Your argument falls at the first hurdle. Where did all the jewish moneylenders come from? There was no widespread diaspora of jewish financiers in europe before christians made a special place for them and gave them a monopoly.
^ Official Vatican magazine, 1890. The Jewish control of France began only following the anti-Catholic revolution, culmination in napoleon's emancipation of the Jews:
Some years ago, a French writer completed a savory work on the Jewish invasion of his country, using a rationale that, in substance, can be summarized as follows.
The French Christians have never forgotten that these Jews, by name and birth barbarians, most of whom are not pure, in less than a century have become our overlords. Their influence occurred in three phases: in 1791, when all of the national institutions collapsed; in 1815, when France fell prostrate; and in 1870, when the German armies mutilated France.
When in 1789 the era of revolution against the hegemony of the nobility and clergy began, what militated against these two ranks of our civilization? Their ownership of two-thirds of French soil. Taine recently justified the basis for this ownership. The nobility was formed in order to defend the nation against external enemies, and thus procure security and glory for the nation. The clergy have well merited credit for civilizing the nation, of having sweetened our customs, of enriching us through knowledge and churches, and through many thousands of expressions of charity.
Before the revolution, the clergy’s combined capital was estimated at about 4 billion francs. In 1789 there were at least 130,090 priests and religious. That was 30,000 francs for each. But after the revolution this was reduced to an income of 1,500 francs. To understand the magnitude of this, one need only look at the great number of people who cashed in on this reduction of capital to the clergy, and at the perquisites that were passed around everywhere. Who can deny a legitimate patrimony was subjected to an enormous abuse; and essentially confiscated?
A hundred years later there are no longer 130,000 priests and religious, but 60,000 foreign, non-French Jews, who head a social order that is not marked by distinguished service toward the nation. Rather, they are a voracious mob of worldly supernumeraries, who, one hundred years later, have snatched up in our house, not a sum of 4,000, but 90 billion francs.
And now, lords as they are over the public trust, they ardently inflame the common people, goading them against the clergy. The wicked popular passions they arouse form a screen for their monstrous wealth. At the time of the first revolution they reproved the clergy for their 4 billion francs. Yet, today isn’t it amazing to see the fortune of just one family of Jews (that of the Rothschilds), who have amassed it by bleeding from behind the scenes, in less than seventy years? And what’s more, this race was not content with bleeding us. They also made haste to kidnap the faith of Christ and the all that is most beautiful in our culture!
Thus did the passionate French writer end by exclaiming: "Christian Frenchmen, let us join together to thwart the wicked tricksters. Let us form a defense league against these enemies of the name, race, belief and fatherland of our traditions."
A similar cry is heard in other countries, and might also soon be heard in those where there is as yet no outcry, but where one shall soon be heard, when the boiling point is reached.
The difference between the strength and societal power the Jews have had in Europe post-1789 vs pre-1789 is greater than the difference between night and day. And yet "the Church did nothing to stand as a bulwark against the Jews," some would obstinately claim.
Like I said, why were those defences necessary in the first place? Before christianity there was no jewish question.
Because before Christianity there was no (historic) Christ, and it is precisely the revolution against Christ, in history that incarnated the Jewish Revolutionary Spirit within history. The Jews are not the force that they are because of their DNA. that is an embarrassing level of reductive thinking. The Jews are the force that they are because they were unified, in Spirit, against Christ, the Logos, Himself. Define the good, and those who choose to define themselves in opposition to it we will all the more united. Which is why Christ wisely and truly said, "He that is not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth." (Mat 12:30). With the advent of the Incarnation within time, all of human history is now measured by Him - if He is Who He says He is, how could it be otherwise?
Political advantages. Christianity offered a useful mechanism for suppressing and controlling large numbers of people. It's iron-age marxism.
<defining the antecedent in terms of the consequent.
It would be more accurate to say, "Marxism is Christianity without Christ." But of course, if Christ is indeed the Logos, then subtracting Christ from the equation radically changes the nature of the system, now doesn't it?
And yes, I think that without christianity the jews would have had a much more difficult time infiltrating europe. There's a reason why up until the 20th century the vast majority of their population was contained here: Christian countries make an ideal host.
This may be so. Liberalism likely would not have as readily evolved without the Christian sense that every man is made in the image and likeness of God. Marxism likely would not have evolved if not for liberalism.But to judge a thing by the corruption of it is mere folly, I'm sorry to say.
No. Jews are highly adapted to taking over centralised institutions. "Unity" is a weakness. We need decentralisation and a return to local governance.
No. Christianity has never been a european unifier, it has been a globaliser.
If all men are mortal, and Socrates is a man...
European unity need not entail European exclusivity. If Christianity unifies all people, then it unifies Europe. And this it clearly did, better than anything that has ever been, including the (Unholy) Roman Empire. Although God's Providence clearly (unsurprisingly) knew what it was doing in selecting the time of Rome to send the Son of God, for the connectedness of Rome made spreading the Gospel to all the world a possibility in a way it would not have been even a few centuries before.
We don't need Europe against the world, Broc. We need man united against sin.
PS 0 points 2 years ago
http://www.catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/judaism/jewrope.htm
^ Official Vatican magazine, 1890. The Jewish control of France began only following the anti-Catholic revolution, culmination in napoleon's emancipation of the Jews:
The difference between the strength and societal power the Jews have had in Europe post-1789 vs pre-1789 is greater than the difference between night and day. And yet "the Church did nothing to stand as a bulwark against the Jews," some would obstinately claim.
Because before Christianity there was no (historic) Christ, and it is precisely the revolution against Christ, in history that incarnated the Jewish Revolutionary Spirit within history. The Jews are not the force that they are because of their DNA. that is an embarrassing level of reductive thinking. The Jews are the force that they are because they were unified, in Spirit, against Christ, the Logos, Himself. Define the good, and those who choose to define themselves in opposition to it we will all the more united. Which is why Christ wisely and truly said, "He that is not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth." (Mat 12:30). With the advent of the Incarnation within time, all of human history is now measured by Him - if He is Who He says He is, how could it be otherwise?
<defining the antecedent in terms of the consequent.
It would be more accurate to say, "Marxism is Christianity without Christ." But of course, if Christ is indeed the Logos, then subtracting Christ from the equation radically changes the nature of the system, now doesn't it?
This may be so. Liberalism likely would not have as readily evolved without the Christian sense that every man is made in the image and likeness of God. Marxism likely would not have evolved if not for liberalism.But to judge a thing by the corruption of it is mere folly, I'm sorry to say.
Why not both? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity_(Catholicism)
If all men are mortal, and Socrates is a man...
European unity need not entail European exclusivity. If Christianity unifies all people, then it unifies Europe. And this it clearly did, better than anything that has ever been, including the (Unholy) Roman Empire. Although God's Providence clearly (unsurprisingly) knew what it was doing in selecting the time of Rome to send the Son of God, for the connectedness of Rome made spreading the Gospel to all the world a possibility in a way it would not have been even a few centuries before.
We don't need Europe against the world, Broc. We need man united against sin.
@CHIRO