How Did Christianity Convert The Germanic Folks

[Tautalos]

http://foster.20megsfree.com/457.htm



The Christian Question

The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity:
A Sociohistorical Approach to Religious
Transformation

James C. Russell
New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.
$19.95 US

xiv + 258 pp.

Reviewed by Samuel Francis



“Christian theology is the grandmother of Bolshevism,” Oswald Spengler wrote many years ago. What he meant was that Christianity’s endorsement of such ideas as universalism, egalitarianism, peace, world brotherhood, and universal altruism helped establish and legitimize the ethics and politics invoked by socialists and communists. Socialists and communists don’t always agree, however, which is why another German scholar, Karl Marx, pronounced that religion is in fact a conservatizing force, the opiate of the masses, the drug that prevents the workers of the world from rebelling against their class enemies.

Both of these Teutonic heavyweights might have profited from reading James C. Russell’s The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity, since it speaks, at least indirectly, to the tension between their different views of Christianity, differences that continue to be reflected in political and ideological disputes on the European and American right today. The main question in the controversy is this: Is Christianity a force that supports or opposes the efforts of the right to defend the European-American way of life? Christians on the right argue that their religious commitments are central to Western civilization, while pagans and secularists on the right (especially in Europe) argue, with Spengler, that Christianity undermines the West by pushing a universalism that rejects race, class, family, and even nation.

Mr. Russell, who holds a doctorate in historical theology from Fordham University and teaches at Saint Peter’s College, does not quite answer the question, but his immensely learned and closely reasoned book does suggest an answer. His thesis is that early Christianity flourished in the decadent, deracinated, and alienated world of late antiquity precisely because it was able to appeal to various oppressed or dissatisfied sectors of the population -- slaves, urbanized proletarians, women, intellectuals, frustrated aristocrats, and the odd idealist repelled by the pathological materialism, brutality, and banality of the age.

But when Christian missionaries tried to appeal to the Germanic invaders by invoking the universalism, pacifism, and egalitarianism that had attracted the alienated inhabitants of the empire, they failed. That was because the Germans practiced a folk religion that reflected ethnic homogeneity, social hierarchy, military glory and heroism, and “standards of ethical conduct ... derived from a sociobiological drive for group survival through ingroup altruism.” Germanic religion and society were “world-accepting,” while Hellenic Christianity was “world-rejecting,” reflecting the influence of Oriental religions and ethics. By “Germans,” it should be noted, Mr. Russell does not mean modern residents of Germany but rather “the Gothic, Frankish, Saxon, Burgundian, Alamannic, Suevic, and Vandal peoples, but also ... the Viking peoples of Scandinavia and the Anglo-Saxon peoples of Britain.” With the exception of the Celts and the Slavs, “Germans” thus means almost the same thing as “European” itself.

Given the contradictions between the Christian ethics and world-view and those of the Indo-European culture of the Germanic peoples, the only tactic Christians could use was one of appearing to adopt Germanic values and claiming that Christian values were really compatible with them. The bulk of Mr. Russell’s scholarship shows how this process of accommodation took place in the course of about four centuries. The saints and Christ Himself were depicted as Germanic warrior heroes; both festivals and locations sacred in ancient Germanic cults were quietly taken over by the Christians as their own; and words and concepts with religious meanings and connotations were subtly redefined in terms of the new religion. Yet the final result was not that the Germans were converted to the Christianity they had originally encountered, but rather that that form of Christianity was “Germanized,” coming to adopt many of the same Indo-European folk values that the old pagan religion had celebrated.

Mr. Russell thus suggests, as noted above, a resolution of the debate over Christian universalism. The early Christianity that the Germans encountered contained a good many universalist tendencies, adapted and reinforced by the disintegrating social fabric and deracinated peoples of the late empire. But thanks to Germanization, those elements were soon suppressed or muted and what we know as the historical Christianity of the medieval era offered a religion, ethic, and world-view that supported what we today know as “conservative values” -- social hierarchy, loyalty to tribe and place (blood and soil), world-acceptance rather than world-rejection, and an ethic that values heroism and military sacrifice. In being “Germanized,” Christianity was essentially reinvented as the dynamic faith that animated European civilization for a thousand years and more.

Mr. Russell’s answer to the question about Christianity is that Christianity is both the grandmother of Bolshevism (in its early universalist, non-Western form) and a pillar of social stabilization and order (through the values and world-view imported into it through contact with the ancient barbarians). Throughout most of its history, the latter has prevailed, but today, as Mr. Russell argues in the last pages of his work, the enemies of the European (Germanic) heritage -- what he calls “the Euro-Christian religiocultural fusion” -- have begun to triumph within Christian ranks. “Opposition to this fusion, especially as it might interfere with notions of universalism and ecumenism, was expressed in several of the documents of the Second Vatican Council,” and he sees the same kind of opposition to the early medieval Germanic influence in the various reform movements in church history, including the Protestant Reformation, which always demand a return to the “primitive church” -- i.e., pre-Germanic Christianity. It is precisely this rejection of the European heritage that may have driven many Christians of European background out of Christianity altogether and into alternative forms of paganism that positively affirm their racial and cultural roots.

Whatever primitive Christianity or true Christianity or historical Christianity may or may not have believed and taught, what is indisputably happening today is the deliberate extirpation from Christianity of the European heritage by its enemies within the churches. The institutional Christianity that flourishes today is no longer the same religion as that practiced by Charlemagne and his successors, and it can no longer support the civilization they formed. Indeed, organized Christianity today is the enemy of Europe and the race that created it.

Mr. Russell has produced a deeply learned book that assimilates history and theology, sociology and comparative religion, and even sociobiology and genetics within its pages. Moreover, it is an important book that addresses a highly controversial and philosophically and culturally significant issue that few others will address at all.

[Menydh]

The banality of American racialists, even when holding a degree, is boring and a waste of time. Especially considering that they are educated in a country with strong Calvinist foundations.

The institutional Christianity that flourishes today is no longer the same religion as that practiced by Charlemagne and his successors, and it can no longer support the civilization they formed. Indeed, organized Christianity today is the enemy of Europe and the race that created it.

Are we then to assume that you adhere to the views of Traditional Catholicism, Tridentarian Mass and sedevacantism?

I mean, destructing is all very appealing providing we have a plan for constructing or reconstructing. What would be yours?

[Tautalos]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

The banality of American racialists, even when holding a degree, is boring and a waste of time

I don't know many (if any), but this text is certainly not a waste of time.

Are we then to assume that you adhere to the views of Traditional Catholicism, Tridentarian Mass and sedevacantism?

You would have to ask that to the author of the text. Speaking for myself, I am far from desiring a return to anything Christian.

I mean, destructing is all very appealing providing we have a plan for constructing or reconstructing. What would be yours?

The return to the worship of the real Deities of the West.

[Perun]

Ahhhh......why if isn't my old enemy from Skadi!


Anyways.....I(Hilaire Belloc) along with Petr totally debunked this book over at Original Dissent which you can read in total here:

http://www.originaldissent.com/forum...ad.php?t=15951

I even found several scholarly reviews claiming that this book is not history, rather Russell is simply projecting his own socioloical theories of religion onto the past.

Better books to read on this topic are Richard Fletcher's The Barbarian Conversion: From Paganism to Christianity and Peter Brown's Rise of Western Christendom.

As I mentioned at OD, Brown makes notes that adopting to local cultures occured throughout the Christian world; in areas as diverse as Ireland, Spain, Armenia, Egypt, Syria, and so on. Most hilarious is how Brown documents the conversion of the Armenian people, which Brown even states closely resembled the conversion of the Germanic peoples. So Russell's thesis that "Germanization" was somehow special and completely changed Christianity is totally wrong.

All in all, there is simply too much information out there to refute Russell.

[Perun]

Originally Posted by Tautalos

The return to the worship of the real Deities of the West.

"The Paganism of the Mediterranean basin, from which all our culture springs, was not originally affected very much by the Paganisms of Asia; by the Paganism of the Black races it was affected hardly at all: not because they would not have had some natural affinity with any other Paganism, but because there was little physical contact between them. Today such opportunity is universal, and is increasing in effect. Today the barrier, the only effective barrier, against such infiltration of Pagan ideas from races other than our own, is a strong anti-Pagan moral system and creed—and there is none such outside the Catholic Church."
--Hilaire Belloc Surivals and New Arrivals

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Tautalos

I don't know many (if any), but this text is certainly not a waste of time.

It's a much simplistic attempt to make an analysis of Christianism, which only takes one part as if it was the whole. So much for a serious analysis..

You would have to ask that to the author of the text. Speaking for myself

I'm asking you since you posted the text, not the author.

I am far from desiring a return to anything Christian.

If it wasn't for Christianism, Portugal would be today an Islamic country and the same for the rest of Hispania, as well as the Balkans, etc.

You are lucky, your desires might be accomplished pretty soon. Europe might end up islamicised in the near future.

The return to the worship of the real Deities of the West.

ROFL!

[Perun]

If it weren't for Christianity, much of what we hold dear as European wouldn't exist. It was Christians who even preserved and improved upon the Classical heritage.

[Tautalos]

Originally Posted by Perun

Ahhhh......why if isn't my old enemy from Skadi!

Yes, it is a small world...

Anyways.....I(Hilaire Belloc) along with Petr totally debunked this book over at Original Dissent which you can read in total here:

http://www.originaldissent.com/forum...ad.php?t=15951

I will read it.

As I mentioned at OD, Brown makes notes that adopting to local cultures occured throughout the Christian world; in areas as diverse as Ireland, Spain, Armenia, Egypt, Syria, and so on.

That's what the text says... didn't you notice it?

Most hilarious is how Brown documents the conversion of the Armenian people, which Brown even states closely resembled the conversion of the Germanic peoples. So Russell's thesis that "Germanization" was somehow special and completely changed Christianity is totally wrong.

Not a good argument. The traditional ethic of the Germanic folks would not be too different from Armenia's. And, generally, the belief that Christianity is a «national religion» was widespread by the Church and is still mantained by Christian patriots. That shows that Russell's text is absolutely correct in that aspect.

[Tautalos]

Originally Posted by Perun

"The Paganism of the Mediterranean basin, from which all our culture springs, was not originally affected very much by the Paganisms of Asia; by the Paganism of the Black races it was affected hardly at all: not because they would not have had some natural affinity with any other Paganism, but because there was little physical contact between them. Today such opportunity is universal, and is increasing in effect. Today the barrier, the only effective barrier, against such infiltration of Pagan ideas from races other than our own, is a strong anti-Pagan moral system and creed—and there is none such outside the Catholic Church."
--Hilaire Belloc Surivals and New Arrivals

And that anti-Pagan moral system is dying out, which is no surprise, since it was always alien to the most authentic Europe, which is Gentile Indo-European.

[Tautalos]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

It's a much simplistic attempt to make an analysis of Christianism, which only takes one part as if it was the whole.

Actually, it hits the essence of the subject.

I'm asking you since you posted the text, not the author.

I don't have to agree with all that the author said. I thought that was obvious from my first answer.

If it wasn't for Christianism, Portugal would be today an Islamic country

If, if... well, any «if» is for free. If Portugal was Pagan, Islam would have been expelled much faster... if I could fly, I would perhaps touch the clouds.

Moreover, India was not Christian when the Hindus (which are basically Pagans, after all) defeated the hords of Islam, and that's why India is still a Pagan fortress.

You are lucky, your desires might be accomplished pretty soon. Europe might end up islamicised in the near future.

That would be more close to your own desires, since Islam is nearer Christianity than Paganism...

[Faísca]

Originally Posted by Tautalos

And that anti-Pagan moral system is dying out, which is no surprise, since it was always alien to the most authentic Europe, which is Gentile Indo-European.

Are you sure you wanted to use the word Gentile?

Because Gentile in its current meaning means someone who is not of the jewish faith, a Christian...

[Tautalos]

Originally Posted by Perun

If it weren't for Christianity, much of what we hold dear as European wouldn't exist. It was Christians who even preserved and improved upon the Classical heritage.

Christian impudence, to which I answered before...

If Mynydd wanted to give you one hundred euros and Samuel Francis took that money from Mynydd and gave you fifty euros, would you be thankful to Samuel Francis?

I wouldn't.

If there was no Christian self imposition, Europe would be a lot brighter than it is and would probably be more capable of dealing with immigrants and enemies. Most probably, there would be no militant, ethno-masochist, hate-monger, universalist and anti-racist political Left.

[Perun]

Originally Posted by Tautalos

And that anti-Pagan moral system is dying out,

No it is not, and Fr. Andrew Greeley totally debunks that notion here:
Religious decline in Europe?

The only thing declining in Europe is church attendence, and thats largely true for incompetent and overly bureaucratic churches. Yet non-mainstream Christian movements are thriving in Europe.

Here's a sociological study about that:
http://www.bepress.com/cgi/viewconte...1&context=ijrr


And large numbers of Europeans still travel to places like Fatima and Lourdes. Not to mention the large number of young Christians that gathered in Rome for John Paul II's funeral and gathered again in Colonge for the arrival of Benedict XVI.

Richard Neuhaus even wrote an article about the growin Catholic faith in Eastern Europe, especially Poland, but added:


http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/...n/neuhaus.html

"Observers are struck by the small but dynamic movements of Christian renewal in, for example, France and Germany. Moreover, some studies suggest that the general population of western Europe is not as secular as many think."


And so on and so on. So keep telling yourself that Catholicism, or even Christianity, is in decline in Europe; you're only fooling yourself.

since it was always alien to the most authentic Europe, which is Gentile Indo-European.

Whatever.....Europe only existed as a vague geographical entity to the Classical pagans. It was Christianity that gave Europe a cultural and racial significance.

[Tautalos]

Originally Posted by Johannes de León

Are you sure you wanted to use the word Gentile?

Because Gentile in its current meaning means someone who is not of the jewish faith, a Christian...

Gentile is the same as Heathen or Pagan.


I personally prefer the term «Gentile» because it reminds the word «Gens», and for me the main motivation for Paganism is ethnic pride.

[Tautalos]

Originally Posted by Perun

No it is not, and Fr. Andrew Greeley totally debunks that notion here:

Well, your only argument is of the «magister dixit» type. Can't you summarize the arguments that you read? It would be more easy to talk.

And large numbers of Europeans still travel to places like Fatima and Lourdes.

Less and less, in what concerns Fatima. So, that argument goes against your position.

Whatever.....Europe only existed as a vague geographical entity to the Classical pagans. It was Christianity that gave Europe a cultural and racial significance.

Christianity did not gave any racial significance to Europe. As for culture, Christianity is foreign to all the European ethnicities, and, moreover, it is universalist. So, it cannot be considered as something European - or else, it is less European than, say, communism, for Communism was born in Europe...