Fascinating article about the differences between the American Pagan  
revival
and continental European Paganism , some of which  --as in  Lithuania--
is a still-living continuation of spiritual traditions that go back  
thousands
of years. FYI, there also is still-living Paganism in parts of Russia  and
a few rural areas of Poland and Finland and the Balkans.
 
In America, but not in Europe, or not very much in Europe, some  % of 
Christians
have obvious interest in reviving Goddess traditions within a Biblical  
context.
Also the case among some Jews, those who seek to do things with 
Lilith tradition or Shekhina / Matronit tradition. So, there is a
Christian - Pagan blend going on with some version of the Goddess
as mediating between the two.
 
Anyway, a good overview of this movement in modern religion.
 
Billy
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
 
 
 
Pointedly Pagan 
The Pagan-Fascist Controversy
We need a new historical understanding of Paganism's recent past.
By _Gus  diZerega_ (http://www.patheos.com/About-Patheos/Gus-diZerega.html) 
, September 29, 2011
"Like" the _Patheos Pagan Page_ 
(http://www.facebook.com/pages/Patheos-Pagan-Portal/185230108170664)  on 
Facebook to receive today's best  commentary 
on Pagan issues.
A few years back, there was a bit of a stir within the academic Pagan  
community when the _Pomegranate_ (http://www.equinoxpub.com/Pom) , a Pagan 
journal then seeking to become  academic, published a piece by Peter 
Staudenmaier 
on why Paganism was irrational  and would likely lead to the kind of 
politics he equated with fascism. The  editor wanted to stir up controversy, 
and 
stir it he did. I responded that the  author, a follower of the 
left-communist anarchist _Murray Bookchin_ 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Bookchin) 
, didn't know anything about modern Paganism  and was cherry picking his 
examples and blurring his categories to make his  case. Further, by equating 
totalitarianism with the right, he rather glaringly  ignored Stalin. 
The issue of Pagan irrationality leading to fascist politics rose up again 
in  a debate I had with Ken Wilber. (Ken has _since set aside_ 
(http://www.integralworld.net/dizerega.html)  his blanket condemnation of us.) 
I 
summarized  many of these issues in _an article_ 
(http://blog.beliefnet.com/apagansblog/2008/02/deep-ecology-paganism-and-fascism-revisited.html)
  a few years 
back on my Beliefnet  blog. 
But at the same time, the people who had pointed to an earlier connection 
of  Paganism and European fascism had raised an interesting issue, one that 
since  then has never been all that far from my mind. For the connection 
between  "Paganism" and fascism did in fact exist. Martin Heidegger and C. G. 
Jung were  both German thinkers who influenced many people in believing that 
the modern  Enlightenment lost access to and recognition of the power of 
spiritual truths  within the world. Heidegger's collaboration with the Nazis 
_is 
well known_ 
(http://books.google.ro/books?id=0eJa3xPCThsC&source=gbs_similarbooks_r&cad=2) 
; Jung's is less so. But in 1932,  before Hitler came to 
power, Jung wrote, "The huzzahs of the Italian nation go  forth to the 
personality of the Duce, and the dirges of other nations lament the  absence of 
strong leaders." Two years later, after Hitler came to power while  referring 
to 
this passage, Jung wrote, "Since this sentence was written, Germany  too 
has found its Führer" (_The Seduction of Unreason_ 
(http://www.amazon.com/Seduction-Unreason-Intellectual-Nietzsche-Postmodernism/dp/0691125996/ref=sr_1_1?
s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1317249003&sr=1-1) , p. 75).   
And yet the critiques these men made of the modern secular mentality and 
the  kinds of knowledge it provided were often penetrating and remain 
valuable. I,  for one, agree with many of their criticisms. So what are we to 
make 
of their  execrable politics? And is there any connection between their 
critique of  secular modernity and fascism? 
At the same time, there were some superficial similarities between an  
interwar German youth movement and the American counter culture of the 60s. The 
 
tragedies and disruptions of the first-world era disgusted many German 
young  people and more than a few elected to turn to getting closer to nature 
as 
more  authentic and worthwhile. Here is an interesting account of this 
movement's _impact on Werner Heisenberg_ 
(http://www.aip.org/history/heisenberg/p04_text.htm) , one of the greatest 
scientists of  his time. His motivations 
will be completely understandable to many of us from  the 60s generation. 
I think I have found the answer to the similarities as well as the profound 
 dissimilarities between the interwar German interest in Paganism and 
nature and  that of the 60s and all that has followed. If I am right it is very 
interesting,  but not in the way our critics think. What follows compresses 
elements of  English, German, and French cultural history over about a 
century into a few  paragraphs. It paints with a broad brush. But I think it 
paints broadly  accurately, although I look forward to any constructive (or 
critical but on  topic) comments any of my readers might wish to provide. 
America and Europe: Different but similar 
When modern industrialism began to arise, a great many penetrating 
observers  in Europe and America alike saw and wrote about its shadow side. But 
they 
saw  and wrote about it from within very different contexts. 
Americans wrote from within a culture profoundly shaped by the ideals of 
the  American Revolution and the liberal sentiments of the Declaration of  
Independence, sentiments that had let most of the original states to abolish  
slavery peacefully and for some even to give women the vote. America's 
loyalists  had fled to Canada or to England, and most never returned. For a few 
decades,  the South also remained within this liberal zone before the growing  
profitability of slavery led its leaders to reject the liberal principles 
of the  Declaration. And so our critics of industrial modernity, men like 
Henry David  Thoreau and Ralph Waldo Emerson and the homegrown critics of mass 
wage labor,  such as Henry George, all wrote from within a liberal 
framework. The first  flowering of an alternative spirituality under conditions 
of 
religious liberty  and the growing spiritual leadership of women also occurred 
during this time, as  Sarah Pike explains in her book _New Age and Pagan 
Religions_ 
(http://www.amazon.com/Neopagan-Religions-Columbia-Contemporary-American/dp/0231124031/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1317249554&sr=1-1)
 . 
Europeans with similar sensibilities towards spirit and the world lived in 
a  very different world. They confronted a liberalism that for the most part 
no  longer spoke the language of human rights. After the French Revolution, 
for  various reasons good and bad, European liberals had narrowed their 
appeal to the  bourgeoisie and the new industrialists.  Much of Europe remained 
rural,  conservative, religious, and wedded to the old aristocracy even as 
the new  working class eventually allied with various socialist movements. 
The socialists  generally shared the nature-is-nothing-but-resources outlook 
of the  industrialists. 
European conservatives were disproportionately hospitable to the romantic  
critiques of the new industrial mentality. Of these men and women, some were 
 traditionally Christian, and often Catholic. Others had accepted the  
Enlightenment critique of the ancien regime, but believed that order  and 
hierarchy were necessary to prevent chaos. Here is where the later fateful  
seeds 
that distinguished European conservatism from fascists and Nazis were  
planted. While one saw itself as traditional and the other as revolutionary,  
both hated liberalism and extolled hierarchy and authority. 
It was within these broad anti-liberal groups that the romantic critiques 
of  the new industrial and liberal orders rising in Europe were most avidly  
accepted. While the conservatives employed conservative Christian 
frameworks,  those who were no longer Christian often blamed Christianity for 
the 
evils of  the modern world, especially its egalitarianism. Many of them 
cultivated an  interest in Pagan traditions as an alternative. (Here I would 
disagree with the  European secular right and give far more credit to classical 
civilization than  to Christian, but that's another argument.) 
The evidence I have encountered suggests these people were not practicing  
Pagans in our sense; they were cultural Pagans as an alternative to a  
Christianity they considered decadent and soft. They certainly were not  
Goddess-oriented, for those qualities were the opposite of the "manly virility" 
 
praised by the European right and their political fascist wing. 
Pagans then and now 
So how do we differ from the so-called "Paganism" of some European  
right-wingers between WWI and WWII? 
    1.  We come to it out of liberal culture, a culture the European right  
regarded as too soft and feminine to survive.  
    2.  Consequently, we are vastly more receptive to the Divine Feminine 
than  were the European Pagans I have so far read about, who generally 
regarded  themselves as manly critics of an overly feminine (!?) society.  
    3.  Our Paganism is primarily religious in focus, whereas the  
Europeans of that time saw what they did in primarily cultural  terms.
These are very important differences indeed. They dominate despite an 
overlap  in elements of their and our critique of secular modernity and a 
common 
use of  the term "Pagan," albeit with different meanings. In a sense, I see 
most of them  as appropriating the term Pagan as a tool in their attack on 
liberal modernity  rather than as a description of their religious beliefs. 
Today, this issue is not entirely past history. Elements of this European  
cultural focus remain within some European Pagan circles, and I am curious 
as to  how they will work out. For example, Lithuania was the last Euro-Pagan 
culture  to be crushed by Christian military might. It retains a strong 
Pagan cultural  identity, and while under Soviet occupation many Lithuanians 
held fast to that  identity. Lithuanians I know have told me most, but hardly 
all, Pagans there are  Pagan for cultural reasons rather than religious or 
spiritual ones. If my  argument is correct both we and they can benefit from 
increased contact. By  example (and not by lecture), we can offer an 
alternative to the most  reactionary political implications of their 
courageously 
maintained Pagan  identities.  They in turn can help us find ways of 
increasing the breadth  and richness of Pagan culture in America. That sounds 
like 
win/win to me. 
But most importantly, if this argument is valid, it helps us all appreciate 
 the best parts of our heritage even while seeking to live more harmonious 
and  peaceful lives ourselves.

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to