The Christmas Coronation of Charlemagne 800 A.D.
“It is now upon you alone that the churches of Christ lean, from you alone that they await safety, from you, the avenger of crimes, guide of those who err, consoler of the afflicted, upholder of good.” So said Alcuin of York of Charlemagne, who on Christmas Day 800 A.D. was crowned the King of Christendom by Pope Leo III.
On this 1220th Christmas Day after the coronation of Charlemagne and the inauguration of Christendom I, any semblance of that Christendom has been thoroughly vanquished and definitely replaced by Satanic States and a universal anti-Christic dystopia. Thus the erstwhile Christian nations no longer have the meaning they once did, for they have apostatized, are devoid of God, and are thus illegitimate. Nostalgic ethnic sentiments and cultural romantic reenactments do not change the fact that Western countries—and most especially those that formed the bulwark of Christendom I such as France, Italy, Spain, Ireland, and even the late-coming America—have not merely reverted to heathenism but are essentially and virulently anti-Christic. For these cultures have betrayed, in fact are based upon, the very rejection of the Christian heart of Western civilization, and thus are rendered virulently hostile to Christ and his people. In short, these nations and these cultures, unlike the natural law based pagans of old, are utterly irredeemable, having as their very essence an anti-Christic dynamics. This means that the third millennium is a time where Christian patriotism can no longer be properly equated with nationalism but rather only with true piety, or love and honor of God and parents. That is, a righteous patriotism then derives solely from the inseparable love of, and wholehearted allegiance to, faith and family.
Due to the new hostile sociopolitical realities, the third millennium is a time as well of new beginnings; it is a time of the clan and the small-faith community of families; and it a time when a new Christendom will be built (to the extent that it is built) solely on Christ an those clans and families. If any new Christian sociopolitical entities, even new countries, are to arise, they must arise anew and outside and beyond the demarcations of the past; outside and transcendent of the current sociopolitical powers-that-be; they must arise outside and in contradistinction to the world, the flesh, and the devil. This dawn of the third millennium requires the advent of a new Christian culture comprised of individual pastoral, that is grassroots, shoots that have made their way up among the ruins of an anti-Christic, dystopic world.
It is now, in this the third Christian age, that the lay faithful are called to grow up and out of the childhood of ages past. These faithful, these so-called “commoners” and “citizens,” are called to rise up fully mature, no longer holding onto props of the world, no longer dependent or subservient to powers and principalities, but only holding onto, dependent upon, and subservient to the Holy Cross. The third millennium is truly the age of the laity. It is the age of the laity because it is the age of the family and the imago Dei individual (the image of God as free rational-volitional beings) that comprises that family. And it is the age of the family and imago Dei individual because that family is being destroyed and the individual enslaved as never before; for in God’s economy “where sin abounds grace abounds more” (RM 5:20), the truth and good arising in direct contradiction to the prevalent falsehood and evil.
1,220 years after the Coronation of Charlemagne on Christmas day, “the whole salvation of the Church of Christ,” that is, any possibility of a new Christendom, once again resides with the laity. But this new Christendom entails not the restoring of the ancient Western monarchies (as many traditionalists whimsically espouse), but with reinforcing the only timelessly God-ordain monarchy, that of the family. A new Christendom entails not the divine rights of elite kings and royal families, but rather the divine rights of the common man and the nuclear family. And these divine rights of the common lay faithful are absolute, for they derive from the faithful’s absolute right to do their duty to God, that is, their duty to abide by both natural and divine law, and indeed divine inspiration. But make no mistake, those that so abide by natural and divine law are outlaws to the Satanic State; a State that as such must be militantly engaged for “the whole salvation of the Church of Christ,” and most specifically and urgently for the salvation of the domestic church that is the family.
Patriotic Piety Contra Nationalism
The toxicity of the anti-Christic third millennium requires that Christian piety and devotion no longer be squandered on a supposed but baseless duty to king, flag, or country. No longer should a romanticizing of a country’s past Christian heritage evoke allegiance to that country’s anti-Christic present. And no longer can a Christian justify a particular nationalism against a larger internationalism, for internationalism is but nationalism writ large. Rather, in the third-millennium, Christian piety, patriotism, loyalty, and devotion must be given to that which a person can truly know and so can truly love; and it is the Faith made tangible in the family, and the community of families, that one can truly know and love. It is neither countries, nor royal lineages, nor constitutions that God has immutably ordained, but rather it is the Holy Faith in grace and the sacrosanct family in both nature and grace that is God-ordained.
Christian’s must not give their hearts to a State. Again, they are called to be patriots only in so far as they are called to be pious. A Christian’s allegiance should be both familial and universal, not national and political. For familial allegiance is grass-rooted, as charity begins in the home; and universal allegiance justly transcends nations, as all men are created in God’s holy image (and indeed all men have families as well). But when a people’s allegiance is national and political the flower of their own nation’s familial foundation is inexorably conscripted and exterminated, while the families of opposing politics or nations are likewise afflicted.
Yes, Aristotle was wrong. Aristotle’s polis model and political philosophy imbued the State with a sacred, albeit pagan, nature, and held it to be the only perfect society. In the erstwhile Christian era, this theory was subsequently “baptized” by adding the Church, even in her accidental and improper bureaucratic and political power, as the only other “perfect society.” This modified/baptized Greco-Roman model entails the State and the bureaucratic magisterial Church as having a united God-ordained authority over the people (indeed the clergy was considered aristocracy). The family was said to lack self-sufficiency and so was held to be an imperfect society. As such the individuals which make up the imperfect family were tasked to depend upon and thus subservient unto the “perfect” conglomerate of State and Church.
This widely adopted sociopolitical model is an example (another being an acquired virtue-based morality) of “Saint” Aristotle’s undue influence. The error of the Greco-Roman, and subsequently Christianized, sociopolitical conceptualization is personified in Aristotle’s consummate hero, Socrates. For, though Socrates taught in theory that the heeding of truth is the greatest good, he lacked the courage to assert his right to do his duty to God and truth. Rather, Socrates commits the grave and cowardly sin of suicide because he could not bear the thought of being exiled from the totalitarian body politic. Such cowardliness can be attributed in part to the perverse belief in pagan Greece (as well as Rome) that the State was divine. But not so in Judaic or Christian culture; or at least not so until the Jews, murmuring against God’s will, sought to have a king like the pagans did (see Book of Samuel, 7th Century B.C.); or at least not so until the Popes, amidst the intrigues and alliances of the Church hierarchy with princes, sought to proclaim themselves kings (see Pope Boniface VIII’s Unam Sanctam, November 18th, 1302).
But in truth, there are no perfect material societies or institutions here below, for matter is necessarily limiting and thus imperfect in this fallen world. So contrary to pagan theory, lack of self-sufficiency does not belie the superiority of the family, for all here below is insufficient, including the State, Corporation, or bureaucratic elements of the Church (be she ever so perfect dogmatically and mystically). In fact, the family’s very insufficiency is why all other sociopolitical entities exist: they exist to fulfill the family’s needs. Hence, it is the family and not the State that is the reason for being and end of sociopolitics: that is, the family is the superior society for which all other sociopolitical societies are ordered. As such, it is the community of families, writ small or large, that is the most proper and indeed most relatively perfect sociopolitical entity.
Divine Rights & Sacred Duties
Providentially enough, it is the family’s nemesis of technology—a technology that can intrude itself upon the intimacy and in-the-moment interpersonal/familial interaction—that is also the family’s boon. For technology allows a familial self-sufficiency that was in the past only possible for families of large estates. With multiplying technology (from tractors, to sewing machines, to computers), as well as instant accessibility, communication, and commerce (from online shopping, to online business, to online homeschooling and libraries) the family has the additional means to do for itself without ever leaving the comforts and cloister of the home.
This new familial technological self-sufficiency only emphasizes all the more the priceless value of a woman’s exclusive dedication to the family and home, dedication that requires doctoral level competencies to manage the complexities of contemporary home economics (complex multitasking is characteristically a feminine aptitude). But even with a technologically enhanced home economy, the family in the third millennium remains hapless, without that which only a woman can provide: the sweet maternal love that is the very nectar and sine qua non of human and familial flourishing. So too, for men this new self-sufficiency makes possible an entrepreneurship that allows them to rightly distance themselves from the State and its status quo large corporations (which are just as satanic as their governmental partners in crime.) These men, freed from servitude to Leviathan, are better able to remand all their efforts directly to the well-being of their families, wives, children, and homes; indeed yhey are better able to recognize and thus repel the evils perpetrated against their families by that very Leviathan.
From home-grown produce, home-schooling, and cottage industries to Christian corporations, neighborhood militias, and patriarchal governing, the family and the extended community of families can in this technologically enhanced third millennium achieve a degree of self-sufficiency, independence, and perfection that was never before possible. But again, this will only be actualized if responsibility is assumed by fathers as the God-ordained leaders of natural and Christian society; it will only come to fruition if mothers are enthroned as the God-ordained center and heart of natural and Christian existence; and it will only thrive if individual Christians uncompromisingly exert their absolute right to dutifully heed their God-ordained conscience informed by natural and revealed truths.
The principles of Christian sociopolitics are based themselves upon the even more basic and overriding principles of imago Dei individualism, which derives from both the Imago Dei and Christian Crucial Vocations and specifically from the conscience informed by natural and divine laws. In fact, the principles of Christian sociopolitics, patriarchal or otherwise, are properly ordered to (in addition to the familial) the facilitation of imago Dei individualism and the rightly informed conscience. These key imago Dei principles of responsibilities and rights, of duties and authority, are themselves related to the moral principle of subsidiarity.
Subsidiarity holds that all matters of governing ought to be handled by the most basic and least centralized competent authority. The principle of subsidiarity is an immutable moral principle since it derives directly from the natural fact that the human person is made in the image of God. Man being made in the image of God means he is a creature who is rational and volitional, and thus is radically free and responsible. This rationality, volition, freedom, and responsibility is the essence of human personhood, and is intrinsic to the doctrine of the creation of man and his redemption. Being made in the image of God, it is the individual who is the essential moral actor, it is the individual who chooses good or evil, it is the individual who is ultimately responsible, and it is the individual who, by his own choice, is saved or damned. Thus, the principle of subsidiarity, as well as the principle of a conscience informed by natural and divine laws, are of the most foundational principles of an adequate anthropology.
Authentic subsidiarity must derive from the authority of God himself, that is it is neither of the egoistic whims of the individual, nor any chauvinisms of family or ethnicity, not any in-group power-curves, and definitely not from the supposed largess of the State. Inexactly, individualism is often used to claim rights as per the dignity of the human person, but the only right the human person has is to do his duty to God, and the dignity of the human person is in his being in God’s image. Authentic individualism and its ensuing subsidiarity must be based on the understanding that human authority and rights derive from God, not the individual separate from him. So too, then, the family is not an end in itself but the primary and most effective means for facilitating true imago Dei individualism. For it is the family that is foundational, and most intimate and responsive to the unique person as he goes through the stages of human development.
The New Age of a Familial, Grassroots Christendom
Rights do not derive from the State, but rather the State’s rights, its very validity, derives solely from its facilitation of an authentic imago Dei individualism and the good of the family. But in the third millennium, and at any time that despots have reign, to champion subsidiarity, imago Dei individualism, and the sacrosanct family will be violently opposed by the State. It remains then up to the family (and most effectively, the sociopolitically structured patriarchal family, and most righteously the Christian patriarchal family) to militantly champion imago Dei individuality and hence the majestic authority of God himself.
If the Holy Faith is to thrive in the third millennium, no longer can Christians be dependent on or subservient to the powers-that-be; no longer can they allow themselves to be the pawns of princes, presidents, principalities, or political powers. If there is to be any semblance of a new Christendom in the third millennium, no longer can the Holy Faith have its locus in ecclesial entities; no longer can the Faith be equated primarily with the papacy, prelature, or parish. Rather, in this third millennium, the Holy Faith must find both its dynamic leadership, primary identification, and impactive dynamics in the Christian family. This will entail creating nothing less than a grassroots Christian order that is a separate and self-sufficient power structure unto itself, with values, laws, and governance that transcends, and truly countermands, that of the perverse popular culture and the Satanic State.
The family is sacrosanct in its subsidiary authority because it is in the family especially that the drama of the individual delicately unfolds, and it is in the family that true love, understanding, interpersonal communion, and hence human formation, superlatively take place. The family in its primary God-given authority is the very last bastion against the enslavement of the imago Dei individual by a technologically enhanced, and hence tyrannically crazed, total State. But be certain that the bringing about of a new Christendom can inexorably take place if done one soul and one family at time. Thus a radical, courageous, and celebratory living out of the Faith and domestic life is achievable for one and all, now and immediately; the anti-Christic powers-that-be be damned. So to all people of good-will be of good Christmas cheer and New Year vigor, for from the darkest hour arises the brightest hope!