heavy burden of my misery on my back.

As a defence mechanism a few pages later he confesses: ‘My greatest rest and consolation was to solace myself with the other friends… We all had something to teach the others and each learned from the others… Our souls melted together and into one’.

A pagan of the time might have read between the lines a homosexual relationship in what Augustine just said about his lachrymose agony, but as I wrote above the commentators on the Confessions never suggest it. Even my admired authors Eduardo Velasco and William Pierce did not understand the homoeroticism of ancient Greece and Rome.

Categories
Child abuse Psychology So-called saints

Augustine, 2

Augustine and his mother Monica (1846) by Ary Scheffer.

BOOK II: Spends a year at home before going to Carthage

I want to remember now my past uglinesses and the carnal dullness of my soul… In my adolescence I burned with desire to be filled with the baser things… Your anger against me was increasing… burning in the flames of my concupiscence… At least, I should have paid more attention to the voice of your clouds warning those who marry that you will suffer the tribulations of the flesh, but I forgive you [1 Cor 7:28].

This poor devil, elevated to the greatest Father of the Church for all Christendom (Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant), already believed that sex was sinful even within marriage! On the next page Augustine continues:

Made a eunuch for the kingdom of heaven, I would have sighed happily for your embraces [Mt 19:12]… I was lost at sixteen.

And here it is clear what it means to be a slave to the parental introject (in his case, a mental slave to his mother’s engulfing mind), and why I say that the idea of the deity is but a sublimation of the maternal (or paternal) image:

She wanted me—and I remember how insistently she asked me in secret—not to fornicate… The words, however, were yours, though I didn’t know it. I thought you were silent and that it was she who spoke. Therefore, I despised you, her son, the son of your servant [his mother] and your servant [Augustine], who didn’t cease to talk to me through her.

With such an ogre of a super-ego it is no wonder that further down on the same page he added about his nascent libidinous impulse:

I wallowed in my slime as if it were balm and precious ointment, and to mire me…

 

BOOK III: Going to Carthage

To love and be loved was the sweetest thing for me, especially if I got to enjoy the beloved’s body…

He was already nineteen years old and his pagan father, the only one who could have saved him from his wife’s abrasive behaviour, had died.

But you know very well, O light of my heart, that I had no knowledge of the counsel of your Apostle at that time.

In a sense he did, as we saw in the previous section. Augustine was unaware that the self is a structure, and that it can be programmed at the whim of one’s parents, either for good or for evil.

What only delighted, excited and kindled me was to love, seek and embrace strongly not this or that sect, but wisdom itself, whatever it might be. These were the words that excited and burned me, and the only thing that dampened my ardour was not to find the name of Christ there. For this name, Lord, the name of my Saviour and your Son, I drank it piously with my mother’s milk, and by your mercy I kept it engraved in the depths of my heart.

By the way, I will never forget my father’s words: ‘Faith is suckled!’ in a tone of assertive gravity. And here is how the unconscious of Augustine’s mother had already perceived that her son, although he would flirt for a short time with Manichaeism and other pagan sects, was at heart a good Christian:

My mother, your faithful servant, wept for me, shedding tears… She dreamt, in fact, that she was standing on a wooden ruler all sad and afflicted and that there was coming towards her a young man with a bright, cheerful and smiling face. He asked her the reason for her sadness and her daily tears, not because he didn’t know it, but because he had something to tell her, as in such visions. When she had answered that her tears were for the loss of my soul, he told her to take courage and to look carefully and be attentive, for where she was, there I was also [my emphasis]. She looked and saw me standing beside her on the same ruler.

Monica’s unconscious captured her son perfectly, as he was: a good Christian.

When she told me the dream and I tried to interpret it as a message that she shouldn’t despair of one day being as I was at present, she promptly and without hesitation replied: ‘No, he didn’t say “where he is, there you are”, but “where you are, there he is”.

This sharp reply of my mother’s impressed me very much… I was more impressed by this reply than by the dream itself.

But as Augustine had not yet devoted himself body and soul to being a champion of Constantine’s still young faith, his mother ‘returned to the charge with greater entreaties and more abundant tears’ as he confesses in his Confessions.

Monica was a clinical case of what some YouTubers call a narcissistic mother: a phallic, possessive mother without ego boundaries between her and her son, whom she treats as a mere egoic object (cf. my Letter to mom Medusa).

Categories
So-called saints Stefan Zweig

Augustine, 1

Augustine (354-430) was not only a man of his time like the previous ones in this series. Of the five mentioned, this African author had the most significant influence on the civilisation of the white man (he was, for example, the most widely read author in Spain). I will not speak here of his magnum opus, The City of God. His infernal doctrine, which wreaked so much havoc in my young life, is already denounced in several parts of my autobiography. I will confine myself to his most popular book.

It will be remembered that in my article on Goethe I said that Zweig had written about Augustine, but I omitted what he wrote about this so-called Father of the Church. Here is the full passage:

Classical antiquity had as yet no inkling of these mysterious paths. Caesar and Plutarch, the ancients who describe themselves, are content to deal with facts, with circumstantial happenings, and never dream of showing more than the surface of their hearts.

Before he can throw light into his soul, a man must be aware of its existence, and this awareness does not begin until after the rise of Christianity. St Augustine’s Confessions breaks a trail for inward contemplation. Yet the gaze of the famous divine was directed, not so much inward, as towards the congregation he hoped to edify by the example of his own conversion. His treatise was a confession to the community, a model Confession; it was purposeful, teleological; it was not an end in itself, comprising its own answer and its own meaning. Many centuries were to pass before Rousseau (that remarkable man who was a pioneer in so many fields) was to draw a self-portrait for its own sake.

But in previous pages Zweig had observed the obvious: Rousseau’s confessions were not honest either, since he never repented of his sin of having thrown all his children into the orphanage. Precisely because of this sort of thing Zweig said that autobiography is the most difficult of literary arts: one must betray oneself if one wants to tell the pure truth about one’s life, a truth that neither Augustine nor Rousseau really confessed for lack of insight, intellectual honesty and nobility of soul.

The biggest problem I see with the editions that have been made of the Confessions is that they have been prefaced by Christians, including Penguin Books. This bias makes the unsuspecting reader unaware that the accepted wisdom about the book is a myth. There was no such thing as his very famous conversion weeping in the garden of his house. He was always a Christian as I will demonstrate in this article divided into more than one blog posts.

By convention, the thirteen chapters of the Confessions are called books instead of chapters by the publishers:
 

BOOK I: Augustine’s childhood

In this first chapter Augustine mentions his wet nurses. It is pertinent to note that, in referring to his whining as an infant, he already sees it as sinful. The white man’s current seemingly terminal sense of guilt is due to having secularised the Christian notion of sin (now at ethnosuicidal levels throughout the West). Augustine speaks of ‘you’ to his god, which all editions capitalise, ‘God’; he doesn’t use the ‘thou’ when referring to this deity in the Confessions: a sort of epistle to the Christian providence by this Punic theologian.

‘Who shall make me understand the sin of my childhood, since before thee no man is without sin, even a child of a single day on earth?’ Three pages later he confesses: ‘I was still a boy when I began to invoke you as my help and refuge…, I was small, I begged you with no small affection that they wouldn’t whip me at school. Sometimes, for my own good, you didn’t listen to me, and I was laughed at not only by my elders but also by my parents’.

Augustine was unaware, as the vast majority of religious people still are, that the idea of ‘God’ is a sublimation of the parental image. In this anecdote we see that the child Augustine was the victim of beatings at school and of mockery of these beatings in his own home. Since the idea of the deity is a projection, it is not surprising that now, talking in written soliloquies to his parental introject, he tells this ‘deity’ that ‘for his own good’ he didn’t listen to his pleas. Alice Miller calls this poisonous pedagogy in one of her books, translated into English under the title For Your Own Good.

And why was he beaten? On the next page he tells us: ‘I was whipped because I played ball…’ Clearly, the teachers were childhood-breakers, but Augustine doesn’t identify with the wounded child inside him but with the perpetrator: ‘I sinned, Lord, by disobeying my parents and teachers’.[1] The religious introjects had begun in his early childhood:

I was still a child when I heard of the eternal life promised to us by our God, who humbled himself and came down to our pride. And from that time I was marked with the sign of the cross, and from my mother’s womb I was given a taste of his salt.

Then he writes: ‘With what fervour of spirit and with what faith I came to my mother and mother of us all, your Church’ (my emphasis: keep in mind that he is always writing to his god in this epistle-book called the Confessions). He continues:

In truth, I already believed, and my mother believed, and all the house believed, except my father, who, however, could never overcome in me the pious right my mother had over me that I shouldn’t cease to believe in Christ, in whom he didn’t yet believe. For my mother wanted you, my God, to be my father more than he did.

The next page already shows the enormous cognitive distortion that Christianity caused him from an early age: ‘Being such a small boy I was already a great sinner’, and shortly afterwards: ‘I still don´t fully understand today why I abhorred Greek literature’. As I read the following pages I couldn’t restrain myself from writing at the bottom of the page, ‘If what Augustine says is a sin, Tubby of Little Lulu is a sinner!’ Even common curiosity in the Greco-Roman world was sinful:

But my sin was to seek in myself and other creatures, not in him, pleasure, beauty, and truth, thus falling into pain, confusion.

 

____________

[1] What healed Alice Miller of her depressions, she confesses, was to identify with the wounded child inside her; not with the perp.

Categories
Revilo Oliver So-called saints

Xtianity:

A religion for sheep, 2

by Revilo P. Oliver
Published by Liberty Bell Publications in 1980,
under Oliver’s nom de guerre Ralph Perier.

The Fathers of the Church

Today, including all of the many minor sects, is what it was made by the patient and subtle work of the Fathers of the Church. They were a knavish lot. There is no way of knowing how many of them were actually Jews on duty for God’s Race. It is highly unlikely that any one of them was a Greek or Roman. Most of them were probably Semites or descendants of one of the other Oriental peoples that swarmed into the mongrelised Roman Empire and displaced or replaced the Romans. Whatever their racial antecedents, it is clear from their own writings, despite much later whitewashing, that they were a motley crew of shysters, psychopaths, and other misfits. They were calculating or compulsive liars and forgers; see the able review of their record by Joseph Wheless, Forgery in Christianity (New York, 1930).

One of the Fathers’ most audacious and successful hoaxes certainly emits a Jewish odour. By brazen affirmation constantly repeated, they put over the claim that the wicked Romans, beginning in the time of Nero, persecuted Jesus’s little lambs because the innocent creatures wanted to worship “the true God.” Nothing could be more absurd historically. The Romans, aside from their typically Aryan obtuseness to the facts of race, were an admirably practical people and knew how to govern. It was their fixed policy never to interfere with the superstitions of their subjects. They impartially tolerated the most grotesque rites and obscene religions. Some of the disgusting cults that flourished among the dregs of society practised human sacrifice, but so long as they were content to sacrifice their own members, the Romans took no action: They knew that nothing should be done to save fools from the consequences of their folly. It was only when religious zeal inspired the murder of Romans or of the subjects entitled to their protection that the Romans drew a line beyond which their toleration would not go. Even then, they punished, not the pernicious faith, but only violence and conspiracy to commit violence.

The vermin executed by Nero were Jewish terrorists from the rabble of the huge ghetto that the Jews had planted in Rome. They were accused of having set the great fire that destroyed the greater part of Rome in 64; they confessed and were executed—cruelly, it is true. When one considers the appalling outbreaks of Jewish nihilism that occurred throughout the world from time to time, whenever a christ stirred up the rabble, one sees that it is highly probable that the terrorists were guilty of the crime to which they confessed. It is true that Nero’s political opponents, who were conspiring to overthrow him, preferred to accuse him of the crime; and the young egomaniac’s arrogant folly, when he expropriated the devastated centre of the city for an extravagant new palace, seemed to confirm the political propaganda. That was what enabled the Fathers, when they began to impose their hoax on the ignorant more than a century later, to pretend that the ferocious terrorists had been persecuted for wanting to love everybody.

When historical criticism became feasible in our eighteenth century, the Fathers’ clever hoax long escaped detection: Thirteen centuries of Christianity had so accustomed our people to the practice of torturing and killing men for their thoughts and superstitions that the story seemed plausible enough.

After the middle of the third century, when the successors of the extinct Romans tried desperately to shore up the crumbling empire, a few of them are known to have taken some action against Christians as such, but we do not know under what provocation and, of course, no reliance can be placed on the tales told by the Fathers. The usual policy, however, was toleration, and we know that Diocletian admitted Christians to positions of high trust and responsibility in his own palace until 303, when the Christians’ piety got the better of them and they tried to murder him by burning him alive in his own bedroom. That made him angry.

At the end of the fourth century, St. Jerome, who was much better educated than most of the Fathers and probably the best of a bad lot, was the real founder of a new type of short story that became immensely popular: tales about the “martyrs” who “suffered for their faith.” There is extant a letter by Jerome in which he bitterly reproves some Christians who thought that it mattered that the hero of his first fiction had never existed. That, Jerome indignantly said, was irrelevant, since his tale edified the clergy’s customers, who knew no better. And Jerome went on concocting the tales with such brilliant success that he soon had a host of imitators, all trying to invent more grisly plots.

Jerome, as you see, was an accomplished theologian. He is now best remembered for his revision of the Latin text of the Bible, which he carried out with the help of kindly Jews, who hovered about him, eager to explain the mysteries of God’s Word. Those Jews, we may be sure, knew what Christianity was doing for them.

In 313, Constantine and his colleague, Licinius, who were jointly fighting civil wars against rival emperors, issued the so-called Edict of Milan, which proclaimed universal toleration for all religious cults and specifically named the Christians as cults to be tolerated. The two emperors undoubtedly felt that the support of the Christian organisations would be an asset in the civil wars, and Constantine may have foreseen that they could be especially useful to him when the time came for him to turn upon and destroy his ally and brother-in-law, Licinius. Of course, as soon as Constantine was safely dead, the Fathers of the Church concocted a story that he had been privately “converted” by a childishly-imagined miracle in 312, and had been actually baptised on his death bed, so that the soul of one of the most treacherous rulers undoubtedly flitted right up to Jesus.

A fourth-century head of Constantine, which clearly shows not only the degenerate appearance of its subject, but also the decline of Classical art that had already taken place. Art would decline even more precipitously after the Christians’ rise to complete power. It would not attain greatness again until the rediscovery of Classical ideals and philosophy during the Renaissance.

Christians still like to repeat the myth about the “conversion” of Constantine and the Triumph of the True Faith. All that really happened was that the Fathers of the Church, securely established by the edict of toleration, shrewdly used their bargaining power in intrigues with the various ambitious generals who were slugging it out for the grand prize. The real triumph of their Church came only with the final victory of Theodosius in 394, when the Fathers at last got the power to use the imperial police and army to begin persecuting in earnest. Their first concern, of course, was to exterminate their Christian competitors and destroy all their gospels. Some of those gospels, however, escaped them in one way or another. That is why we now know a good deal about the competing brands of Christianity.

We Aryans still have an instinctive respect for honesty and a peculiar respect for facts. We are shocked by the hypocrisy and mendacity of the Fathers, and Christians of our race cannot bring themselves to believe those ostentatiously pious individuals were what the record shows them to have been. In justice to them, however, we should remember that their deceptions were not un-Christian. They thought—or at least it was their business to teach—that Salvation depended on belief in certain inherently implausible tales and on conduct they approved. From that premise, it followed that any lie or trick that would induce the desired faith in the yokels was not only justified, but meritorious. As a recent writer has said, “Lying for the Lord is a normal exercise of piety.”

Categories
Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums (books) So-called saints

Christianity’s

Criminal History, 197

For the context of these translations click here.
PDFs of entries 1-183 (several of Karlheinz Deschner’s
books abridged into two) can be read here and here.

The Martyrdom of St Emmeram.

 
St Emmeram or ‘Praising God without tongues’

Emmeram, a rather mysterious bishop and martyr (difficult to say which he was less, if he was both) from the late 7th century, was accused of seducing the pregnant duke’s daughter Uta. In the days of the Bavarian prince Theodo, he was charged with luring the pregnant duke’s daughter Uta and then slain by her brother Lantpert on his way to Rome in Helfendorf (now Kleinhelfendorf, Upper Bavaria). The legend panels of the local chapel of martyrdom have immortalised the ‘event’ in pictures and verse:

O cruelty of torment and agony,
So Emmeram suffered,
His gliders were all and all cut away from the body,
The hands and feet, even the fingers too,
were all chopped off,
Acquires thereby the kingdom of heaven…

When this was, if it was, is completely uncertain and disputed, like almost everything about this figure, his origins, his episcopal office, especially the reasons that led to his murder; perhaps, but this too is quite uncertain, 685. Did the ‘martyr’ fall as a representative of Frankish power in Bavaria, striving for independence? Did he win the palm of martyrdom as the seducer of the duke’s pregnant daughter? Or did he voluntarily take the guilt of seduction upon himself, as the pious version of his first hagiographer, Bishop Arbeo of Freising, implies in his Vita Haimhrammi, but ‘probably only according to the embellishing romantic folk tale’, according to the Catholic Kirchen-Lexikon which adds, moreover, ‘which contradicts his narrative’.

Bishop Arbeo only wrote his opus in 772 and apparently for quite selfish reasons, namely, according to the Catholic Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche in 1931 (which in its latest edition of 1995 no longer mentions the ‘martyr’ at all), ‘primarily in the interest of the places of Emmeram´s veneration in his diocese’. And Bishop Arbeo, from the noble house of the Huosi, who was able to occupy the Freising bishop’s see several times, was a very enterprising prelate who was able to expand the possessions and rights of his diocese. However, almost all popular Catholic portrayals spread a more rather than less gruesome kitsch, as is appropriate for Arbeo’s supernatural exploits. After Uta’s brother has chased after the departed ‘saint’, he dies like a great Christian blood witness. Duke’s son Lantpert has hired ‘five butchers who will chop the haggard man’s corpse to pieces from vein to vein, from limb to limb’. And while he is horribly mutilated, his eyes torn out, noses and ears cut off, hands, feet and the (of course only supposedly) unchaste member, he thanks God ‘with great devotion’ for the marvellous ordeal.

Of course, Emmeram’s veneration as a saint only began decades after his death, but then accompanied by the most beautiful miracles, healings of the sick, and exorcisms of devils, not to mention Arnulf of Carinthia, East Frankish king and emperor of the last punitive miracles (because the Regensburg bishops repeatedly encroached on his ever-growing property. Even serfs were later given to the saint).

The glorious cult, revitalised in the 17th century, spread beyond Bavaria in the early Middle Ages. Under the East Frankish Carolingians, however, Emmeram achieved his greatest importance as a tribal saint, and under Arnulf he became the personal patron of the emperor, helping him in battle against the Moravians. The ruler believed that he alone was to thank for his rescue from mortal danger during the campaign against Swatopluk in 893, which is why he richly endowed the Bavarian monasteries, especially St Emmeram, which received all the jewellery of his palace, and in 899 his body no longer had its place in the Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche 1995: the entire article on the monastery ‘St Emmeram’, which in 1931 was twice as long as the one on the saint himself, has now been omitted.

However, the monks of Emmeram honoured the memory of their benefactor by celebrating a solemn office every year on the anniversary of his death and by making up and forging documents in his name throughout the year, such as the one claiming that he had bequeathed them the entire Neustadt. In the face of all these scams, even ‘the actual patron saint of the monastery, Emmeram, receded into the background for a long time’ (Babl). Nevertheless, he lives on in the Kleinhelfendorf legends and not only there:

Praising God without tongue, power yes wonder.
The godless Rott could no longer live that
he now always praises God,
Thuet cut off his tongue.
But he still praises God,
burdening us with praise for this miracle,
As if the tongue were on the old ear,
Asking nothing of Wüttrich’s raving
.

Categories
Dominion (book) Inquisition So-called saints

Dominion, 12

Or:

How the Woke monster originated

Before quoting the book, we should recall the pride shown in the Greco-Roman world for the Aryan nude in the form of public statuary, something that both Jews and Christians abhorred. The so-called Catholic saints only show a monstrous reversal of these values, as can be seen in the hagiographies rephrased by Tom Holland in his chapter ‘Persecution: 1229 Marburg’:

The Lady Elizabeth had been born to greatness. Descended from a cousin of Stephen, Hungary’s first truly Christian king, she had been sent as a child to the court of Thuringia, in central Germany, and groomed there for marriage. At the age of fourteen, she had joined Louis, its twenty-year-old ruler, on the throne. The couple had been very happy. Elizabeth had borne her husband three children; Louis had gloried in his wife’s demonstrable closeness to God. Even when he was woken in the night by a maid tugging on his foot, he had borne it patiently, knowing that the servant had mistaken him for his wife, whose custom it was to get up in the early hours to pray. Elizabeth’s insistence on giving away her jewellery to the poor; her mopping up of mucus and saliva from the faces of the sick; her making of shrouds for paupers out of her finest linen veils: here were gestures that had prefigured her far more spectacular self-abasement in the wake of her husband’s death. Her only regret was that it did not go far enough. ‘If there were a life that was more despised, I would choose it.’ When Count Paviam urged Elizabeth to abandon the rigours and humiliations of her existence in Marburg, and return with him to her father’s court, she refused point blank…

Clerks in the service of the papal bureaucracy and scholars learned in canon law had long been toiling to strengthen the foundations of the Church’s authority. They understood the awful responsibility that weighed upon their shoulders. Their task was to bring the Christian people to God. ‘There is one Catholic Church of the faithful, and outside of it there is absolutely no salvation.’ So it had been formally declared during Elizabeth’s childhood, in 1215, at the fourth of a series of councils convened at the Lateran. To defy this canon, to reject the structures of authority that served to uphold it, to disobey the clergy whose solemn prerogative it was to shepherd souls, was to follow the path to hell. [pages 247-249]

One thing that is completely absent on the intellectual right today is the historical memory of what the doctrine of eternal damnation meant for the mental health of medieval Europeans. I touched on the subject in my books on family tragedy; and more succinctly in ‘On Erasmus’, collected in one of the books of the featured post.

In 1206, a one-time playboy by the name of Francis, a native of the Italian city of Assisi, had spectacularly renounced his patrimony. Taking off his clothes, he had handed them over to his father. ‘Moreover he did not even keep his drawers, but stripped himself naked before all the bystanders.’ The local bishop, impressed rather than appalled by this display, had tenderly covered him with his own cloak, and sent him on his way with a blessing. Here, with this episode, had been set the pattern of Francis’ career. His genius for taking Christ’s teachings literally, for dramatising their paradoxes and complexities, for combining simplicity and profundity in a single memorable gesture, would never leave him. [page 251]

Above, St Francis’ renunciation of worldy goods by Giotto.

He served lepers; preached to birds; rescued lambs from butchers. Rare were those immune to his charisma. Admiration for his mission reached to the very summit of the Church. Innocent III, the pope who in 1215 had convened the Fourth Lateran Council, was not a man easily impressed. Imperious, daring and brilliant, he gave way to no one, overthrowing emperors, excommunicating kings. Unsurprisingly, then, when Francis, at the head of twelve ragged ‘brothers’, or ‘friars’, first arrived in Rome, Innocent had refused to see him. The whiff of heresy, not to mention blasphemy, had seemed altogether too rank. Francis, though, unlike Waldes, never stinted in his respect for the Church, in his obedience to its authority. Innocent’s doubts were eased. Imaginative as well as domineering, he had come to see in Francis and his followers not a danger, but an opportunity. Rather than treating them as his predecessors had treated the Waldensians, he ordained them a legally constituted order of the Church. ‘Go, and the Lord be with you, brethren, and as He shall deign to inspire you, preach repentance to all.’ [pages 251-252]

By 1217, less than a decade after this proclamation, a Franciscan mission had reached Germany. Elizabeth would grow up profoundly inspired by its example. By dressing in secret as a beggar, she had been paying tribute to Francis. Other demonstrations of her enthusiasm for his teachings were more public. In 1225, she provided the Franciscans with a base at the foot of the Wartburg, in the town of Eisenach. Three years later, following the death of her husband, she made her way there and formally renounced her ties to the world. Yet no matter how desperately she longed to do so, she did not then go begging from door to door. Elizabeth had properly absorbed the lessons of Francis’ example. She understood that to embrace poverty without obedience was to risk the fate of Waldes. [page-252]

While Waldes was very similar to Elizabeth and Francis in terms of mortifications of the flesh (which today would be considered a mental disorder, self-harm), in the eyes of the Church he was reprehensible because, unlike Elizabeth and Francis, he didn’t faithfully obey his ecclesiastical superiors: enough for him to be considered a heretic.

No mortification, no gesture of abasement, could possibly be undertaken unless at the command of a superior. Here, for a princess, the mistress of many servants, was a realisation that was itself a form of submission. So Elizabeth, even as she sat enthroned by her husband’s side, had employed a magister disciplinae spiritualis: a ‘master of spiritual discipline’. Not just any master, either. ‘I could have sworn obedience to a bishop or an abbot who had possessions, but I thought it better to swear obedience to one who has nothing and relies totally on begging. And so I submitted to Master Conrad’…

Even before Louis’ death, he had punished her for missing one of his sermons with a beating so violent that the stripes were still visible three weeks later… To suffer was to gain redemption. In 1231, when Elizabeth died of her austerities at the tender age of twenty-four, Conrad did not hesitate to hail her as a saint. As gold is purified by fire, so had she been purged of sin. The same strictness that had brought her to an early grave had brought her to heaven. [pages 252-253]

Elizabeth of Hungary submits to her master of spiritual discipline. This image appears in Holland’s book. Conrad was tireless in his defence of the Church and its authority:

In 1231, there came a fresh refinement. A new pope, Gregory IX, authorised Conrad not merely to preach against heresy, but to devote himself to the search for it—the inquisitio. No longer was it the responsibility of a bishop to bring heretics to trial, and sit in judgement on them, but rather that of a cleric especially appointed to the task. Even though, as a priest, Conrad could not himself ‘decree or pronounce a sentence involving the shedding of blood’, he was licensed by Gregory to compel the secular authorities to impose it. Never before had power of this order been given to a campaigner against heresy. Now, when Conrad rode on his mule from village to village, summoning the locals to answer his interrogation of their beliefs, he did so not merely as a preacher, but as a whole new breed of official: an inquisitor.

‘In all things he broke her will, to ensure that the merit of her obedience to him would increase.’ So Conrad had justified his handling of Elizabeth. Now, with all of Germany his to discipline, he could not afford to soften. The truest kindness was cruelty; the truest mercy harshness. The swarm of heretics that confronted Conrad were not readily to be redeemed from damnation. Only fire could smoke them out. Pyres needed to be stoked as they had never been stoked before. The burning of heretics—hitherto a rare and sporadic expedient, only ever reluctantly licensed, if at all—was the very mark of Conrad’s inquisition. In towns and villages along the Rhine, the stench of blackened flesh hung in the air. ‘So many heretics were burned throughout Germany that their number could not be comprehended.’ Conrad’s critics, unsurprisingly, accused him of a killing spree. They charged him with believing every accusation that was brought before him; of rushing the process of law; of sentencing the innocent to the flames. No one, though, was innocent. All were fallen. Better to suffer as Christ had suffered, tortured in a place of public execution for a crime that he had not committed, than to suffer eternal damnation. Better to suffer for a few fleeting moments than to burn for all eternity.

With Master Conrad, the yearning to cleanse the world of sin, to heal it of its leprosy, had turned murderous. That made it no less revolutionary. The suspicion of the worldly order that had brought Gregory VII to humble an anointed king before the gates of Canossa was one that Conrad more than shared. As Elizabeth’s master, he had forbidden her to eat food ‘about which she did not have a clear conscience’. Anything on her husband’s table that might have derived from exploitation of the poor, that might have been extracted from peasants as a tribute or a tax, she had dutifully spurned. ‘As a result, she often suffered great penury, eating nothing but rolls spread with honey.’ The Lady Elizabeth had been a saint. Her peers were not. In the summer of 1233, Conrad dared to accuse one of them, the Count of Sayn, of heresy. A frantically convened synod of bishops, in the presence of the German king himself, threw out the case. Conrad, nothing daunted, began to prepare charges against further noblemen.

Then, on 30 July, as he was returning from the Rhine to Marburg, he was ambushed by a group of knights and cut down. The news of his death was greeted with rejoicing throughout Germany. In the Lateran, though, there was indignation. As Conrad was laid to rest in Marburg, by the side of the Lady Elizabeth, Gregory mourned him in sombre terms. The murderers, so the Pope warned, were harbingers of a rising darkness. All of heaven and earth had shuddered at their crime. Their patron was literally hellish: none other than the Devil himself. [pages 254-256]

Categories
Dominion (book) Emperor Julian So-called saints

Dominion, 4

Or:

How the Woke monster originated

For previous instalments of this series, see here, here and here.

When I first read Nietzsche when I was seventeen, I was very confused. At the time I wanted to rebel against my father’s traumatic Catholicism the way normies did and still do: through modern freethinker thought. I didn’t understand why Nietzsche fulminated against believers and non-believers alike. As a teenager, I never imagined that even the most militant atheists were still, axiologically, Christian.

I didn’t start to understand Nietzsche until, alarmed by the Islamisation of Europe, I read the aggregations of a Swede that I would eventually collect in the entry ‘The red giant’ (to honour Nietzsche, since 2021 this article has been available in German). The following quotes from Holland’s Dominion are taken from the chapter ‘Charity: AD 362’:

The shock of this cut Flavius Claudius Julianus [Emperor Julian] to the quick. The nephew of Constantine, he had been raised a Christian, with eunuchs set over him to keep him constant in his faith. As a young man, though, he had repudiated Christianity—and then, after becoming emperor in 361, had committed himself to claiming back from it those who had ‘abandoned the ever-living gods for the corpse of the Jew’. A brilliant scholar, a dashing general, Julian was also a man as devout in his beliefs as any of those he dismissively termed ‘Galileans’. Cybele was a particular object of his devotions. It was she, he believed, who had rescued him from the darkness of his childhood beliefs. Unsurprisingly, then, heading eastwards to prepare for war with Persia, he had paused in his journey to make a diversion to Pessinus. What he found there appalled him. Even after he had made sacrifice, and honoured those who had stayed constant in their worship of the city’s gods, he could not help but dwell in mingled anger and despondency on the neglect shown Cybele. Clearly, the people of Pessinus were unworthy of her patronage. Leaving the Galatians behind, he did as Paul had done three centuries before: he wrote them a letter.

‘My orders are that a fifth be given to the poor who serve the priests, and that the remainder be distributed to travellers and to beggars.’ Julian, in committing himself to this programme of welfare, took for granted that Cybele would approve. Caring for the weak and unfortunate, so the emperor insisted, had always been a prime concern of the gods. [pages 137-138]

One of the problems with us apostates from the Christian faith is that we fail to realise that this mania for helping the dispossessed is also Christian, even in non-Christian contexts. On this site, I have generally spoken well of Emperor Julian, but like all apostates, he probably never realised that, axiologically, he was still a Christian…

The heroes of the Iliad, favourites of the gods, golden and predatory, had scorned the weak and downtrodden. So too, for all the honour that Julian paid them, had philosophers. The starving deserved no sympathy… The young emperor, sincere though he was in his hatred of ‘Galilean’ teachings, and in regretting their impact upon all that he held most dear, was blind to the irony of his plan for combating them: that it was itself irredeemably Christian. ‘How apparent to everyone it is, and how shameful, that our own people lack support from us, when no Jew ever has to beg, and the impious Galileans support not only their own poor, but ours as well.’ [page 139]

The reversal of Greco-Roman values was already taking place at the time of the reign of the house of Constantine, i.e. the descendants or relatives of the first Christian emperor.

The wealthy, men who in previous generations might have boosted their status by endowing their cities with theatres, or temples, or bath-houses, had begun to find in the Church a new vent for their ambitions. This was why Julian, in a quixotic attempt to endow the worship of the ancient gods with a similar appeal, had installed a high priest over Galatia and urged his subordinates to practise poor relief. Christians did not merely inspire in Julian a profound contempt; they filled him with envy as well. [page 140]

There was no human existence so wretched, none so despised or vulnerable, that it did not bear witness to the image of God. Divine love for the outcast and derelict demanded that mortals love them too… ‘The bread in your board belongs to the hungry; the cloak in your wardrobe to the naked; the shoes you let rot to the barefoot; the money in your vaults to the destitute.’ The days when a wealthy man had only to sponsor a self-aggrandising piece of architecture to be hailed a public benefactor were well and truly gone. [pages 140-141]

In the following pages, Holland informs us that the quixotic Emperor Julian perished fighting the Persians, and gives us further evidence of how values were reversed:

And if so, then Martin—judged by the venerable standards of the aristocracy in Gaul—represented a new and disconcerting breed of hero: a Christian one. Such was the very essence of his magnetism. He was admired by his followers not despite but because of his rejection of worldly norms. Rather than accept a donative from Julian, he had publicly demanded release from the army altogether. ‘Until now it is you I have served; from this moment on I am a servant of Christ.’ Whether indeed Martin had truly said this, his followers found it easy to believe that he had… By choosing to live as a beggar, he had won a fame greater than that of any other Christian in Gaul… [pages 146-147]

No longer was Greco-Roman statuary, which so beautifully displayed the superb Aryan beauty, the benchmark for honouring the Aryan Gods. Now that the god of the Jews was in charge, it was necessary to admire their antithesis:

The first monk in Gaul ever to become a bishop, he was a figure of rare authority: elevated to the heights precisely because he had not wanted to be. Here, for anyone bred to the snobbery that had always been a characteristic of Roman society, was shock enough. Yet it was not only the spectacle of a smelly and shabbily dressed former soldier presiding as the most powerful man in Tours that had provoked a sense of a world turned upside down, of the last becoming first… As a soldier, though, he did have his heavy military cloak; and so, taking out his sword, he cut it in two, and gave one half to the beggar. No other story about Martin would be more cherished; no other story more repeated. This was hardly surprising. The echo was of a parable told by Jesus himself. The setting, as recorded in Luke’s gospel… [pages 147-149]

This image in a museum in Bamberg, Germany, which also appears in full colour in Holland’s book, shows Christ watching Martin sharing his cloak with a beggar. Holland then takes us to the year 394 to discuss the conduct of a billionaire, Meropius Pontius Paulinus:

Paulinus would present himself as a visual reproach to their extravagance. Pale from his sparse diet of beans, and with his hair roughly cropped like a slave’s, his appearance was calculated to shock. His body odour too. In an age when there existed no surer marker of wealth than to be freshly bathed and scented, Paulinus hailed the stench of the unwashed as ‘the smell of Christ’. [page 151]

As Hitler saw, Christianity was a religion that introduced spiritual terror into the Aryan soul. In the following paragraphs Holland explains the causes of such behaviour in a Roman who would once have used his wealth to honour Aryan beauty:

…he [Paulinus] far preferred another passage from the gospels. The story had been told by Jesus of a rich man, Dives, who refused to feed a beggar at his gates named Lazarus. The two men died. Dives found himself in fire, while Lazarus stood far above him, by Abraham’s side… Such was the fate that haunted Paulinus—and that he was resolved at all costs to avoid. [page 153]

In the final pages of the chapter, Holland informs us how the church reacted, thanks to the rationalisations of its African theologian, St Augustine, to reconcile the church’s love of riches with these Gospel passages. Yet Holland informs us that Clovis, the founder of the Merovingian dynasty, used to pray to St Martin: something which shows that even the most powerful warlord was already bowing down to a so-called saint.