Understanding
the Religious Reich 1.2
or
How Fundamentalists Define "Religious Freedom"
Copyright © 1990, 1997 c.e.,
Isaac Bonewits
"Deeply hath sunk the lesson thou hast
given and shall not soon depart."
-- William C. Bryant
A few years ago, Neopagan newsletters
and journals were publishing articles about a religious
freedom organization (now defunct), that had been founded
by fundamentalists and which had invited Neopagans to
join. The response from Neopagans at the time was, I
believed, naive. That led to the first publishing of
this essay in 1990 under the title, "Can We Trust
'Friendly' Fundamentalists?" Now with the growing
power of the Religious Reich, which has almost completely
taken over the Republican Party on a local and state
level, it is even more important that Neopagans, and
all others who cherish their constitutional freedoms,
should improve our understanding of fundamentalism,
of the long-range plans of "Christian Reconstructionism,"
and of what a fundamentalist considers "religious
freedom."
Throughout this essay
I'm going to be referring to "fundamentalists,"
so perhaps I should clarify the term. Let me start,
as I so often do, with a historical review of the term
-- on this occasion quoting A Handbook of Theological
Terms, by Van A. Harvey (MacMillan, NY, 1964):
Fundamentalism is a
name that was attached to the viewpoint of those who,
shortly after the turn of the [19th-20th] century,
resisted all liberal attempts to modify orthodox Protestant
belief or to question the infallibility of the Bible
in any respect. The name is derived from a series
of tracts published between 1912-14, entitled The
Fundamentals that aimed at defining and defending
the essentials of Protestant doctrine. The most important
of the fundamental doctrines were (1) the inspiration
and infallibility of the Bible, (2) the doctrine of
the Trinity, (3) the virgin birth and deity of Christ,
(4) the substitutionary theory of the atonement, (5)
the bodily resurrection, ascension and second coming
of Christ (parousia).
Since most of these beliefs have been a part of Christian
orthodoxy [for fifteen centuries], historians have
seen the uniqueness of fundamentalism to consist in
its violent opposition to all beliefs that seem opposed
to some teaching of the Bible. In the twenties and
thirties, this opposition was focused particularly
on any theory of man's [sic] origins, especially evolution,
that seemed incompatible with the account in Genesis.
Consequently, fundamentalism tended to be identified
with blind opposition to all critical inquiry.
Because of this identification,
certain conservative theologians who share the above-described
beliefs but who think they can be defended in a rational
manner have tended to shirk the name "fundamentalist"
and call themselves "evangelical conservatives."
They generally oppose the spirit of ecumenism and
any theology, including neo-Reformed theology, which
does not regard the Bible as the absolute and infallible
rule of faith and practice.
The term "fundamentalist"
has since been extended by the mass media to refer to
"fundamentalist" Jews, Moslems, and even Hindus!
In each case, the inference is that some people refuse
to budge from the most conservative version of their
faith that is available to them. Non-Christian examples
include some Orthodox Jews and Shiite Moslems. Christian
but not Protestant examples would be conservatives within
both Roman and Eastern Orthodox Catholicism, as well
as Mormons (though non-Mormons often consider them "non-Christian").
Nontheistic examples would include most Marxists and
Secular Humanists, as well as other fervent atheists.
For the purposes of this
essay, I could simply refer to "ultra-conservative
monotheists," but "fundamentalists" is
somewhat shorter and the modern Protestants who call
themselves by this term are, in fact, the primary threat
to our lives and freedom right now. So on those occasions
when I don't specifically mention it, you may keep in
mind all the others mentioned in the preceding paragraph.
The primary emotions driving
fundamentalists are an Unholy Trinity of anger, hatred
and fear: anger that there are other religions in the
world (implying the possibility that their own fundamentalism
might not be the One True Right and Only Way after all);
hatred of these other faiths and their followers for
daring to exist and refusing to immediately convert;
a fear that if these other faiths are allowed to continue
to exist, they will seduce the fundamentalists' membership
away, and an even deeper fear that if their fundamentalist
beliefs are actually incorrect, then they will have
essentially wasted their lives avoiding opportunities
for happiness in the here-and-now while chasing their
"pie in the sky when they die" (which is not
relevant for the atheist fundamentalists).
While psychological analyses
of their religious beliefs infuriate True Believers,
they can nonetheless be quite revealing to outside observers.
It seems obvious to me that this Unholy Trinity is a
religious expression of the severely dysfunctional childhoods
so common to fundamentalists. The emotional repression
involved in being raised as a fundamentalist tends to
breed anger, hatred and fear towards yourself and the
world around you.
Fundamentalism, with its
pervasive sense of guilt about most normal physical
and emotional feelings, and its patriarchal structure
wherein the father's word is law, creates family atmospheres
in which emotional, physical and/or sexual abuse of
children is the rule, not the exception. Such
abuse, now being publicized thanks to organizations
such as Fundamentalists Anonymous, Walk
Away, and various incest
survivors' groups, can't help but create personalities
in which legitimate anger, hatred, and fear towards
their abusers is redirected inwards, creating the guilt
and shame so useful for fundamentalist religious authorities.
Later in life, these painful emotions can be redirected
again, this time towards "safe" targets --
people with different religious and moral convictions
than those one's family claims.
Again, I'm using the term
"fundamentalists" very broadly. I've heard
similar life histories from people raised as Orthodox
Jews, Mormons, and Jehovah's Witnesses -- and I can
clearly remember the patterns from my own Roman Catholic
childhood.
The Unholy Trinity is
exhibited in other ways that have affected all of Western
history: anger towards ambiguity (why can't Mom/Dad/Siblings
be predictable?); hatred towards women (why didn't Mom
protect me?); and a generalized fear of the entire world
(what awful thing will happen to me next?). The resulting
emotional turmoil from these factors can't help but
effect the overall worldview, and thus the religious
beliefs and actions, of the victims.
Many people of good will
are naive enough to think that they can logically persuade
fundamentalists to be more tolerant. Unfortunately,
trying to discuss religion with a fundamentalist is
somewhat like trying to discuss color theory with people
who can only see black and white. When you try to point
out, however diplomatically, that their vision is limited
by their inability to see red, green, blue or yellow,
they will insist that it is your view that is
the limited one, because you can't see that a black
and white worldview is more accurate in some ultimate
way. If you suggest that the universe is more complex
than their dogmatic divisions of "100% Truth"
vs. "100% Falsehood," they will accuse you
of being dogmatic, because you refuse to consider the
possibility that their dogmas might be 100% True. Their
next step is usually to denounce you as demonic, or
the dupe of demons, for thinking that there might be
any Truth outside their particular denomination's version
of their scriptures.
More sophisticated (or
pretentious) fundamentalists will suggest that critics
of fundamentalism should try to raise objections which
show that it "fails" on "its own terms,"
not "your" terms. This, of course, is impossible,
not because fundamentalism has no gaping holes in its
theology (it has many, as any moderate or liberal Christian
minister will be happy to explain), but because it is
a closed logic system that defines itself as always
True and differing views as always False -- hence logical
"failure" can never be demonstrated
because it literally cannot be perceived. As for what
they assume "your" terms are, this is always
a simplistic cartoon that distorts -- and blurs together
-- every competing view on the planet into a dualistic
mirror of their own, which they then can triumphantly
"defeat" (the famous rhetorical "straw
man" gambit).
When fundamentalism's
prime philosophical opposition came from Scientistic
atheists and agnostics, who were dualists themselves,
it was relatively easy for fundamentalists to play this
game. They are much more confused -- and threatened
-- by pluralism, relativity, and ambiguity, hence their
urgent need to reduce all complexity to the psychologically
soothing, if philosophically and spiritually bankrupt,
simplicity of dualism. More dangerously, for those of
us who care about human rights, this need for simplicity
leads them to desire secular power to enforce their
views and eliminate all competing worldviews.
The ancient Hebrews appear
to have invented religious genocide : killing the priestesses
and priests of the competing deities worshipped within
their own population, then the clergy of all the local
tribes. For good measure, they also killed the conquered
tribe's adults and boys, keeping only the little girls
whom they could rape and brainwash into the new religion
of Yahwehism (and their new roles as slaves to men).
The history of what became known as Judaism is the history
of sanctimonious religious terrorism -- practiced right
up to the time when their weapons were taken away from
them. While they were a conquered people, the Jews believed
in religious freedom, but whenever they had land again,
that freedom vanished for all but themselves. Fifteen
centuries of Christian oppression made religious freedom
again a cherished ideal, but as soon as there was a
chance for another Jewish state, fundamentalist Jews
were quick to oppress the non-fundamentalist Jews and
the gentiles then in residence. The results have been
the current mess you can observe on your TV news every
night.
Let's not overlook the
equally charming history of Islam -- another desert
monotheism that started by committing religious genocide
against local Paleopagans, enslaving their women, and
slaughtering and oppressing "unbelievers"
whenever possible. They, too, have promoted the ideal
of religious freedom and toleration whenever economic
or political fortunes have been against them, only to
toss those ideals out the window when Islam was in power.
You may examine modern Iran or any other nation in which
fundamentalist Moslems are in power for current examples.
That brings us back to
the Christian fundamentalists and a bloody history with
which most Neopagans (and other western non-Christians)
are only too familiar. More men, women, and children
have been enslaved, tortured, raped, mutilated, and
murdered in the name of Jesus Christ than in the name
of any other deity in recorded history. Christians have
oppressed Jews, Moslems, Buddhists, Pagans, and each
other throughout their centuries of power, preaching
religious intolerance as the word of Jehovah whenever
they had the military, political, or economic power
to make it stick -- and then piously preaching brotherhood,
peace, and toleration when they didn't.
The various sayings to
be found in their scriptures give monotheists a choice
of which "Trinity" to worship. They can follow
the Unholy Trinity of anger towards the unbelievers,
hatred of "sin" (ie. different moral beliefs
and those who live by them) and fear "of the Lord"
(meaning, fear of deviation from the One True Way),
on the one hand; or a somewhat holier one of peace (from
the spiritual serenity their beliefs are supposed to
give them), love for all humanity (as supposedly being
fellow children of the "same" god), and hope
for a new world (here or in their Heaven). Because of
the dualism inherent in monotheism, however, individuals
and sects tend to flip-flop between these extremes.
The liberals and the oppressed among them stress the
positive side of their scriptural message, while the
conservatives and those in power stress the negative
side. Of course, the conservatives often use the positive
vocabulary when proselytizing, and both the liberals
and the conservatives routinely describe each other
as not being "real" members of The Faith.
This gives both varieties "plausible deniability"
for ancient and modern crimes committed in the name
of The Faith.
Why should fundamentalist
monotheists hate Neopagans more than they do the members
of all the other competing religions around these days?
Well, all of them don't. Most of the Moslems in the
world, for example, have never heard of us. Their fundamentalists
are too busy fighting Christians in Lebanon, Jews in
Israel/Palestine, Hindus in India, Buddhists in Indonesia,
Marxists in Afghanistan, authors in England, and liberal
Moslems at home, to pay any attention to what is in
essence a Western religious movement with no appreciable
presence in the Islamic world. I'm sure though, if a
Neopagan movement starts up over there, the Shiites
will be quick to kill the participants.
Most of the fundamentalist
Jews aren't paying any attention to Neopaganism either.
We're just one more non-Jewish religion that their kids
are straying off to, and we're viewed as a form of "craziness"
rather than evil.
It's the Christian fundamentalists
in whom we inspire the greatest anger, hatred, and fear.
They routinely denounce Buddhism, Taoism, the New Age,
and all other competing belief systems, just as they
have always done, but seem to save their greatest vituperation
for occultists in general and Neopagans (especially
Witches) in particular. As most Neopagans know, Christian
fundamentalists are constantly publishing and broadcasting
blasphemies against our deities, slanders against our
members, and half-truths and outright lies about our
beliefs and practices. Over and over, they strive to
convince the general public, the media, and the civil
governments that we are devil worshipping murderers,
rapists, child abusers, and even cannibals. Their kids
beat up our kids in school, their adults vandalize our
stores and temples, shoot bullets through our windows,
and manipulate the courts to remove our children from
us. Why? What is it about Neopaganism that makes Christian
fundamentalists so desperate that they will repeatedly
violate their own Commandments to try and stop us?
There are a number of
theological reasons why fundamentalists of any monotheistic
persuasion would find Neopaganism disturbing; after
all, we disagree with them about everything they consider
most important. But so do the Buddhists, the Taoists,
the Hindus, and most of the other "new" religions
on the American religious scene. The real reasons for
the severity of fundamentalist attacks on the Neopagan
community are, as usual, not theological at all.
We believe in magic --
that anyone can learn to do miracles. That makes their
Christ (assuming he ever actually lived -- still an
open question among non-fundamentalist historians) merely
another famous magician among many. This destroys the
main body of "evidence" for special claims
of his divinity and thus for the fundamentalists'
special position as holders of The Only Truth.
Neopagans believe in pluralism
and multiplicity -- making us very hard to pin down
and define, and bringing up dreaded "feminine"
ambiguity. Worse, we worship goddesses, our women have
places of honor and leadership, and gay and lesbian
people are seldom discriminated against. These attitudes
threaten both the male egos that control fundamentalism
and the inherent sexism of their way of life, and present
the terrifying danger that fundamentalist women and
girls (not to mention any gay men and boys unlucky enough
to be born into fundamentalist homes) might find our
religions far more attractive than their own -- which,
of course, many do!
Perhaps worst of all,
those of us who call ourselves Pagans, Druids and Witches
have deliberately chosen to identify ourselves with
the victims of conservative monotheism -- with the millions
upon millions who have suffered at their hands down
through the centuries. While reincarnation has not been
officially accepted belief in monotheism for the last
thousand years or so, a certain wave of fear must still
pass over the fundamentalists when they realize, however
subconsciously, that we just might be their victims
come back from the grave to haunt them for their crimes,
and that this time when they try to silence us, they
will fail.
But silencing us is something
that they must at least attempt -- and not only because
we are a healthy, growing competitor in the marketplace
of religious ideas. As a pluralistic, decentralized,
feminist, ecological, and democratic collection of religions,
we represent the future of faith in a world of ever-increasing
change and diversity. Fundamentalists know that the
world is changing and that they cannot control the changes.
They are horrified of the future and anything that reminds
them of it. Neopaganism combines a revival of old deities
that the fundamentalists have been taught from childhood
were "demonic," with patterns of belief and
practice that fit perfectly with the new global culture
now emerging. The Fundamentalists have no psychological
options left. They either have to cure themselves of
the dysfunctional personalities that have made them
fundamentalists, or (being dualists) try to silence
us. Guess which tactic they usually choose?
In recent years, the United
States and other western countries have seen the rise
of the Religious Reich, led by fundamentalist Christian
men with literally theocratic agendas. That the Republican
Party has become an unholy owned subsidiary of the Christian
Coalition is fairly obvious. What many Americans don't
know, however (until it's too late), is that the Religious
Reich focuses as much attention on taking over local
school boards, town halls, and county governments, as
it does on grabbing for power on the statewide and national
levels. This is part of their long-range theocratic
plan for America, which they call, "Christian Reconstructionism."
They want to take over enough state governments to call
for a constitutional convention (they are only a few
states away from that goal). At such an event they could
legally scrap our current Constitution and the entire
Bill of Rights, replacing them with their own twisted
vision of "Biblical Law."
If they succeed in taking
over America because the rest of us were too lazy to
fight them and too cynical to bother voting, they fully
intend to institute the death penalty for being homosexual,
for having or performing (or assisting someone to have
or perform) an abortion, for living in "sin"
(including all "unconventional" partnerships,
lovestyles, and family structures), for practicing "witchcraft"
(any minority religious, metaphysical, astrological
or New Age belief system), and for having or distributing
"pornography."
I know it sounds unlikely,
but remember, their predecessors have been terrorizing
"unbelievers" for centuries, slowing down
only when they lost political power. Today they're close
to regaining the secular power they lust after, thanks
to gaybashers, anti-feminists, Klu Klux Klanners, dozens
of right-wing millionaires, and thousands of Fundamentalist
preachers, Catholic priests and Orthodox rabbis who
see their livlihoods and power threatened by sweeping
global change. They are counting on the votes of millions
of modern "Know-Nothings" who are terrified
of the future and willing to vote for whoever their
preacher/priest/rabbi tells them to.
Want to know the sordid
details, straight from the Christian Coalition's own
messiah? Just read The Institutes of Biblical Law,
by Rousas John Rushdoony, the ayatollah of Christian
Reconstructionism. Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Ralph
Reed, and all the right-wing fundraisers of the Christian
Coalition praise, quote and follow Rushdoony, who lays
out his plans and goals as clearly as Adolph Hitler
did in Mein Kampf.
Whether you are a moderate
or liberal Christian or Jew, a Hindu, Taoist, Unitarian,
Pagan, Agnostic or Atheist -- whether you are gay, straight
or bi; male, female, or undecided; if your lifestyle,
beliefs, or political views are even the slightest bit
different from those of the Religious Reich -- you are
a target. Let's not make the same mistakes German democrats
and liberals did in the 1930's. Let's make sure that
The Handmaid's Tale remains fiction, by getting
off our comfortable rear ends, stepping away from our
keyboards, and exercising our citizenship rights while
we still have them.
Now, in their quest for
absolute power, spokespersons for the Religious Reich
often use the language of the civil liberties movements,
in fighting what they perceive as "government interference"
in their practice of religion. Some Neopagans say that
we should work with such "friendly fundamentalists"
in a common quest for religious freedom. I urge caution
and further investigation of individuals, groups, and
their motives, before doing so.
While Supreme Court rulings
interfering with the practice of minority belief systems
are offensive, and the Religious Freedoms Restoration
Act was well worth supporting, we should not be fooled
by fundamentalist references to "religious freedom."
Their complaints about "unconstitutional government
interference" with religious practices are actually
about the fundamentalists' loss of their traditional
-- and very unconstitutional -- privileges. For three
hundred years, religious zealots have been shoving their
theology down our throats, usually with the connivance
of the civil government. Where do you think most of
our laws about sex, drugs and gambling originated? From
"blue laws" that close stores on Sundays to
mandatory (monotheistic) prayers at graduations, conservative
Christians have dominated the public American culture
since shortly after the Revolution. But over the course
of the last few decades courts and legislatures have
gradually taken away one after another of the fundamentalists'
special privileges. Organized prayer is no longer allowed
in schools, evolution is taught in biology classes,
big city kids can learn about safe sex and birth control
methods, etc. -- all of which upsets the Religious Reich
terribly.
The Religious Reich complains
that the existence of rights for secular people (including
the right not to be subjected to fundamentalist opinions)
violates their rights as spreaders of the Gospel.
They argue that the separation of church and state is
itself a violation of the first admendment freedom of
religion clause, i.e., that they have the "right"
to use the government to promote Christianity as long
as they aren't pushing any particular denomination of
it. Often they attack the ACLU for its pro-separation
stand, despite the fact that the ACLU has done more
to fight for freedom of religion than any other organization
in American History.
The Christian Reconstructionists
of the Religious Reich would prefer that America was
a fundamentalist theocracy in which they would have
every one of their old privileges back, and a number
of new ones as well (with only fundamentalist Christians
eligible to vote, run for office, or teach in the schools,
for example). No matter how friendly, reasonable and
ecumenical they may occasionally act towards non-Christian
groups, on the day they decide they don't need us
anymore they will cheerfully rip our throats out.
Does that sound paranoid?
Perhaps. But remember -- we know their track record.
Fundamentalists have never supported religious
freedom for anyone but themselves except as a temporary
tactic. They are going to have to be a lot more convincing
if they expect us to be able to trust them. I suppose
they could start by publishing apologies for, and retractions
of, all the lies that they have published and broadcast
about us over the years, signed by all the national
leaders of the Religious Reich (some of whom have told
those lies). I'm not going to hold my breath waiting.
Fortunately, those of
us in the Neopagan community who are looking for religious
freedom groups to join do have some trustworthy choices.
There's always People
for the American Way (2000 M St. NW, #400, Washington
DC 20036). This group has pluralistic, feminist, and
democratic biases fully in keeping with Neopagan polytheology.
They have been keeping
tabs on the Religious Reich for over fifteen years
and their website contains a wealth of information the
fundamentalists would rather you didn't read. I'm a
member and I recommend them.
The other major force
fighting the Religious Reich is Americans
United for Separation of Church and State (1816
Jefferson Place NW, Washington, DC 20036), a nonprofit,
nonpartisan educational organization of moderate and
liberal Christians, Jews, Unitarians, Atheists, Agnostics,
and yes, a few of us Pagans! You can visit their website
or send email to their net liason at [email protected].
Their phone number is 202-466-3234. Their newsletter,
Church State is an excellent source of news and
advice on the fight against theocracy. I'm a member
and I recommend them.
Also worthwhile is The
Freedom Writer, a newsletter published by the
Institute
for First Amendment Studies. IFAS was founded by
ex-fundamentalist minister Skipp Porteous and attorney
Barbara Simon. This publication, now available online,
focuses on the activities of the Religious Reich, exposing
fraudulent ministers, anti-Semitism, censorship campaigns,
etc. There are also frequent news clipping about civil
liberties victories. Those of you who were once fundamentalists
might also be interested in IFAS' former publication
turned webpage, Walk
Away,written by and for ex-fundamentalists.
You can send IFAS email at "[email protected]" or snailmail
at Box 589, Great Barrington, MA 01230. Their phone
number is 1-800-370-3329.
For keeping tabs on trends
throughout the American religious scene, I can recommend
Religion Watch (Box 652, N. Bellmore, NY 11710,
$19.95 year USA). The editor, Richard P. Cimino, does an excellent job of
reporting trends in both mainstream and minority religious
movements, albeit with a slight Christian bias.
Of course, for civil liberties
activism in general, there is no beating the American
Civil Liberties Union. I'm a card carrying member
and proud of it (even if that does mean I can never
be elected President). Controversial as the ACLU is,
and disgusting as some of their clients have been over
the years, they remain the largest and most effective
defense against all those forces (including the fundamentalists)
who would trash our Bill of Rights.
There's a group called
Americans for Religious Liberty (Box 6656, Silver Spring
MD 20906), founded as a front for the Humanist Society,
but I can't recommend them. The Humanist Society is
an association for atheists, agnostics and scientolators
-- people who sneer at all religions equally. If you
can put up with the kind of folks who run sleazy "debunking"
groups to attack psychics and parapsychologists, you
might find ARL worth investigating. Ask them about their
platform in which they advocate keeping "pseudoscience"
as well as religion out of the public schools.
If Neopagans are going
to support civil liberties and anti-discrimination groups,
which I obviously think we should, then we had better
be selective in our choice of allies. It's usually the
fundamentalists themselves who oppress our civil liberties.
We'll be much better off setting up our own groups,
or supporting organizations that are genuinely neutral
in matters of religious belief. I don't think that we
can or should trust "friendly" fundamentalists.
After all, deeply hath sunk the lesson they have given
and shall not soon depart.
Copyright © 1990, 1997 c.e., Isaac
Bonewits. This text file may be freely distributed on
the Net, provided that no editing is done and this notice
is included. If you would like to be on the author's
personal mailing list for upcoming publications, lectures,
song albums, and appearances, send your snailmail and/or
your email address to him at PO Box 1021, Nyack, NY,
USA 10960-1021 or via email to [email protected].
(P. E.) Isaac Bonewits, Adr.Em./ADF
Email: [email protected]
Snailmail: PO Box 1021, Nyack, NY, USA 10960-1021
This webpage is copyright © 1999 c.e., Isaac Bonewits
Most recently updated: February 19, 1999 c.e.
This page's URL is http://www.neopagan.net/ReligiousReich.HTML
My Homepage URL is http://www.neopagan.net
