Only today, now that almost the whole world has succumbed to ape-nature — right up to the Germanic countries which have not been fully spared either — does the truth begin to dawn on us, that we are lacking a certain divine humanity in a general flood of ape-men. But it will not be long before a new priestly race will rise up in the land of the electron and the Holy Graal, which will play new songs on new harps, and as before, on the first feast of Pentecost, when the spirit descended in tongues of radiation on the apostles, so will the electrical swans of the gods come once more to the great Pentecost of mankind.
- Great princes
- Strong Warriors
- God-inspired priests
- Singers with eloquent tongues
- Bright eyed cosmologists
will rise up out of Germany’s ever-holy soil of the gods, put the Sodomite apelings in chains, establish the Church of the Holy Spirit, of the Holy Graal anew and make the earth into an Island of the Blessed. The temples of the pastors and ape-dealers will collapse, the Graal-castle and the Church of John will, however, abide until Christ comes again.
~ Joerg Lanz von Liebenfels, Theozoology
I yield the floor, Cologero, and no more need be said by me at this time.
Thank you, Perennial, though it seems that some readers don’t quite comprehend “cease and desist”. William Blake claimed that “If a fool persists in his folly, he would become wise.” Apparently, there is an exception and he has been noticeably present here lately.
Anyone interested in persisting in this rather foolish line of debate is invited to continue it at the Utopian Race blog. There you can do all those cool pagan things, like shag a wench or brag about how tolerant and multi-culti you are. You can also complain there about how deluded and blasphemous your father was, and your grandfather, and your grandfather’s father, and your grandfather’s grandfather, and so on. Because only Semitic religions command you to honor your mother and father.
EXIT, two points: Apparently, you forgot post 51, where you explicitely say millions of pagans were killed. Further, if you do not believe yourself to be a neo-pagan, then you should clarify what you consider yourself. Trying to revive older traditions, pagan, heathen, or otherwise makes one the “new” version of it (since you have no connection to the “old” version, by succession or otherwise). Thus you would be a neo-whatever. “I know thy works, that thou art neither cold, nor hot. I would thou wert cold, or hot.” (Apocalypse 3:15). Declare thyself sir, and make bold your intentions. In any case, you state most people accept that the Church did this or that. Well, that would make most people wrong, would it not, as they would be on almost any other subject. Your appeals to democratic knowledge alas are not evidence. I also challenge you to show where I said the Church did not harm ANYONE. Not so, I am simply saying it was not on the scale, to the degree, or on the level that it is generally wrongly, and inaccurately, claimed to be. So if I am using straw man arguments, you have yet to show what they are. This is not us and them. But it is right or wrong. You are free to believe what you wish, but you are not free to justify on falsehood. Be a heathen, if you are, but do it because you think paganism is right, not because you think Christianity is wrong. I would not have difference with you if you did not demonize Christianity, falsely. Fight for your cause, just do not denigrate mine. Otherwise, foresee a challenge, sir. It is only just to expect.
Furthermore, since when has “tolerance” become a traditional virtue, and not just one virtue among many, but the one that trumps all the others? Are we supposed to be envisioning some neo-pagan utopia where druids, witches, and odinists dance around the maypole together?
Now, the Viking used to sell Slavs into slavery to the Arabs and raid convents and monasteries along the coast of England. Is that OK since, apparently, it wasn’t done for religious reasons? The Romans hunted and killed many pagans in the name of Empire, just as its successor, the Holy Roman Empire, continued to do. There is a life lesson, there, that the weak will get eaten up, pagan, christian, or atheist alike.
Perennial, I understand what you mean about history now. My comments were largely autobiographical (in reference to fundamentalists).
About history, historical events can be seen as expressions of principles or lack thereof, for “by their fruits you shall know them” as the gospel says. Thus principles, in this view, are only as good as their application in the real world. If one wishes to determine if the Middle Ages were traditional he would have to look at history. Otherwise the Middle Ages is simply a myth.
Perennial, I don’t recall writing that the church killed millions of people. This seems to be a straw man argument for you to keep on denying that the church killed anyone. Most people accept as fact that the church wiped out entire cultures which were at their very heart spiritual, and this type of behavior is out-and-out anti-traditional. As Julian and others had pointed out, calling God “a jealous God,” as the bible does, is an offensive blasphemy that has lead to the exclusivist position found only in Semitic religions.
Attacking neo-paganism is another straw man of yours. I am by no means a neo-pagan. You seem to think that reviving the old traditions automatically makes you such; that is false. You choose to see the situation as us and them, Christian or pagan, believer or unbeliever, black or white, without any shades of grey or different colors.
Exit wrote: “As Julian and others had pointed out, calling God “a jealous God,” as the bible does, is an offensive blasphemy that has lead to the exclusivist position found only in Semitic religions.”
Every god is a jealous god. To wit:
There is no point to continue. This nonsensical discussion is an example of the demon of dialectics, magnified by elements of gross ignorance, and is far from our purposes. Least of which because we do not hold to the idea of Sola Scriptura, so hurling bible quotes around is a task for the less than intelligent.
Please cease and desist. If anyone has anything to say about tradition, please do so. But arguing about what gang colors to wear puts you in a certain undesirable class.
E.g., what is immutable, what causes motion, how do the Ideas become manifest, what is Cosmos, what constitutes Chaos.
Just proclaiming oneself a “christian” or a “pagan” is window dressing and impresses no one except your fellow true believers.
Ouranoi, I cannot but disagree, but since I think it is useless to carry on this conversation. I feel that any Tradition, if it is a serious one at all, should be founded a mixture of verifiable and unverifiable fact. Perhaps I am too rationalist for Traditionalism. I think myths and legends are the seedbed of any good Tradition, but that there must be something more somewhere. I think the men of Europe have spent centuries fighting their legacy, and I believe that if the Church is destroyed traditional life will follow shortly after. You can cite Evola and Guenon to show their lack of enthusiasm for the Church, but as already noted their words against the modern pagan movement were at least as strong. If they were not sourcing the Church for revival, they were not too keen on paganism either. What then to do? I suppose it is for us to find out. I personally disagree with Guenon and Evola regarding the Church, largely because I think there was so much ground they did not cover regarding it. At least, they did not cover it in their writings. However, they are merely my guide, not my god. As Chesterton said “Christianity has not been tried and founding wanting. It has been found difficult and not tried.” You may dismiss what I am doing as flogging a dead horse, but you have nowhere demonstrated where you are doing much better. I have not seen any evidence that a living tradition exists in neo-heathenism other than predjudice in it’s favour. Nothing of what I wrote was actually addressed except to dismiss it. This is not an argument. I say again, if the neo-pagan movement wishes to be taken seriously, they need to start bringing some compelling stuff. Tearing down Christianity will not raise paganism to a higher level. You want to neatly tie Christianity into a box and judge it from the box you put it in. It has yet to be demonstrated how neo-paganism and heathenism is actually linked to Tradition, and not merely a parody of it. But ultimately the quest is for Truth, which Tradition is merely in the service of. All of us should be exploring the total Tradition, in the quest for Truth, and not vice-versa.
Ouranoi, my wording was perhaps unclear on one point. When I wrote “You, as EXIT does,” I should have put “One.” I was not trying to imply that you were saying millions were killed, only that one could not hold 2 positions which do not coincide.
Perennial, your straw man arguments are getting tedious, attacking positions I don’t even take. Where have I stated “extermination” and “millions of deaths” in the lingo of the oppressed? When I wrote about Pagan and Christian heads of state I was referring to Cologero’s statement on persecutions meted out by both parties on their dissenters and how they differed in tone.
It hardly needs to be said, but I am no more interested in modern forms of new-age or neo-spiritualist currents than you are in modern Christianity. The fact remains that the most traditional civilizations in the west and ones that arguably influenced the entire structure of Catholicism in its most virtuous parts, were Pagan – the imperial ideal/ Empire, neo-Platonism, the heretical high mysticism of Eckhart, the Grail mythos, the aristocratic hierarchies, knights orders (manner bunds) and caste systems and so on so forth. They existed in form and structure up until the “Enlightenment” period. We still see their residues cindering today but they are dead inside and we should not cling to them.
You stated before that you would rather strive into battle on the horse you are riding on than to go looking for it. The problem it appears is that your horse is dead and you are flogging it.
Evola made it clear to not hang onto traditionalist residues and stated that the church should not be propped up (Men amongst the ruins) rather to let it pass while something more virile takes it over – in the form of a true spirit rooted in tradition. Despite saying (with a hint of humor) that a secular humanist is better off under a Catholicism – which would be true as a safety measure to their own profaneness but not recommended to those of a natural yearning for transcendence – because they won’t find it in the Church institution. Therefore the Church has had its day and I’ll be glad to see the end of its cycle behind us in the wake of the nightmare it has left behind. Looking back, it was the admixture of two incompatible civilizations which would eventually plant the seeds of modernity itself – an alien spirit with that of indo-European culture which flowered for a brief moment in history but could never last. It began as slave revolt and will end with it. Even Guénon saw nothing in the revival of the west through Christian means (even as he wrote “Insights into Christian Esoterism” where he refers to how the church had some traditional scaffolding) he saw no reason to revive it and fled to Sufism instead. Had a form of Buddhism (instead of a form of Judaism) taken hold in Europe at that time (and fused with platonic ideation) then our past up to this point would be radically different. Had these energies of Alpha Europe been put into a spirit more congruent to its transcending character two thousand years ago then the heavens would have truly opened for millennia. Anyway we should have thought about hindsight at the falling of Earth Base One.
Christianity was an historical narrative that based itself in time as a linear progress from creation to judgment; hence the seeds were planted for modernity, when eventually it [Christianity] would degenerate. As a religion it was never truly consistent in doctrine and we can witness such from its inception onwards. It only “converted” the Vikings a thousand years ago and even then the newly Christianized Normans were the main driving force for it across Europe and the crusades, which led to the entire downfall of Europe. Looking at it from an impersonal and a-historical objective point of view it makes perfect sense despite any colorings you wish to impose on it.
Yes, I can acknowledge Gornahoors (or Cologeros) concern in respecting our ancestors honor, this is important, but there were two parallel histories if one considers that platonic idealisms, structural ideations of Empire and forms of Indo-European peoples never died running alongside and propping up the enthusiasm of the “faith”. The hermetic tradition, the spiritual and racial vigor of Indo-Europids, the Graal amongst other metaphysical principles still influences us and will again radically revive the west when the time comes for the next “Reich” (and yes, to please all, we respect “our ancestors” past upon acknowledging there was a first, even if nominally Christian).
To C : Even though I acknowledge that you’re not given to stating anything in definite terms but what do you think the new spirituality will be (leaving aside modernity and with the understanding that traditional residues cannot be revived)?
Ouranos asked: “Even though I acknowledge that you’re not given to stating anything in definite terms but what do you think the new spirituality will be (leaving aside modernity and with the understanding that traditional residues cannot be revived)?”
You really shake my confidence, Ouranos, since isn’t that what I’ve been doing for over 400 articles? Try reading some, at least the ones that don’t suck. But I will tell you this:
You can’t shop around for a tradition as a women shops for a dress: “Does this one make me look fat? Is the hemline too short? Does this color go with my skin tone?”
So, no, I don’t predict since a tradition is the creation of a man-god. All we can do is prepare ourselves to recognize it when it arrives. That is why we engage in the greater battle, to empty our minds to form a clearing for the god to appear.
This tradition will not come from effete, epicene bookish types who arrange their thoughts neatly in order like a housewife who arranges her knickknacks on the wall. It will not arise out of aporetic debate, the idle chatter of intellectuals, who gossip like women at the river washing their clothes, enslaving their minds to group-think.
No, instead, it will be messy, emotional, inconsistent, impossible to completely express it in words, that is, an obstacle for the intellectuals.
It will appear as popular devotions, processions for the Goddess, prayers and sacrifices to the lesser immortals for illness, abundance, lost causes, lost loves. This will provide comfort and spiritual nourishment for the masses, the serfs, the slaves, but unity for the group as a whole. The more talented will find in it something appropriate to their mentality, a teaching to develop their personality beyond the plane of the merely human. This inner path is much more difficult and can only be known by traversing it.
Hence, to the outsider, it will look absurd as he can only see vain and ineffective rites, the religion of slaves, the opiate of the masses. The inner core will be inaccessible to him, since you can’t eat a banana without first pealing the skin. Few are willing to do that, despite their spiritual hunger.
Comment 60. is entirely logical. Yet how is this comment even offensive?: “History will always be disputed by those who can’t see, hear, or feel, but yes. Let them have the true myth.”
If one sits above all currents they’ll see it for what it truly is.
Just lost a longish further clarification; I spent half my life ignoring what was in front of my face because I thought I understand what “history” was, a “fact” which can be used to destroy a traditionalist of any stripe, Christian or pagan. Why should we beat each other with this blunt sword? It’s rampant in the Christian camp, and an ideology will warp its study every time, in favor of the bias of the observer. Cologero is using an existential “fact” (Christian Europe) as a jumping off point for experiential study – this is definitely not quite the same thing. I wasn’t intending to jab venom at anyone who is struggling with the modern mindset.
Hmmm. Re-reading the context, I can see how you might construe it that way – my apologies for phrasing. I was referring (actually) to those of my own camp (thinking along the lines of my latest post), who are always throwing church history in my face. I’d appreciate the benefit of the doubt, here. The neo-pagan camp I know absolutely nothing about, and can only leave that to the true self.
[Logres:]´History will always be disputed by those who can’t see, hear, or feel, but yes. Let them have the true myth.´
What does this mean? Seems like a venomous jab on a level I wasn’t expecting to see from you Logres.
History will always be disputed by those who can’t see, hear, or feel, but yes. Let them have the true myth.
Good post, Logres. I will add, however, that if we can use history to buttress our narrative, so much the better, I would think.