|
Politically Correct Religion
by Ogmios
The Pagan Movement is often criticized in the secular and traditional
religious media for its adherence to a belief in the efficacy of
magic, the strange rituals that are practiced, and the fact that it
is not a "monotheistic" religion. But, magic has
had a long history within the traditional religious structures, the
rituals bear remarkable resemblance to those of other religions, and
most religions are, in truth, polytheistic. So, why the criticisms?
Magic
Magic is clearly visible in most religions even today - although
often masquerading under a more "politically correct"
name. An excellent and succinct definition of magic comes from
The Encyclopedia of Witches and Witchcraft by Rosemary Ellen Guiley,
who states that "magic is the art of effecting change through an
external and supernatural force." Considering the source,
this definition should be "comfortable" to members of the
Wiccan community; but, what of the population at large?
The American Heritage Dictionary defines magic as "the art that
purports to control or forecast natural events, effects, or forces by
invoking the supernatural." One would be hard
pressed to find a more secular source in America than a main-stream dictionary.
So, is the attempt "to control ... natural events ... by
invoking the supernatural" something restricted to pagans?
Hardly. Although more generally recognized as being a
phenomenon of Brazil or the Philippines, there are actually an
estimated 8,000 spiritual healers in the British Isles
And, this is clearly through invocation of the supernatural, as the
same source states that "healing seems to involve a transfer of
energy from one person to the other." [A Book of Beliefs;
Allan et al]
In the United States, Christian Scientists evince healing by
understanding God as "Truth". "Christian healing
... employ[s] no other remedy than [God], understood, to heal all
ills that flesh is heir to... it reposes all faith ... in spiritual
power divinely directed." [Christian Healing, Mary Baker
Eddy]. However, this is not limited to the several hundred
thousand Christian Scientists. Roman Catholics and
fundamentalist Protestant sects often hold "healing
services" where they 'invoke the power of God (i.e.
supernatural) to control natural events' (e.g. illness).
What better example could one give of a religious group calling upon
the supernatural to alter the natural course of events than
Lourdes? On a more esoteric front, the Ancient and Mystical
Order Rosæ Crucis (Rosicrucians) as well as the Masons base
much of their ceremony and teachings on the premise of magic.
Ritual
What are the "strange" rituals practiced by Pagans?
Consider a typical sabbat process:
* An altar is set up in space designated for the ritual;
* The area is swept clear of any negativity;
* Incense is lit; candles are lit representing the God and/or
Goddess; perhaps a bell is rung.
* The elementals, often perceived as spiritual helpers to the God and
Goddess, are called and invited (never ordered) to participate;
* The sacred circle is cast to provide 'holy space' in which to work;
* Salt is often used to purify water that it may be used in the circle;
* The priest(ess) dips the tip of their finger (on their right hand)
into altar oil and anoints their forehead with the sign of the
"solar cross";
* The Lord and Lady are invited to be present with the priest(ess);
* A chalice is used to hold wine, and the priest(ess) takes a drink
of the wine;
* A special dish holds cakes (bread) - the priest(ess) takes a piece
and eats it;
* Following specific seasonal activities, the sabbat is ended, the
circle cleared, the God and Goddess are often thanked for their
participation, and the ceremony is closed with "blessed be"
or "so mote it be".
There is obviously no "standard" sabbat ritual;
there are as many variations as there are pagan paths and solitary
practitioners. But, this is fairly representative.
Now, let's consider a ritual from a typically Christian
service. As with paganism, there is no "standard"
service ritual; there are as many variations as there are
Christian paths. But, this also is fairly representative:
* An altar is established within the church (usually, permanent);
* The altar area is kept clean and pure;
* Incense is carried around to cleanse the site; candles are
lit which represent Christ, the "light and life of
grace"; perhaps a bell is rung;
* Saints, often perceived as spiritual helpers to God, is called and
invited (never ordered) to intercede with God on behalf of those present;
* A vial of "holy water" that has been specially prepared
and blessed is often used to sanctify and purify the altar area;
* The priest dips the tip of his finger (on his right hand) into
either altar oil or the holy water and anoints his forehead with the
sign of the cross;
* Christ (as the incarnation of God) is called upon by the priest;
* A chalice is used to hold wine, and the priest takes a drink of the
wine which will also be offered to participants as part of the Eucharist;
* A special dish (paten) holds bread - the priest takes a piece and
eats it, as will participants during the Eucharist;
* Following specific seasonal activities, the service is ended, the
priest leaves the altar area, the congregation is blessed in the name
of Christ, and the ceremony is closed with a blessing or
"amen" (a Hebrew term which literally means
"confirmation", "truly", or "so mote it be").
Christians often look askance at the pagan tradition of basing
their sabbats on the moon, or lunar cycle. And yet, Easter (cf.
Ostara, Eostre) is set by tradition as 'the first Sunday after the
first full moon on or after the vernal equinox'. The date for
Christmas was set to coincide with Yule, or the Saturnalia.
Meanwhile, several other major religions rely nearly entirely on a
lunar calendar (e.g. Islam, Hinduism, and Judaism).
Monotheism
This is one of the most often used, and most unjustified,
anti-pagan positions. The assumption in the disagreement is
that, whereas paganism is clearly polytheistic in behavior (although
most pagans see the Goddess, God, and other gods as manifestations of
a single unified spiritual presence), all "reasonable"
religions are monotheistic. This is so often quoted that it is
virtually never questioned. And yet, the "three great
monotheisms" (as they are often called) of Christianity, Islam,
and Judaism are anything but.
There are numerous quotations from the Hebrew Pentateuch (known
to Christians as the first five books of the Old Testament) that show
that Judaism, rather than being the 'source' of monotheistic thought
in the western religions, was actually monolatrous - not
monotheistic. Abraham (founder of Judaism) "met the
Canaanite supreme god, El, and adopted him, but only partially and
nominally, bestowing upon him qualities destined to distinguish him
and to assure his preeminence over all other gods &ldots; This was
not monotheism, but monolatry (the worship of one among many
gods)." [Abraham, The New Encyclopedia Britannica]
Christianity has had a number of internal differences with
regard to the concept known as the "Trinity". This is
the concept "that God is one in substance but three in
'person'. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." [[Trinity,
The New Encyclopedia Britannica] Although there have been sects
that have denied the Trinity (e.g. Unitarian), most Christians
consider this "modalism" to be an essential Christian
belief. To those who don't accept the explanation that it is a
"mystery", it certainly looks like polytheism. When
one adds the existence of Satan (the progenitor of evil) and angels
such as Michael and Gabriel, Christianity's monotheistic heavenly
abode begins to look more and more crowded.
Hinduism makes no pretense of being what it is not.
Traditional Hindu faith recognizes the existence of 33,000
gods!!! These are seen by most educated Hindus as
manifestations, representations, or aspects of a single spiritual
source. But, historically (and to the less educated, rural
Hindu of today) they are "gods" nonetheless.
In The Zoroastrian Tradition, Farhang Mehr
maintains that "theological monotheism &ldots; form[s] the
religion's backbone". Others have summarized the faith as
believing that "there is only one God, God of Subtle Wisdom,
Ahura Mazda". However, Mehr also outlines moral dualism,
and quotes the Zoroastrian holy books as saying: "In the
beginning, there were two Spirits" (Gathas: Yasna
30-3). Yet Zoroastrianism, one of the oldest of the western
faiths, teaches the existence of Ahura Mazda (the "good"
god) as a monotheistic concept, while admitting the existence of evil
in the form of Ahriman. And, in large parts of the faith,
Mithra appears as the "son" of God - i.e. another god.
So, although it may be politically correct to refer to
Zoroastrianism as monotheistic, when the same standards are applied
that are applied to pagan faiths are applied to Zoroastrianism, it
doesn't even come close. In fact, this is a good reference
point for modern pagans. If the academic and theological
standards and tests that are applied to Zoroastrianism are applied to
Wicca and other pagan faiths, they too would be considered
monotheistic. However, there is no political correctness factor
that encourages the population to want to do so.
Confucianism is often regarded by theologians as an ethical and
philosophical system rather than a true religion. This is in
part because it pays minimal attention to the metaphysical.
Nevertheless, the term Hsiao which Confucius is reported to have used
throughout the Analects appears to have originally
meant a form of piety or worship toward ancestral spirits. This
certainly allows for multiple metaphysical entities, even if not
truly "gods".
Shinto is clearly polytheistic, and Taoism (in its theological
expression) also refers to multiple gods. In essence, only
three of the world religions should probably be considered to be
truly monotheistic. And, interestingly, two of these three are
often branded as "atheistic" by the west. Buddhism
and Jainism, both Indian religious branches that were cultivated from
Hindu roots, are often accused of being atheistic. Buddhism
clearly refers to the "Ultimate Reality", but consciously
refrains from using the term "God". This is due to
the connotations of personality that others have attached to the
name. So Westerners often simply prefer to accuse Buddhism of
being atheistic. In the case of Jainism, the charge is at least
somewhat closer to the truth. Jains are not atheists;
but, they are agnostic. Jainism teaches that all that is
required for the creation of the universe as we experience it is 'a
single human soul'. They do not deny that God exists.
They merely claim that - if God exists - She is both unknowable and
impossible to prove (or disprove). So, there may be a God;
they just don't know.
Political Correctness
PC, or Political Correctness, has usually been a tool employed
by the Liberal wing of American politics. In fact, in a 1998
address to the annual Accuracy in Academia summer conference, Bill
Lind labeled it as "cultural Marxism". Lind attacked
the very existence of PC as a cultural arm of Marxist thought.
Although speaking from a politically conservative position, Lind
makes some points that are virtually undeniable from either side of
the political spectrum.
Lind claims that "all ideologies are totalitarian because
the essence of an ideology &ldots; is to take some philosophy and say
on the basis of this philosophy certain things must be
true". [Lind; The Origins of Political
Correctness]. The ellipsis in this quotation replaces an
important point. It was at this point that he parenthetically
claimed that "conservatism correctly understood is not an
ideology". And, why not?
The dictionary definition for ideology is "the body of
ideas reflecting the social needs and aspirations of an individual,
group, class, or culture." Since conservatism is, by
definition, "the disposition in politics or culture to maintain
the existing order and to resist or oppose change or
innovation", it most certainly is an ideology. It
is, in fact, that body of ideas reflecting the need of our culture to
maintain the existing order and to oppose change. Furthermore,
Lind claims that "Political Correctness says that all history is
determined by power, by which groups ... have power over which other
groups. Nothing else matters."
So, although Political Correctness may historically have been
wielded more often in the hands of the "New Left", by those
of Liberal political beliefs, and perhaps even by Marxists, it is not
exclusively their cultural weapon. Americans have used the
atomic bomb in war; no other nation has. But, it is
certainly not the American weapon. We invented it; but,
it is not exclusively ours. This is also true of the cultural
weapon of Political Correctness. It may have been a liberal
invention, but it is not exclusively a liberal weapon.
Conservatives also have the means to employ it - when circumstances
enable them to do so.
In the United States, it is the traditional Western religions
that hold all of the power. That, In fact, is what makes them
"traditional". Roman Catholics may be concerned over
the intrusion of Southern fundamentalism into the political
arena; and, Southern fundamentalists may have feared the
Catholic penetration of American politics that occurred with the
presidential nomination of Al Smith (1928) or the election of John F.
Kennedy (1960). But, both of these are Christian, and thereby
have a number of common political views.
Essentially, their disagreements become "internal
squabbles" when compared to a threat from "the
outside". The Judeo-Christian belief system, which is a
main-stay of the conservative American ideology:
* has been "in power" since the initial colonization of
North America;
* naturally seeks to "maintain the existing order";
* maintains that, based on their religious beliefs, "certain
things must be true"; and
* attempts "to resist or oppose change or innovation."
Christianity has universally accepted that monotheism is the proper
theological position, and has developed a rather convoluted
definition of monotheism in order to be able then to define
Christianity as monotheistic. To be anything else is not
"politically correct". Many Christians have even
accused Islam of being "pagan", "polytheistic",
or "backwards". Nothing could be further from the
truth, but this has not deterred the accusers. Muslims,
however, who do not subscribe to the same convoluted definition of
monotheism as Christianity, could easily find valid grounds on which
to accuse Christianity of the very same things.
So, despite the fact that Paganism is predominantly peopled by those
who identify themselves as "liberal"; and, despite
the fact that Political Correctness has clearly been most often a
tool employed by those at the liberal end of the political
spectrum: Pagans are not politically correct.
This may at first seem oxymoronic, but PC has been appropriated by
the Conservative power base and is being used effectively by them to
ostracize those whose beliefs would challenge the Judeo-Christian hegemony. |
