Last month The Atlantic published an editorial written by Rabbi David Wolpe. Titled, The Return of the Pagans, subtitled "Hug a tree or a dollar bill, and the pagan in you shines through". Which in fact admirably sums up the message of this screed. You almost don't even need to read the rest of it to get his message. But I did anyway.
I almost wish I hadn't. Even now, days later, just remembering it leaves me shaking with rage and dismay.
In the very first paragraph the author describes the egotism and greed of Donald Trump, concluding that "there's something a little pagan about the man". He then goes on to list the foibles and failings of Elon Musk (ten kids with three different women, flirtation with antisemitic tropes, worship of wealth and "ideological imperialism of ego") and again, decides that based on those things, apparently the label "pagan" applies to Musk as well. (Trump identifies as Christian, Musk as an atheist.)
He then makes the jump to breaking down the Pagan reverence for the sanctity of Nature (in his words, "the worship of natural forces") into two factions- with those on the left (the tree huggers), by means of ritual and magic, (which he describes as "coercive practices") centered solely on the self. While those on the right (those dollar huggers) worship force as the means to their desired end- wealth, political power, and tribal solidarity. The "deification of nature" and the "deification of force" are both, in his view, defining features of paganism- one being pantheism, the other idolatry, which are supposedly embraced by the opposing sides in the political and cultural strife currently dividing our nation and the world itself. Hug a tree or a dollar bill. Either way, you're a pagan with a lower-case p. The basic message being, paganism (always with that lower-case p) equals selfishness and greed. And that apparently everything currently wrong with human beings has something to do with paganism. (Never mind that monotheism has dominated Western culture for nearly two thousand years.)
The implied remedy for that is a renewed dedication to monotheism. (To give credit where due, Rabbi Wolpe doesn't specify which particular flavor of monotheism.) If I'm reading it right, humans can only reach their highest potential by remaining mindful that they are created in God's own image. And that humans are at the top of the food chain because God ordained it. Further, one must be a monotheist to be able to grasp those things. While he doesn't name specific examples, it's clear that he is referring to the Abrahamic faiths. Not Mithraism, Dianic Wicca, Zoroastrianism, or any other Pagan form of monotheism.
Never a mention of the millennia of Pagan celebrations and rituals focused on the health and well-being of entire communities, nations, and ecosystems. Near the very end he offers a brief acknowledgement of the long and well documented history of monotheism being weaponized for the subjugation and/or destruction of women, of minorities, of LGBQ+ people, of indigenous peoples, of entire cultures. (Actually, he simply says, "manifold cruelties".)
There's more.
In subsequent paragraphs Rabbi Wolpe manages to bring together fascism, communism, the pursuit of beauty, and again, the desire for wealth (he seems especially upset about that) as all being a direct consequence/ expression of... anyone care to hazard a guess?
Yep. It's paganism. Because, in his own words, "Wealth is a cover for, or a means to, the ultimate object of worship in a pagan society, which is power."
(Is Joel Osteen aware of this? How about all those White Christian Nationalists?)
Among other things he lumps together Nietzsche, Nazis, Instagram, drugs, the QAnon shaman, and cosmetic surgery as "pagan to its roots". There's a running joke among liberals that whatever a conservative doesn't like is automatically labeled "woke". For Rabbi Wolpe, just substitute the word "pagan". Like those conservatives who couldn't accurately define "woke" if their lives depended on it, so his astounding ignorance of Paganism is jaw-dropping. It'd be laughable if it weren't so horrifyingly dangerous.
"The Nazis...were reinvigorating a pagan ideal."
Out of the whole thing that hurt the most.
It's not an ugly word. And shouldn't be used as if it were.
Rabbi David Wolpe is a highly respected, widely read authority and teacher of a faith which has suffered through a long history of very ugly, very painful oppression, demonization, and mass murder by ignorant, malignant outsiders. As an authority, a teacher, his words matter more than most people's words do. Given that background and his position in society it seems to me that such a person might want to be just a little more responsible about how he characterizes other faiths. He knows all too well the harm that words can do, when those words are full of misinformation. He knows that people actually listen to him, and take his words seriously.
There was a time when he and I both would have been in great danger, for similar reasons, of the same Inquisition. Because of misinformation and outright lies. The dangers posed by such misinformation are still with us all.
That he apparently can't see that is perhaps the saddest irony I've ever witnessed.
In the end, he's one more monotheist who's willing to paint a target on my back, and on everyone like me. He's thrown me, and every other Pagan, under the bus. We can and should coexist peacefully and respectfully. Maybe even be supportive of each other. That's hard to do with someone who sees you as less-than, if not an actual enemy. It makes me furious. And more than a little sad.
David Wolpe is a Visiting Scholar at Harvard Divinity School. He is the Max Webb Emeritus Rabbi of Sinai Temple in Los Angeles. A lecturer, columnist, and author, who has appeared in numerous TV documentaries on biblical topics.
You can read his editorial which appeared in The Atlantic, minus the pay wall, here www.msn.com/…
And some links to a few of his earlier writings-
From 2011, "Clashing Over Iran and the Jews" www.huffpost.com/…
Also from 2011, "Christian charity in Haiti is the Jewish thing to do" jewishjournal.com/…
From 2004, "Lessons From Life's Second Chance" jewishjournal.com/…
They're eloquent, well written, and overall rather different in tone.
•••••••
Please note in case it isn't absolutely clear, my quarrel is with the author of that editorial, not with his faith. I also have a bone to pick with the editors of The Atlantic, who saw fit to publish an editorial which is needlessly hurtful and insulting, and which in my opinion comes perilously close to hate speech. That however is a whole separate story for another time.
•••••••
Thank you for reading. This is an open thread, all topics are welcome.
