Why I Won’t Jump on the Neo-Pagan Bandwagon

The motto of my channel is “God, Nation, Empire,” which is a variant of the old motto of Imperial Russia; “Orthodoxy, Nationality, Autocracy.” It essentially states that God comes first, then national identity in both an ethnic and a cultural sense, and finally Empire, which I suppose is a general commitment to strength, high culture and opposition to degeneracy. At any rate some neo-Pagan posted on my channel and said “I like Gods, Nation, Empire.”

He was trying to start a fight I believe, as neo-Pagans want to, especially since I have a Chi-Ro prominently displayed in the banner, and my religious beliefs are pretty much plastered across the page. I responded that my religion is Catholicism and that I’m quite earnest about it. To which he replied that he followed the faith of his ancestors. Let’s deconstruct this a bit and make about 1 billion enemies in the process shall we?

The faith of the ancestors comment is something extremely smug. I find neo-Pagans like to use it as a club to beat Christians. They argue that because 2000 years ago, in the case of the Greeks, and about 1000 years or so in the case of the Nords, they had a different religion, that Christianity is illegitimate because it’s not the faith of their ancestors. The obvious question this raises is “what about the last 1 to 2000 years? And the dozens of generations who are much closer to you personally, whose religion was not paganism but some form of Christianity?”

Generally speaking they will ignore this, but I have seen two main responses to it.

The first is that the last 2000 years were a bad thing and that we should go back to barbaric pre-industrialized societies, get in the long ships and go around raping and killing people. Fair enough I suppose, but in this case it seems more like a justification for personal bloodlust than any sort of deep spiritual need to honour one’s ancestors.

The second is that it’s the original religion of their ancestors and that Christianity is a foreign religion. One may ask the question: if (in the case of Middle Eastern Greeks) 2000 years is not a long enough time to practice a religion in order for it to be your native religion, then how long are we talking about? Did Thorism as it was practiced by medieval Vikings really stay the same over a period longer than 2000 years prior to the coming of Christianity? Does neo-Paganism even bear much of a resemblance to their ancestors forms of worship?

This also raises the question of which ancestors they’re talking about? They seem to pick limited length of time during the medieval era when most of the stuff about Norse religion or whatever form of neo-Paganism their LARPing to was written. For all we know there may have been an even older religion practiced by the Cro-Magnon’s before the coming of any Indo-European peoples – perhaps the Neanderthals had a completely different religion system, one that was replaced by the Cro-Magnon’s and then was replaced by Thorism.

To maintain that Thorism or any other form of neo-Paganism is the sole religion of their ancestors is to not only ignore thousands of years of history and dismiss dozens of generations of recent ancestors, but also to arbitrarily pick how far back you’re willing to go and ascribe to it the status of the true and honest religion of your ancestors.

Before continuing I will add I have never heard a scientific or philosophical argument for why neo-Paganism is true, it in fact I doubt most neo-Pagans believe that it’s true, it really just comes off to me at least, as a religion that was developed solely to be politically expedient and I think more than anything else this is where they diverge from me. Truth matters to me more than feelings and more than political expediency, I am interested in whether or not God created the universe and whether or not Jesus Christ was his human incarnation, not in formulating a religion that is perfectly in line with all of my pre-existing political beliefs.

That’s just the way I am and how I’ve always been. I converted to Catholicism because I found the historical and philosophical arguments and evidence to be overwhelming and if pressed I can vehemently defend my faith against all sorts of moral and other objections. Neo-Paganism has no intellectual basis aside from a vague traditionalist principle referring to the spiritual nature of a people and the necessity of them creating their own religion or some other broad quasi-sociological statement to the effect.

I personally just can’t play that game, I can’t pretend to believe in something (that in many cases the person in question that I’m arguing with admits that they made up or that someone else made up) expressly for the purpose of political expediency. I am the first to admit sometimes it makes things harder or creates ethical dilemmas, but so does everything in life, the Church has survived 2000 years more or less intact with her core doctrines largely unchanged.

There is absolutely no guarantee that even if we all LARPed to neo-Paganism it wouldn’t immediately change and accept things like gay marriage. After all, it was created to serve a political agenda, so much like liberal Protestantism, why not change when said agenda does? I have already seen neo-Pagans for tolerance and immigration campaigning on Facebook.

Well I suppose I have alienated just about everyone and ruined the blog for Alfred, but that’s about as edgy as one can be. I just get tired of the smugness sometimes, I frankly find a lot of the neo-Pagan guys are basically fedoras with long hair and lightning bolt tattoos.

Advertisements
Argent

Hey I am Argent Templar some randy in my early to mid 20's from Ontario, Canada. I am a recent convert to Catholicism (2014) of the conserva-trad variety. My politics can be described as Far Right. I cover a wide range of topics including video games, movies, politics, history, philosophy and religion.

5 thoughts on “Why I Won’t Jump on the Neo-Pagan Bandwagon

  1. You’re very right about the sheer number of modern “Pagans” who’s only spiritual fervor stems from a knee-jerk hatred of Christendom and anything supposedly “Jewish.” People like Varg Vikerness are doing a lot more harm than good by outright refusing to accept the last two thousand years of European identity in favor of a reductionist conception of blood and soil. Their shallowness is a kind of exposition of nihilism, I think. These people are modern, plebeian and materialistic, and they’ve latched onto foggy notions of volkish racialism in order to channel their personal anger and confusion.

    It’s a shame. I personally know self-identifying Pagans who are nothing of the sort, but they are drowned-out by the torrent of angry lost souls who lack perspective. To deny the last two thousand years of Europe (as well as its off-shoots) is such a dangerous thing to do. It’s an affront to reality. A lie. To those Pagans who can rise above such foolishness, I salute you. Maybe you ought to talk some sense into your brothers. They’re holding you all back.

    1. I have a long term project in the docket, up next when I get the time, I am going to do a complete apologetic series, going through the arguments for God, Christianity and Catholicism. I get a lot of questions from people in our sphere about my religious beliefs and why they are so conventional.

      Apologetic’s and metaphysics are a passion of mine and while I am sure running through the Cosmological argument isn’t particularly edgy, restoring a robustness and self-confidence to Christian intellectualism is one of my pet causes.

  2. Christianity is considerably different now than 500 years ago. And LARPING works both ways. If you subscribe to Vatican II or today’s Protestantism than you, a “West Coast Reactionary,” are doing nothing more than LARPING the Germanicized religion of your ancestors (presuming they were Europeans). I could provide reams of evidence but none of it matters because Neo-Christians are compelled to self-righteously bash non-Christian belief systems, then feign superiority as they retreat into that mental state of butthurt victimization if/when they get their behinds handed to them.

    Like it or not, many people will never come to Odin/Jesus simply because those systems failed. Want their respect? Either take back your Churches or honor what was (both Pagan and Christian), put on a pair of forward-looking spectacles, and search out a new Telos. If any of this is too difficult, then we descendants of the Occident may well be finished. I don’t find that thought acceptable. Do you?

  3. I originally wrote this response to a different, but related, TRS article a while ago, but I believe that it might have some currency here. As such, I have posted a modified version below.

    A lot of people on the Alt-Right, especially those who lean towards Neo-Paganism, really need to go and read a bit more about (Patristic/Catholic) Christian theology and its interpretation during the classical, late antique, and (early-high-late) medieval periods (c. 450-1521), as it will change their perspective on both its value and strength as a vehicle to defend and preserve European group identity.

    Part of the Alt-Right’s rocky relationship with Christianity derives from the modern, post-reformation-cum-enlightenment identity most arbitrarily attribute to it (as it is understandably more recent and comprehensible). This is a problematic interpretation as Christianity had been philosophically corrupted by this point (1521+), and so one needs to cast their mind back a little bit further to realise that, for about 1000 years after the fall of Rome, it uniquely served the needs and aims of the European peoples. Many of the ancient European Christian leaders, who generally adhered to a broadly Gregorian understanding of spirituality, understood the intrinsic relationship between folk and faith, and sought to preserve and cultivate both in many ways (an interesting example would be Charlemagne trying to recreate the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Aachen). Folk and faith were not treated or understood as completely separate concerns or needs that had to be addressed individually or at the expense of the other. The physical endurance and consequent metaphysical success of the European peoples that constituted Christendom rested upon their ability to sufficiently develop their internal cultural institutions in order to cultivate and promote Christian/European values (via churches, literature, music, law, art, etc.), whilst defining and defeating the out-group, typically Muslims/Saracens (consider the actions of Charles Martel, Basil the Bulgar slayer, or Vlad III of Wallachia), something we appear to have lost sight of.

    Without a physical base from which to promulgate Christianity, which was implicitly understood to be synonymous with European culture and values, it would have been impossible for the European peoples (as individuals, groups, or nations) and their descendants to attain salvation without the physical means to do so. The idea that Christians only care about God, and being part of His nation, at the expense of everything else is a bit narrow-sighted – without Christian civilisation, Christianity cannot endure. Similarly, without Europeans Christianity will die out as only a high-trust society can maintain it as successfully it as it used to be, for any significant amount of time. Who else has a religion constructed upon the logos? It’s also useful to add that there are many significant pagan elements that were incorporated into Christianity as the continent was converted – in a lot of ways the Latin and Greek traditions preserve the original pagan culture, but they operate in relation to a unique fusion of Semitic and Greek theology.

    What we lost was a holistic understanding (the conjunction of the physical, temporal, historical, mystical, and spiritual) of how Christianity itself should be defined, interpreted, and defended in relation to the differences that exist between nations. Now it is understood in universal terms. Before, all were spiritually equal (in God), but were recognised to be physically distinct and unique (See Isidore’s Etymologiae, or Bede’s Historia ecclesiastica gentis anglorum). The Muslims maintain a distinct folk/faith very similar to what we used to have. What we need to do is re-introduce the notion of physical particularism and the acceptance of distinct nations into Christianity, then most will realise its power as a unifying, life-affirming force, and vehicle for White/European identity.

    An aside:

    The Alt-right will not succeed in its long-term aims without collective adherence to a form of metaphysical faith. Its members argue over distinct physical facets (symptoms) of the decline (economics, politics, society, law, music, art, immigration), when the cause is fundamentally spiritual (we lost our soul/our soul is dying). Only religion has the power to bind all those elements into a singular discourse that everyone within a society can comprehend on multiple levels (i.e. apocalyptic imagery). In principle, the existential threat is singular (the death of a people), even though its expression, in practice, is highly varied. Therefore we need to make our terms of engagement with both ourselves and a wider audience singular in order to make our message accessible and comprehensible to all. If our continued existence on all planes and possibilities is conveyed and then recognised to be fundamentally compromised, then people will stop caring for their money and their standards of living, and they will fear for their lives and those of their kith and kin. Only an unseen threat of ‘biblical’ proportions will convert the public and convince them to reform.

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