It is you who asked some clarifications about the relations between
Evola and Codreanu, but it is that Dutch site which assumes wrongly
that the former called for an "overthrowal of Christianity', and it
is that erroneous assumption which we rectified. So, there is no
misunderstanding between us in this respect.
Had he read 'Imperialismo pagano', in which there is nothing
blasphemous, before he met Evola, it is difficult to say whether
Codreanu would have refused to meet him. At any rate, it is not for
us to say it. Nor do we wish to venture into speculations of that
kind.
--- In
evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "lordofthespear"
<hailtocryptogram@...> wrote:
>
> Thank you for your post, some things are partially cleared up now.
> I guess there are some misunderstandings here though: firstly, it is
> me who's asking the question about the relationship between Codreanu
> and Evola, and secondly, I see that I gave you a wrong impression of
> how I viewed Evola's stand on Christianity and the essence of the
> legionary movement.
> I must confess I have only read the English excerpts of Imperialismo
> Pagano which were available on the net, but still one can say it
> pleaded for a heathen restoration and was critical of Christianity,
> using some Nietzschean arguments and calling it a religion of pity.
> That this work was about the direct overthrowal of Christianity and
> the reintroduction of paganism I wrongly assumed from an Evola
> biography from a Dutch website (www.monas.nl) (which seems to
contain
> more errors, by the way). Also note that I wrote 'anti-christian'
and
> not anti-christian, as I know Evola wasn't a person one can simply
> lable as anti- or pro-christian; he has been quite positive about
> orders/movements from the past who marched under a Christian
banner.
> When I said Evola admired the legionary movement for it�s spirit
and
> it's ethical code, I was hinting at their masculine spirit, their
> fighting spirit - accepting victory and defeat -, and it's cult of
the
> blood/forefather cult (things which indeed have a non-christian,
Aryan
> origin). You even added some more interesting points, of which I
> wasn't aware!
> So what I wanted to say in my previous post was that Codreanu, had
he
> known Imperialismo pagano, he could have viewed it as anti-christian
> and would not have wanted to meet Evola. As I recently read parts of
> Codreanu's 'To my legionaries!' I would say he would, as a faithful
> Christian, view some statements as blasphemous. As it now turns out,
> he simply hasn't read it, which makes an exact answer to my question
> impossible then, of course.
>
>
>
>
> --- In
evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "evola_as_he_is"
> <evola_as_he_is@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > This most interesting point has not been brought up before on
this
> > forum. Whoever you are quoting in this respect, the question the
> > author asks shows that he or she has rather superficial views
both on
> > Evola's stand on Christianity and on the true essence of
Codreanu's
> > movement.
> >
> > First, if it is true that Evola had "distantiated himself from
some
> > views expressed in this writing ['Imperialismo pagano'](...) by
the
> > time he met Codreanu", it cannot be said that he "remained the
writer
> > of this 'anti-christian" work". By 1938, when Evola met Codreanu
at
> > his home by Bucarest, 'Imperialismo pagano', which was not
> > republished in the 1930's, was almost forgotten ; it sank into
> > oblivion almost as quickly as it was widely talked about in the
> > aftermath of its publication in 1928, in part because of Evola
> > himself. Besides, nothing indicates that Codreanu had read it
before
> > he met the Italian author.
> >
> > Then, it is a gross over-simplification to state
that 'Imperialismo
> > pagano' advocated purely and simply "the direct overthrowal of
> > Christianity and the introduction (sic) of paganism". What it
called
> > for was a subordination of the Church as an "expression of the
> > spirituality of those who can only 'believe'" to "the Empire,
> > conceived of as incarnation of the royal spirituality of those
> > who 'know' and 'are'. The Eagle beyond the Cross, the solar
symbol of
> > the right of the Fathers (Empire) beyond the lunar one of the
right
> > of the Mothers (the Mother Church)".
> >
> > The 'Iron Guard', banned in Romania for decades, was recently
> > authorised to reform there by the political schemers who are
> > currently 'managing' illegitimately, that is, democratically,
this
> > country, but not before they had pitchforked one of their
henchmen,
> > whose name we haven't bothered to note, into the job
> > of 'leader'. "Codreanu, Horia Sima, successor of Codreanu at the
head
> > of the movement in exile, said in the French
magazine 'Totalit�' in
> > 1984, was a convinced Christian, and yet the sense of his
> > Christianity does not refer to his person, but rather to the
> > political work he achieved. (...) The base of the philosophy of
the
> > Movement is Christianity (...) The whole legionary education
works on
> > the idea of forming a 'new man'. Now, this 'new man' conceived of
by
> > Codreanu was nothing else but the Christian man projected into
the
> > political field" ; to Codreanu, however, it seems that it
> > corresponded to a racial type, that is, the 'Dacio-Roman' one,
> > without any religious reference.
> >
> > Others are of the opinion that Codreanu used the religious
feeling as
> > an instrument of propaganda in a deeply Christian country.
> >
> > The truth is likely to lie between both of these extremes : "What
> > characterises the essence of Romanian legionarism, Claudio Mutti
> > stresses, is a spirit transcending the religious dimension in
general
> > and that of Christianity in particular and for which the faith of
> > Romanian Christian masses was the vehicle of a higher
spirituality".
> > Eric Nolte, whom he quotes in support of his evaluation, goes
> > further : "The mysticism of the Iron Guard cannot be defined as
> > Christian - even though expressions peculiar to Christianity are
> > recurrent in it - since it is not centred on the eternal good,
but
> > rather on the concrete 'blood' of its people. If it is true that
> > there is no break with Christian faith, the hiatus is still
> > undeniable".
> >
> > Mutti proceeds to go through "the elements which lead [him] to
see in
> > the Iron Guard the presence of an heritage foreign to
Catholicism".
> >
> > In the first place, there is the figure of the archangel Michael,
> > since the propitiatory formula of a Mithriac ritual mentions
> > explicitly this archangel as the medium by which the
immortalising
> > force of the god is transmitted to the initiate. Now, as is well-
> > known, Mithraism developed all over the Romanian territory, far
> > before Christianisation. Under these conditions, it is quite
certain
> > that the archangel Michael is a Christian (mis?) representation
of an
> > entity pre-existing to the Christianisation of Dacia.
> >
> > In the second place, Codreanu often refers to the distinction
between
> > the 'great war' and the 'small war', which, asis known, was
first
> > expressed in a famous hadith and which was dear to Evola who went
so
> > far as to dedicate an essay to it : 'La grande e la piccola
guerra',
> > in 'Metafisica della guerra', Ar, Padova, 2001.
> >
> > In the third place, to Mutti, another element assumes in the
> > legionary practice a different meaning from the one it has in
> > Christianity : prayer. For the legionary, it is not a mere
request
> > addressed to the divinity, a manifestation of religious
> > sentimentalism, but rather a compelling ritual act meant to act
on
> > the mysterious forces of the invisible world. "Call them,
Codreanu
> > says about these forces, attract them with all the power of your
> > spirit, and they will come". The legionary prayer is thus a
ritual
> > reciting by which an act of power, and not only an act of faith,
is
> > expressed. Singing seems to have had, beyond a sentimental
> > outpouring, a mantric signification. If Codreanu ascribed to
singing
> > a fundamental importance - so much so that it was for him "one of
the
> > four essential dimensions which are at the root of our life" -,
it is
> > because he sensed this synthesis between rhythm and image by
which
> > experiences of the supra-human order are sometimes expressed.
> >
> > In the fourth place, the doctrine of sacrifice, which has a
central
> > part in legionarism, does not seem, to Mutti, to be reducible to
the
> > form it assumes in Christianity. Once again, it bears the mark of
the
> > transmission of teachings expressed far before Christianity
connected
> > sacrifice with the death of the 'Son of God' and with its
> > commemoration by means of the sacrament of the Eucharist. In the
> > legionary doctrine, sacrifice is justified by what Mircea Eliade
> > calls the "archaic theory of the periodical regeneration of
sacred
> > forces". The 'archaic' man revives by his sacrifice the creative
act
> > of the origins to prevent the exhaustion of sacred force. Now,
the
> > legionary sacrifice is precisely an 'archaic' sacrifice, since
the
> > members of the Iron Guard stated that they sacrificed themselves
to
> > restore race and to prevent it from dying out.
> >
> > On the other hand, some of these elements irreducible to
Christianity
> > in the legionary movement were brought to light by Evola in the
six
> > articles he published on Codreanu, of which five appeared in the
> > Italian press in 1938, while the last was written on the eve of
his
> > death. Mutti, without giving its refrences, refers to a seventh
> > article, in which Evola points out that "the idea of the presence
of
> > the powers of the dead - and particularly that of the heroes - by
the
> > living, which is pregnant in the legionary movement, reflects
> > unequivocally some well-known forms of a pre-Christian (relations
> > between the gens, the ancestors and tutelary heroes)
spirituality.
> > With respect to the relations between the State and the
> > Church, "Codreanu, Evola recalls in 1973, pointed out that the
> > historical situation of a country like Romania was favourable,
since
> > Graeco-orthodox Christianity is foreign to the opposition between
the
> > universality of faith and the national idea ; as national church,
the
> > Orthodox Church could be the perfect counterpart of a renewing
State
> > committed to a national revolution" : assuming that the Orthodox
> > Church was what Codreanu thought it was, Evola couldn't agree
more
> > with him. Least but not last, Codreanu's anti-Semitism was, as
> > Evola's, of the racial type, and not of the religious type. In
> >
http://thompkins_cariou.tripod.com/id15.html/, it is on this
aspect
> > of Codreanu's thought and action that Evola tend to focus,
without
> > criticising any of points made by the former, and we know that he
was
> > particularly demanding on this issue.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In
evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "lordofthespear"
> > <hailtocryptogram@> wrote:
> > >
> > > This might have been brought up before, but how was it possible
that
> > > Codreanu and Evola were - if I'm correct - befriended* with
each
> > other?
> > > The anti-Judeo-Masonic stance they shared and Evola admired the
> > > legionary movement for it's spirit and it's ethical code, but
would
> > > Evola's controversial 'Imperialismo Pagano' not have been a
reason
> > > for serious collision between the two personalities?
> > > Although Evola might have distantiated himself from some views
> > > expressed in this writing (the direct overthrowal of
christianity
> > and
> > > the introduction of paganism) by the time he met Codreanu, he
still
> > > remained the writer of this 'anti-christian' work. Would this
not
> > make
> > > a relationship between Codreanu - a devoted Christian who saw
the
> > Jews
> > > almost literally as demons - and Evola, impossible?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > * I'm not completely sure this is true as I'm not totally
convinced
> > of
> > > the trustworhtiness of my source.
> > > Beside this questionable information the only knowledge I have
of
> > the
> > > 'relationship' between these two personalities is that Evola met
> > > Codreanu after being introduced to him by Mircea Eliade, which
> > wasn't
> > > completely coincidental I suppose. But even then it would be
strange
> > > Codreanu shook hands with Evola, because of a possible
colliding
> > point
> > > of view. Or did Codreanu, which doesn't seem likely to me,
> > completely
> > > lack any background information of the person he met?
> > >
> >
>