And, further, in the midst of all this, the multiplicity of expressions in modern Paganism needs to be recognized and respected, and that goes even within the ranks of modern Paganism. There has never been, and never should be, a "one size fits all" (or even "one size fits most"!) approach to any religion, much less a set of religions as dynamic and divergent as any modern polytheism is or should be. There remains a great deal of intrafaith work to be done within modern Paganism, so that even where we all don't agree on theology or practice (and there are many places where we don't and shouldn't!), we can at least understand and respect each other.
The Communalia ritual that the Ekklesía Antínoou innovated in 2009 at PantheaCon is one small way in which such efforts can begin to occur, I think. In my opinion, it is no use presenting a united front to non-Pagan religions when such a front doesn't really exist. It would be nice if the larger groups within Paganism actually took some of us who are more on the fringe a bit more seriously, and perhaps spent the time to find out what it is we're doing and what makes us different from them, rather than simply assuming we're all on the same team and will support the same causes.
Bravo. You bring up some very, very good points though. I think what many people don't realize is that monotheism is a newcomer in the scope of religious theology. It's an aberration when looked at in the broad spectrum of human history and experience, not an evolutionary pinnacle. I think there's an unfortunate twinning of monotheism, ethnocentrism, and colonialism that has led not only to polytheism, but to the marginalization and, at worse, destruction of any non-monotheist indigenous religions.
I completely agree with you. Even the Judaism of late antiquity was nowhere near as exclusively monotheistic as many people think; henotheism seems to be more the reality there, since Leviticus and Deuteronomy don't say that YHWH (or Iao, as the Greeks called him) is the only god (as the Qu'ran says about Allah, who was just another important local god in Arabia before Islam came along), but instead is the god which the Israelites should worship. (It's amazing that people will today not tolerate a jealous or possessive spouse or significant other, but they're perfectly willing to put up with their deity admitting it unashamedly!) There were other Jewish temples in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, including in Alexandria and Leontopolis; and there were forms of Judaic practice that were far more polytheistic in their focus than many modern Jews and Christians are comfortable admitting, and possibly don't even recognize themselves. Even some types of Christianity in the far-flung provinces—Roman Britain for example—were more syncretistic than what people often think is the case today, with solar monotheism blending pretty easily with the Christian notion of God and Jesus. It is only through the form of special pleading known as "trinitarian theology" that Christianity—particularly Roman Catholic and Orthodox Christianities—can continue to maintain the pretense of monotheism, with their three persons of one god, and their profusions of angels, saints, and so forth.
To Muslims, Christians are erroneous polytheists! And yet, the fact remains that in 6th century B.C.E. Carthage, you could take a shower, whereas in 6th century C.E. Gaul under Christianity, bathing was infrequent even for monks and nobles, and running water was unheard of in most places. Think of the plagues that could have been prevented with a bit more hygiene in people's lives; but, all of that opulent and sensual bathing that the lascivious Romans did had to go, lest people be constantly tempted by lust in seeing all of those uncovered bodies on a regular basis. But it was those darn polytheists with their nonsensical plethora of deities that was wrong and backward and uncivilized, whereas Christianity was not and is not, even if putting up with widespread death and disease occurred along the way. The small bits of science available in late antique Paganism that were lost to Europe until the Renaissance, though, getting credited not to where they came from originally, but instead to Christianity. Strange.
It's ironic, further, that the term "atheist" was originally applied by late antiquity's Greek and Roman Pagans to Christians, because the Christians did not take part in the public religious ceremonies. My, my, my, how the wheel has turned! But now, atheists have accepted every argument that Christianity has made against other religions, and then gone one further and rejected its parent. If people would understand that religion derives its truth not from the factuality of its myths, but instead from the meaning and direction it gives to people's lives, and therefore it does not conflict with the very excellent and ever-deepening view of the physical universe provided by the best insights of science, there would be a lot less difficulty in accepting some of these alternate, non-monotheist ideas, practices, and beliefs.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In