About

Who We Are and What We Believe

Ortho:  Right, correct, straight. As in orthodoxy (right teaching), orthogonal (literally, right-sided; thus, right angled; so, perpendicular, independent) and orthognomon (right knowledge, right indicator (as of a carpenter’s square or a sundial)).

Sphere:  A domain, especially of influence. Thus,

Orthosphere: A domain of Christian orthodoxy independent of conventional conservatism.

We are Christians: Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox. We believe our religion is true, and we take the Bible and the Church Fathers as our guides to the faith. We do not innovate religiously, for that is folly.

We affirm our respective traditions where they disagree with the other branches of Christianity, but we do so respectfully, for we have much in common (catholic or mere Christianity) and our enterprise has as much to do with society as with religion.

Socio-politically, we can be called “traditionalist conservatives” or “Christian reactionaries.”  Since we agree that Modernity—the fundamental principle of contemporary Western Civilization—is radically defective, we are branded “far-right.” In truth, we affirm what was regarded as self-evident by the vast majority of mankind until well into the Twentieth Century: Religion is true, authority is valid and good, man and woman differ in essential ways, and so on. If affirming reality puts us at the rightmost end of the political spectrum, as the world construes politics, then so be it.

We recognize that the societies of the West are radically disordered, and it is our desire that they move toward a more proper order, one which acknowledges Christianity. Although we are Christians, our primary concern here is not with how individual souls are to be saved from the wrath of God, but rather with how society ought to be ordered. Therefore both Christians and friendly non-Christians are welcome at the Orthosphere.

28 thoughts on “About

  1. Pingback: Orthosphere | Amerika: New Right, Conservationist, Traditionalist, Deep Ecology and Conservative Thought

  2. I like the idea of these posts consisting of a variety of questions and self-reflection, but sometimes they are too short and not varied enough in scope. For example, the article that said women are supposed to be less highly sexed than men for example, that clearly is an opinion, not a scientific fact. Perhaps men seem more highly sexual, but their behaviour as being sexually predatory and irresponsible is accepted more so than women being promiscuous, etc. I think that women are prone to the same immorality as men, but social roles keep them in check, so to speak. Perhaps I am wrong as well but you wouldn’t believe how immoral lots of young women are today.

    • The newly aquainted couple in the Rest Home were establishing the rules of order in the new relationship. Naturally, the woman spoke first. She said, “I must have sex every day.” He said, “OK. Put me down for Fridays.”

      Men seem more “highly sexual” because of the role genetically given. We seek. We hunt. And we are larger, stronger. We can take what we want. So, we are more obvious, even anotomically.

      A man usual has to mount a campaign. A woman needs only raise an eyebrow or blow in an ear. Piety and promiscuity are in the eye of the beholder. One man’s harlot is another man’s warm, healthy female.

      The when and why of whatever they do or do not, is a mystery to behold, not solve.

      As Billy Crystal said, “Women need a reason to have sex. Men only need a place.” Realizing this, women long ago began the next step in civilization, negotiation— which has produced all the difficulties we face today.

      “You never really know a woman until you meet her in court.” Norman Mailer.

      They are the most beautiful mortal mystery.

  3. Pingback: Regarding Scientific “Objectivity” | Conservative Heritage Times

    • From Dalrock’s blog I foung this one. Totally cool! I plan on putting in a few hours reading here. Thanx in advance to all the caring posters. May God bless us all in our search for truth and a better society.

  4. Pingback: The Orthosphere — Limbicnutrition Weblog

  5. Pingback: Is Christianity Inherently Left-Wing and Egalitarian? | Occam's Razor

  6. OrthoSphere,

    Regarding the visual trichotomy of the Dark Enlightenment, here is a great visual of the theonomists:

    This is being sent around on various email lists.

  7. Pingback: Religion 2.0: Identitarian Religion | Occam's Razor

  8. Pingback: Conservative Evangelical Nutjobs Pray for Amnesty | Occam's Razor

  9. Pingback: Catholic Church declares war on West | Occam's Razor

  10. Pingback: As Christianity becomes a ghetto religion…. | Occam's Razor

  11. Pingback: The Evangelical Adoption Scam | Occam's Razor

  12. What about patriarchy? It was a good working model in the west until about the late 19th century. Maybe traditional gender roles could be the solution to reordering society? At least that is my position over at my blog “What’s Wrong With Equal Rights” as my name implies, I take the stand that the sexes should be treated differently where it is logical (which it is under many circumstances).

  13. I recommend that you not focus so much on East and West; focus instead on every individual’s tendency toward sin and disorder when not aided by the grace of God. For, whatever is present in the societies of the West today has been present in the societies of the East in the past (and is present there today, except not receiving the full support of the State). My point is whether a state engenders sinful life styles or not, those life styles are always there anyway – but just hidden.

    Perhaps the most important thing to fight for in these societies today is Freedom of Religion. Remember how Russia/Soviet Union cruelly fought to drive Christianity out in order to form an atheistic society. Remember how many other countries, even in the East, have done the same in some fashion in history.

    Finally, the LORD Jesus Christ did not send his Apostles out with sword in hand to conquer people. He said to go out but that whomever did not accept them, dust off their shoes and move to the next house / town and leave the rest to God. Right? So, we are not directed to force Christianity; we are directed to invite others to Christ.

  14. Pingback: A new trend: Identitarian Religion | Occam's Razor

  15. Pingback: Is Mainstream Christianity Dead Set on Destruction of Western Peoples? | Occam's Razor

  16. Pingback: Should we look to Eastern Europe? | Treason and Treachery

  17. Here we go again. The youngest religious movement on the planet is always looking for a way to invalidate all those that came before it, and always in the name of “can’t we just get along”.

    I grew up as a Christian. I left the faith permanently when my own Christian mother tried to kill me because she didn’t approve of a church I was attending. Ultimately, every Christian thinks they are right and anyone who disagrees is “damned”. I’d rather be damned than be a narrow minded person who can’t accept that the US 1st Amendment protects a right to not be a Christian.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s