Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: Christianity and Women

  1. #1
    Ritter
    Guest

    Wink Christianity and Women

    In pondering the relation of a religion to nature, we must also investigate its attitudes towards women. For our forefathers, the vessel and nourisher of life was held in very high esteem, considered equal, a peer. Roman and christian contemporaries of our forefathers remarked with astonishment that we considered women as equal with men. Older women, those beyond child-bearing years, were especially highly praised, often viewed as prophets.

    Their place of honor at an assembly was attractively adorned. The German expression of this place of honor was 'die im Hag Sitzende' (one who sits in a special enclosure); As an example of how the christians twisted and destroyed our customs, this phrase gradually found its way into the English-speaking world; hence the derogative expression for old women: old hags .

    With the domination of christianity, the old beliefs were changed. Women, according to Paul, should not say anything in the community, they should shut up! Woman was the source of sin and a piece of impure dirt. At the Council of Nicea the christians actually discussed with all seriousness whether women were people or animals! At the Synod of Macon, Burgundy, it was determined that women were animals (Oct 23, 585). The churchfathers Ambrose, Augustine and John Chrysostomus maintained that women are subhumans created only to serve man. Thomas Aquinas, named by the church as its primary teacher, preached that women are men that did not fully get formed! Girl babies were considered so unlucky that the church went through all sorts of philosophical contortions to explain how such 'mistakes' could happen: mal-formed male sperm, defects in the womb, damp south winds, too much rain (women hold more water than men). The highly appreciated 'Hag' of the Germans evolved into the witch of modern day christianity. And witches, of course, had to be burned at the stake... one million alone in the 17th century. In the 18th century a Swedish protestant bishop, Troilus, lamented that his flock was not active enough in persecuting witches. As recently as 1910 the Roman Catholic Church's Canon Code permitted a husband to starve, beat, bind and lock up his wife ('til death do us part, presumably).

    The act of love was viewed by the churchfather Augustine as abominable, devilish, disgusting passion, corruption; Bonaventure, another churchfather, said loving stinks. Bernhard of Clairvaux claimed that people who had intercourse descended to depths lower than swine. For almost 2000 years the church has constantly condemned marriage, holding up as models eunuchs such as Origines and Tertullian rather than married men.

    The idea of using women as things to sell like cattle is an eastern implant, one foreign to western people. Yet the Religion of Love grafted this horrendous practice onto the western scene.

    Of course the church did make one exception, the so called Mother of God. This Mary was given as a model for females.

    In 1950, Pope Pius XII proclaimed the Doctrine that Mary was literally taken up to heaven after she died. Of course, he never remarked about why she had to die in the first place. And why is it that no man has been so privileged? Is it because more women than men go to church? Seeing how the church has oppressed women over the past 2000 years it is a little easier to sympathize with many of the goals of the current 'Women's Liberation Movement'.

    www.nordzeit.de

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our women need to be free of Judeo-Christian oppression.

  2. #2
    davison6
    Guest

    Post Re: Christianity and Women

    Originally posted by Ritter
    In 1950, Pope Pius XII proclaimed the Doctrine that Mary was literally taken up to heaven after she died. Of course, he never remarked about why she had to die in the first place. And why is it that no man has been so privileged? Is it because more women than men go to church? Seeing how the church has oppressed women over the past 2000 years it is a little easier to sympathize with many of the goals of the current 'Women's Liberation Movement'.
    That's a veritable Holocaust You just recited, but I see no reason to compensate for it by extending any support or sympathy to the feminists, who would merely start a new Holocaust against men. Many of them would tear apart a goal cherished by many WN/NS: a return to the days when a woman's most honored place was in the home.

  3. #3
    Ritter
    Guest

    Post

    You missed the entire meaning of that post!

    We are calling for the return of the old ways!
    Were women are held up. I don't support those man-haters out their. But we must bring our Aryan Women to their potental if we are to ever advance as a people. Holding them down is wrong!

    (btw, I didn't write that essay)

    Checkout the link. The site is in German but, on the bottom of the page, go to "Archiv" the to "English", it will give you a list of essays including this one in english. It has more good ones in german too.

  4. #4
    davison6
    Guest

    Post

    Originally posted by Ritter
    You missed the entire meaning of that post!
    We are calling for the return of the old ways!
    Were women are held up. I don't support those man-haters out their. But we must bring our Aryan Women to their potental if we are to ever advance as a people. Holding them down is wrong!
    I'm pro-choice about this. I think that holding them up too high simply puts them in a different kind of cage, as well as effectively keeping them out of reach of all except a few elite men. The exact ways and means this could happen merit their own essay, and the possible scenarios are quite broad. I think that women should be free to pursue careers, nor do I think they should be frowned upon if they decide to pursue it exclusively. But I do think that we should support motherhood and make it a socially respectable option again. While I normally take a dim view of women demanding things from men, in the case of housewives who fulfilled their duties as best they could and supported their husband's career, I do favor reasonable alimony.
    I also take a dim view of people demanding things from the government, but at least as a temporary measure, an Office of Parental Affairs might be able to help working class people arrange good daycare, etc. I would certainly encourage women of maternal character who do not have to work to help out their less fortunate sisters (and brothers) by signing up at Parental Affairs to provide daycare in exchange for some spending money or something.

    (btw, I didn't write that essay)
    Checkout the link. The site is in German but, on the bottom of the page, go to "Archiv" the to "English", it will give you a list of essays including this one in english. It has more good ones in german too.
    It was actually a good essay, right up until that last bit of treason about sympathizing with feminists. Although women have been second class citizens in many ways even in our cultures, our love of individual freedom and our individual love for the women who make our lives happy have always guaranteed our women much more rights than other cultures. Some of the things that hold women back are biological, like the fact that to many companies a woman who marries is of compromised effectiveness. If You look at it from the company's viewpoint, she is of compromised effectiveness. Feminism isn't about equality, it's about dumping the burden of their biology on men while helping with our burdens not at all. Feminism and Aryanism are totally incompatible even for moderates like me. Unfortunately, I see so many otherwise strong men turn into silly putty at the prospect of a lady joining the movement, and agreeing with whatever she says no matter how stupid. I realize we're short on women, but that's because we're still a fringe movement. Women always follow where strong men lead, so if we get our act together, women will join. There is no need to coddle them, especially at a stage where we don't have much to coddle them with.

  5. #5
    Ritter
    Guest

    Post

    I didn't mean 'coddle', I don't think they are babies.
    Women are just more powerful than men.
    They have a power we could never have... giving life.
    We need women inoder to give life to the cause.

    The whold essay was about, how the Church has held women down. This is so true. Pre-Christian Aryan beliefs were like that at all.

  6. #6
    davison6
    Guest

    Post

    Originally posted by Ritter
    I didn't mean 'coddle', I don't think they are babies.
    Women are just more powerful than men.
    They have a power we could never have... giving life.
    We need women inoder to give life to the cause.
    This is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Sure, women can give life...
    ...if a man gives her the seed first.
    Despite the large number of exceptions, on the whole men are naturally more powerful than women. Women follow where strong men lead, it has always been and always will be that way. When women are coming here of their own accord, then that's a sign that we're getting somewhere, but if we have to lure them in here then it won't do any good. Just getting a bunch of women here will not breathe new life into the movement. On the contrary, it could give us all a serious case of PMS.

    The whold essay was about, how the Church has held women down. This is so true. Pre-Christian Aryan beliefs were like that at all.
    Idealization can be dangerous. Even in our cultures women were generally subject to men. It's true that Celtic culture definitely assigned them equal status, but this is demonstrably due to the extremely heavy influence of the Goddess religion on the Celts. Aryan culture itself was vigorously resisted in many areas because of it's subjugation of women (who were queens and priestesses in matriarchal Old Europe). Suttee, for instance, seems to have been an ancient Aryan custom, not a late Indo-Aryan invention. It is well attested in Greek myth. In Germanic culture they did have high status as priestesses, but they served a military king, who controlled them, as opposed to the Old Europeans where the High Priestess was the queen of a theocratic government.

  7. #7
    Account Inactive
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Last Online
    Sunday, January 24th, 2010 @ 10:00 PM
    Subrace
    Other
    Gender
    Politics
    Spenglarian
    Posts
    334
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post

    Originally posted by davison6
    Aryan culture itself was vigorously resisted in many areas because of it's subjugation of women (who were queens and priestesses in matriarchal Old Europe). Suttee, for instance, seems to have been an ancient Aryan custom, not a late Indo-Aryan invention. It is well attested in Greek myth. In Germanic culture they did have high status as priestesses, but they served a military king, who controlled them, as opposed to the Old Europeans where the High Priestess was the queen of a theocratic government.
    I don't know which clan of Aryans ever practised that instance so horrid. But it seems that you have everything available to you with the wisdom of the judeo-hellenics.

    Suttee, indeed, is a late custom and its not factually correct to call it Indo-Aryan at all. It was perpetrated by the sub-cultural groups like the Bengalis(who speak a half-caste indo-Aryan language and were early sympathisers of the "judeo-british colonial conquest"), the Rajputs of Rajasthan, not many of whom are actually Aryans.

    Now talk about a recent movie on the child-molestation of a young girl by the priest in southern India. He is of a higher caste. That is enough to add as weight to the polemic that women are deprived among the Aryans. Do you know those priest folk are actually Dravidians and not Aryans?

    About priestesses representing "theocracy" in Europe, it sounds like some christianated agenda, again treating IE in middle eastern terms.

    Will continue.....

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Last Online
    Thursday, March 30th, 2017 @ 05:01 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    German and English
    Subrace
    Nordid
    mtDNA
    H
    Country
    Prussia Prussia
    State
    Teutonic Order Teutonic Order
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Aquarius
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    Ethnocentrism
    Religion
    Asatru
    Posts
    1,827
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    3 Posts

    Post

    Yeah, christianity is very strange in that it frowns upon sex, marriage, and women, you'd almost think they were fags! x_lol x_lol x_lol x_lol x_lol
    Last edited by GreenHeart; Wednesday, July 31st, 2002 at 11:19 PM.

  9. #9
    davison6
    Guest

    Post

    Originally posted by NordicPower88
    Yeah, christianity is very strange in that it frowns upon sex, marriage, and women, you'd almost think they were fags! x_lol x_lol x_lol x_lol x_lol
    They were worse than fags, in many cases they were eunuchs! Fortunately, a reading of the Bible shows that Our Lord had no such weird ideas, or he wouldn't have been criticized for spending so much time with prostitutes.

  10. #10
    davison6
    Guest

    Post

    Originally posted by Rahul
    I don't know which clan of Aryans ever practised that instance so horrid. But it seems that you have everything available to you with the wisdom of the judeo-hellenics.
    I have some sad news for You, Rahul, but many documented instances of suttee date to times when the Jews were a minuscule tribe of pesky religious fanatics derided by the whole world, which at that time saw their beliefs for the absurdities they are. In particular, Greek myth mentions Gorgophone, daughter of Perseus, as the first woman to remarry instead of throwing herself on her husband's funeral pyre. This myth dates to a time when there was no such thing as Hebrews, merely undifferentiated western Semites known today as Amorites squabbling up and down the Levant.

    Suttee, indeed, is a late custom and its not factually correct to call it Indo-Aryan at all. It was perpetrated by the sub-cultural groups like the Bengalis(who speak a half-caste indo-Aryan language and were early sympathisers of the "judeo-british colonial conquest"), the Rajputs of Rajasthan, not many of whom are actually Aryans.
    That it was continued into historical times by Dravidians doesn't surprise me. It's original appearance in Aryan culture involves a complex blend of
    1) hero worship and the attendant sacrifices that were common throughout the ancient world upon the death of heroes and kings. In this context I must note that whereas the ancient Vikings asked for one volunteer to accompany a dead chieftain (and killed her quickly), other peoples buried the entire harem alive.
    and 2) the downfall of the matriarchal system, which can only be reconstructed from myth in the case of our earliest ancestors. However, it is known that Siberia was part of the same matriarchal culture as Paleolithic Europe, and the continuing power struggle between the Aryan military aristocracy and the Old European theocracy is much better documented, as it wasn't quite over in classical times.

    Now talk about a recent movie on the child-molestation of a young girl by the priest in southern India. He is of a higher caste. That is enough to add as weight to the polemic that women are deprived among the Aryans. Do you know those priest folk are actually Dravidians and not Aryans?
    I have not the faintest inkling what this incident has to the current discussion. It has taken it's latest turn as a reaction to Ritter's excessive adoration, which is itself a demonstration of our tendency to grant them much more than other cultures. I am simply reminding him that it's dangerous to idealize excessively as we are not entirely free of certain customs.

    About priestesses representing "theocracy" in Europe, it sounds like some christianated agenda, again treating IE in middle eastern terms.
    Trust me, the histories I base this on, and the even more ancient myths, were written down when anybody who didn't laugh out loud at Hebrew mysticism would have been considered insane. It's true that remnants of these priestesses were persecuted as witches in the Medieval era, but that only shows how persistent their religion was, and scraps of it can still be found across Europe today.

    Will continue.....
    Please do, this thread has real promise now.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Christianity - The Best Deal Women Ever Had
    By Dagna in forum Christianity
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: Sunday, November 9th, 2008, 04:40 AM
  2. Is Christianity Just for Women and Sissies?
    By Taras Bulba in forum Christianity
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: Saturday, June 10th, 2006, 04:31 AM
  3. Christianity and Women
    By Blutwölfin in forum Christianity
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Monday, November 7th, 2005, 09:08 PM
  4. Christianity and Women
    By Blutwölfin in forum Germanic Heathenry
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Monday, November 7th, 2005, 07:32 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •