Had he been realist in the higher, Roman, sense, C.J. Jung would have
realised that it is precisely in the fact that "the Christ symbol is
psychologically inescapable and remains part of the Western psyche
and culture", that it "is psychologically necessary and is an
irrepressible part of the Western self-understanding and heritage",
that the whole problem, for the West, lies, on the spiritual plane.
You said it : "irrepressible". This irrepressible need which even
some great Western minds have felt for two thousand years to take
Christianity and Jesus-Christ as point of reference explains to a
large extent why the heathen restoration called for by Evola
in 'Heathen Imperialism' failed and couldn't but fail, to the great
satisfaction of the Jew. For the Western man, the whole thing has
become an obsession, a mania. Hence the various pathological aspects
which Western spirituality has assumed for two thousand years. As a
matter of fact, to describe Christianity as nothing other than a
Jewish plot, a sickly religion of weakness and decadence meant to
destroy the Aryan world, on one hand, and to hold his very founder in
high esteem to the point of trying to aryanise him, on the other
hand, comes within pathology. At this point, things need to be put
back in perspective : to Epictete, to Lucian, to Celsius, to Pliny,
and so on, Christians appeared as deranged people ; the 'message'
they spread, as anti-traditional, anti-Roman. Unlike Rosenberg almost
two millennia after, the worthiest elements of the Roman Patriciate
would not try to distinguish between 'true Christianity' and 'corrupt
Christianity', almost in the same way as, nowadays, blind, even in
nationalist circles, when driven into a corner, work themselves to
death convincing you that current democracy is not 'true democracy'
and looking for 'true democracy' : Christianity appeared to the best
elements of Roman aristocracy as it is, as a whole, as an aberration
from their standpoint.
So it appeared to Evola, at least to the writer of 'Heathen
Imperialism'. He didn't tie himself up in the two alternatives which
the author is right to state "the Christian opponent of Judaism
(only) has". He didn't tie himself up in them because he did not
oppose Judaism from a religious standpoint, but from a racial and
spiritual standpoint, which allows one to overcome those simplistic
paralysing alternatives. Doesn't the truth seeker easily lose his way
in the maze of theological speculations of which we are reminded of
in
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p335_Whisker.html/, and which were
unknown to cults of Indo-European origin? Once again, what's the
point of dreaming of "a de-feminized, knightly, hierarchical-
initiatory Christianity resurrected on an 'ariognostic' and
Eckhartian basis", when all we need we have in our own tradition,
which is not Christianity? Even assuming that Christianity was
actually corrupted, the fact remains that its god is conceived of in
a theistic manner, whether by 'orthodox' or by 'heretical'
Christians, one way or the other, and that this conception is in
striking contrast with the way Indo-European peoples used to
experience the divine.
Waddell's considerations on the racial origin of Jesus-Christ are as
deeply interesting as highly conjectural. What tends to compromise
the signification of his comparative research is his rather
systematic bringing together historical characters of ancient Egypt
and of Summerian civilisation and figures of the English royal family
of his time, that is, the Victorian era, and his not discriminating
Semitic sun-cults, involving gods "that change, experience birth and
passion (...), are subject to the law of death and rebirth", from
Aryan ones, based on "unchanging, perfect essences, removed from the
lower world of destiny, bright as the sun and sidereal natures (...)".
--- In
evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "brightimperator"
<brightimperator@...> wrote:
>
> It is not certain that the non-Jewish lineage of Jesus is only
> a 'fabrication of the Talmud of Babylon'. Other early non-Talmudic
> sources also testify of Jesus' non-Jewish lineage and mission (as
> the analysis below demonstrates). Also, to preclude any possible
> misunderstandings: that I address the issue of non-Jewish, Indo-
> Persian, or Aryan Christianity merely means I am a hunter after the
> truth. The blood of the petty, deluded, exoteric religious
sectarian
> typical of the modern age is not in me. Yet I do agree with the
> realism of C.G. Jung that the Christ symbol is psychologically
> inescapable and remains part of the Western psyche and culture. As
> the Christ symbol is psychologically necessary and is an
> irrepressible part of the Western self-understanding and heritage,
> would a de-feminized, knightly, hierarchical-initiatory
Christianity
> resurrected on an 'ariognostic' and Eckhartian basis, the "regal
> religion of (the pre-Abrahamic Aryan priest-king) Melchizedek"
Evola
> praises, perhaps be a good collective unifying strategy for re-
> energizing the Indoeuropean peoples of the West in the inevitable
> conflict with contrary forces?
>
> Anyone interested in these questions would benefit from reading the
> following highly informative, scholarly, and suggestive analyses:
>
> Gnostic Origins of Alfred Rosenberg's Thought
>
>
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p335_Whisker.html
>
> JOHN THE BAPTIST AND JESUS, ARYAN SUN-FIRE PRIESTS
>
>
http://www.antiqillum.com/texts/bg/Qadosh/qadosh016.htm
>