Heathen Theology

 

 

Dateline: Friday, May 19, 2006

By: EDWARD O'TOOLE
By: Phenomena Esotericist-at-Large

According to the belief of most Heathens, there exists a cosmic force which is - in part, at least - directly responsible for the all events that take place within the universe. For the Heathen, there are no “chances” or “accidental occurrences“. Things are guided by a kind of plan or design, and Heathens refer to the force behind that plan as Wyrd. Wyrd is, to put it in analogical terms, the underlying pattern or system of internal relationships of all of the integralities in the entire cosmos.

Ed – Your Theology appears to focus heavily on logic and analogics, as opposed to the more ‘natural’ sense-based religions concerning the Old European Gods. It appears to be more akin to the systems used by traditional hierarchical, Rosicrucian and Masonic orders.


M - I have attempted to provide the reader with the necessary information for understanding how analogical systems work. What this means is that, instead of simply presenting a complete 'esoteric' system, as do the Theosophists, Rosicrucians, Anthroposophists, etc., I have tried to show how such esoteric systems are constructed to begin with. In this, I have attempted to make the 'esoteric' 'exoteric'. 'Mystics' and 'Prophets' from around the world have made use of the discipline of Analogics to build complex world-views, often to the detriment of the common man. I wanted people to see how it is that such systems are built.


Therefore, you are partly right when you say: "Your methodology, however, is similar." But, there is no dilemma here. For, as far as I know, I am the first person to 'pull back the curtain', so to speak, and reveal what all of the 'Great Masters' - Blavatsky, Steiner, Heindel, Crowley, etc. - have been using to fool the masses into thinking they are 'divinely inspired'. This is not 'divine inspiration'. This is the systematic application of the discipline of analogics. (Divine inspiration is something far different and much, much grander.)


That is not to say that this discipline is to be cast away. Rather, that we must use it consciously and willingly to create a world-view that fits with our understanding of the nature of man. It is in this sense that I envision its use in a future Heathen Theology.


Ed - How would you differentiate Heathen Theology from:


a) Neo Paganism, specifically Norse, Celtic and Germanic Neo Paganism as created in the 20th Century by Gardner and Sanders from the bastardization of Crowley’s work and Masonic Druidism?

b) The Thule Society

c) The SS’s Odin-based cult?


M - In my opinion, it would be best to forget everything you have learned about Heathenry from any of the sources you list. Specifically:


a) Neo-Paganism (a lá Gardner): As far as I can tell, Gardner received most of his formal (esoteric) inspiration from the Order of the Masons and colored this with exoteric elements of traditional British culture - and this pretty much at random: Greco-Roman, Celtic, Brethonic, Anglo-Saxon and a bit of Gypsy lore appear in rather surprising places in the Gardnerian tradition. There is a strong emphasis on secrecy, mysterious 'Books of Shadows', initiation rituals, etc. that smack of Masonic influence, as you rightly point out. I have used nothing of Gardner's work in my own, and would advise anyone interested in Heathenry to steer well clear of his disciples. And this goes for Wicca as well. The theology of Wicca, largely taken over from Gardner, is very narrow indeed, despite its attempt to imitate the Vedic system involving Ishtadevata, or the chosen personal manifestation of Divinity. This has resulted in the attitude that all Gods are simply manifestations of the One God and that all Goddesses are simply manifestations of the One Goddess. This, in my view at least, has nothing to do with Heathenry.


As for 'Neo-Paganism', the situation is in need of a bit more differentiation, though fundamentally, there is very little to be found in the way of a connection or parallel here, either. As I understand it, 'Germanic Neo-Paganism' is a spin-off of general ('non-denominational') Paganism, and has more or less accepted its practices and beliefs, putting these in a traditionally Germanic context. It is not so much the method that I disagree with here, but rather the underlying assumption, i.e. 'Neo-Pagan' theology in general.


b) & c) The Thule Society & the SS: There is no connection here whatsoever. I have looked only very briefly into the information which regularly circulates among the adherents to these schools of thought (which, of course, should also include Guido von List and his Theosophy rip-off, Ariosophy). And I am proud to say that there is nothing in Integral Theology which could be seen to support similar ideals as those shared by these groups. In my opinion, the esoteric interests of the Thule Society and Himmler's SS were mostly concerned with a few crack-pot theories and very questionable research methods. And I hope that anyone seriously interested in their ideas stays far, far away from Integral Theology and Modern Heathenry.


Ed - Runes. If you see Heathen Theology as being a modern interpretation on the Old ways, then what do you see as being an acceptable modern version of the Runes, e.g. Futhark, being as though alphabets and languages have changed?


M - While it is true that the Germanic dialects have continued to develop since the conversion, I feel this change has not been radical enough to warrant creating a whole new system of runes. The Elder Futhark is just as valid today as it was 1000 years ago, both linguistically as well as spiritually. As for the popular systems which have sprung up around the runes in recent years, I think most of them are crap, though there are a few with redeeming qualities. I could imagine an aesthetic change in the form of the runes, especially if they were to be used in profane written communication, but otherwise, I would leave them as they are.


Ed - You say that Individualism is unacceptable in a Utopian Tribalistic Society. Your system requires, and I quote:


“All traditional societies that reached the level of self-sufficiency required to produce and sustain original culture had some degree of social stratification. Whether in the south of India or the northernmost tip of Iceland, Man has organized the creative forces of his fellow men according to the strengths of the individual. Accordingly, we see that each level of Consciousness is best suited for a particular type of work:


“Servant”: Service and Entertainment (Body/Physical/Nominal Consciousness)


“Farmer”: Cultivation and Production (Life/Vital/Communal Consciousness)


“Warrior”: Defense and Administration (Soul/Personal Consciousness)


“Scholar”: Research and Development (Spirit/Mind/Universal Consciousness)


“Priest“: Education and Guidance (Self/Transcendental Consciousness)”


Does this mean that an adherent to Heathen Theology must conform to set of proscribed laws (read ‘Lore’), in order to be accepted and, if so, who is the ultimate creator of such Lore and to which Power do they hold themselves responsible?


M - Before I go into this in any depth, could you point out which piece of text gave you this impression? As far as I remember, I never made mention of a 'Utopian Tribalistic Society'. Nonetheless, it interests me to know where in our texts you got such an impression.


Perhaps this would be the best place to present a distinction which I have failed to make clear before: The General Theory of Integral Theology is, to put it in modern terms, a 'universal' theology, meaning that it is an attempt to show how theology works independent of the particular culture in which it manifests itself. For this reason, I have sometimes referred to it as a 'Meta-Theology'. This 'Meta-Theology' could be used by any traditional culture in order to come to a better understanding of itself and its particular, culturally relevant theology. Therefore, Integral Theology is an attempt to lay a foundation for a future Heathen Theology.


Ed - How do you see the traditional ‘Hero’ who inevitably had his own path (beod) and did not conform to the society of his birth?


M - It is telling that you present the term 'Hero' in quotation marks, for I am interested to know of someone who is recognized as a 'Hero' who has not, as you say, 'conformed to the society of his birth'. I assume that such a one would be an outcast seen from the eyes of his fellow tribesman, and would hardly receive the title 'Hero' to his name. When I think of a 'Hero' in the Germanic culture, I think of Beowulf, Sigfried, Wölundur, Hermann, Weleda, etc., all of which were individuals whose greatness rested in their fulfilling or surpassing the expectations placed upon them by tradition. Though there might be a few exceptions, typically there is no 'Anti-Hero' in Germanic Heathen culture, that I am aware of. (One such exception might be Egil Skallagrimson, but, as he was an Odin's man, this is to be expected to some degree.)


Ed - You differentiate Man into five primary characteristics, as previously shown. How then can Heathen Theology be compatible with Celtic thought where the Ultimate Man (mortal Ubermensch) was a combination of Warrior, Poet and Priest?


M - I don't see any reason for an incompatibility here, unless you are referring to the purely formal difference existing between the factors 3 and 5. And any confusion which could arise from this should be cleared up by a careful reading of A Short Introduction to Integral Theology. If not, let me know.


Ed - What is your view on women in a Heathen Theological culture?


M - To summarize, I see no real difference between men and women from a theological perspective. Of course, women and men have different natural talents in the spiritual realm, but these are seen to compliment one another rather than compete for supremacy. On a formal religious level, women and men are completely equal.


Ed - What is your view on alternative (non-European) ethnicities in a Heathen Theological Culture?


M - I would accept anyone regardless of ethnic background as long as they could maintain the true spirit of Germanic Heathenry. With that being said, I invite all people, regardless of ethnic background, to explore their own ethnic heritage and traditional religion. Personally, it doesn't really make much sense to me why a person of, say African heritage, would seriously want to practice Germanic Heathenry. I would suggest that they spend their time and energy in working towards the revival of their own tradition, but I would not forbid them from participating in modern Heathenry.


Ed - How would you define the relationship between Man and the Gods?


M - The relationship between Man and the Gods, in my theology, is one of a personal nature. This means that it is between one unique person and another, and cannot be reduced to a schematic form or ritualistic system. Man is connected to the Gods on the Vital, Spiritual and Mental levels of his being. (Note, however, that this is only one type of theology among many.)


Ed - Do you intend to progress from the theoretical into the practical, in terms of establishing a prototype Heathen theological Culture? If so, how?


M - Yes, I have ideas on progressing from the theoretical to the practical, but have met with unexpected hindrances in the execution of my original plan. I expected to encounter more enthusiasm and initiative in creating cult-specific theologies - something that has failed to materialize. Why this is, I am not exactly sure. But it has forced me to reconsider my original plan. I am currently drawing up a new plan, but this will take some time.


Ed – Maurer, I would like to thank you for spending the time to help me and our readers understand a complicated but excellent new look on an ancient belief system.


The Heathen Theology Forum may be found at heathentheology.forumwise.com.