Modern Western Soft Polytheism is the most common modern Pagan concept of the Divine, thanks largely to Pagan publishers such as Llewellyn (which, if we’re being honest, set the standard for most Pagan publishing). I believe that this concept of the Divine is a contributing factor in modern Pagan issues with cultural appropriation and the homogenization of diverse paths.
I’m going to quote my very first Llewellyn book on Wicca (Wicca: A Guide for the Solitary Practitioner by Scott Cunningham) in order to define Modern Western Soft Polytheism: “Every deity that has received worship upon this planet exists with the archetypal God and Goddess. The complex pantheons of deities which arose in many parts of the world are simply aspects of the two. Every Goddess is resident within the concept of the Goddess; every God in the God.” This theory is mirrored in nearly every Llewellyn book I own, even the ones that are supposedly non-Wiccan. In order to understand why this can be a damaging view, we have to look into the history of where this theology has its roots.
The ideas behind Modern Western Soft Polytheism have their roots in nineteenth century English history. There’s not just one easy thing to point at to say “that’s where it comes from”. There are layers (that are gone over in great detail in Ronald Hutton’s work Triumph of the Moon, which, incidentally, Llewellyn published a rebuttal of by one of their big ticket authors, Raven Grimassi), which include Colonialism (with its inherit attempts to “civilize” colonized peoples through the stripping of language, culture and religion; and concepts of “white man’s burden” and “the noble savage”), Industrialization and the Pastoral-Romanticism that came as a direct reaction to Industrialization.
So, how do these things inspire Modern Western Soft Polytheism? I’m going to try to be as succinct as possible: Nineteenth century anthropologists were not nearly as non-judgmental as modern ones attempt to be. Many works are glaringly written from a scandalized perspective rather than an understanding one. Many accounts were also written by missionaries sent to help “civilize” and “save” these poor “savage” souls. The concept of the “noble savage” was one of either shock that a person could have morals and be a good person before hearing the Word of Christ, or the idea that certain concepts within a people’s own religion could have been God “preparing them to hear the word of Christ”.
Heading back over to England (why am I focusing on England? Because Wicca is English and Wicca has inspired this all), dissatisfaction with life in an industrialized society led to a romantic image of country living and a fascination with (largely) Greco-Roman gods of the pasture and woodlands. The poems about these gods started out more as laments to the loss of nature to industrialization than as actual religious literature. However it did lead to a romantic view of the dying/resurrecting gods of agriculture. Which, in turn, sort of made the English “noble savage” their own ancestors (and further cemented their white supremacy because their ancestors had been “prepared for Christ” long ago thanks to the concepts of dying/resurrecting gods of vegetation).
How does this get us through to today? Well, we have Margaret Murray to thank for creating the idea of a pan-European Witch Cult. Her ideas were long debunked, but still somehow deeply impacted historical anthropology through the 1990s (probably because the idea of true polytheism was so alien to academics raised within the overculture created by Colonialism and Pastoral-Romanticism). Her ideas were filtered through Gerald Gardner whose published “Outer Court” books on Wicca influenced generations. Hell, even Asatru started out as a Wicca-based (and therefore Modern Western Soft Polytheist) religion that happened to focus on Norse Gods and garnished with racism (though it wasn’t like Wicca was originally inclusive, its roots are deep in older forms of Conservatism as previously discussed).
So Modern Western Soft Polytheism largely started as a lens through which Colonialist White Monotheists could understand polytheistic religions. This, in turn, makes what Cunningham says above understandable given when it was written, but more problematic than people want to acknowledge. For example, in 2001, I was in college and practicing Wicca based on the few Llewellyn books I’d managed to get my hands on. My roommate was also Wiccan. Her altar was very pretty, prettier than mine; however, her God image was Buddha and her Goddess was Kwan Yin. We saw nothing wrong with this (despite Buddha not really being a god per Buddhism) because “All gods are one god and all goddesses one goddess”. Fast forward to today in which we have more direct contact with other cultures and can therefore quickly learn that the stuff we took for granted as “ours” because publishers like Llewellyn said so are not actually ours. Our continued resistance to this idea, because we think we are honoring the cultures by using these things, is directly connected to being descended from a Colonialist mindset. That shit runs deep and we need to own it in order to heal it and move forward.
“But the Romans compared their gods to others!” The Romans were also amongst the earliest Colonizers. If you want to be technical, the Pax Britannia of the British Colonial Era is a direct inheritance of the Pax Romana of Roman conquest. There is also a difference in comparing/conflating individual gods with similar attributes and saying all gods are the same no matter what culture or context they come from. “But they also fully honored gods not linked to their pantheon! Like Epona!” That is true, how “right” that was is debatable, but in the case of Epona, she filled a gap as Rome did not have its own god of cavalry; how many Gallic gods survived without Roman conflation or incorporation into Roman-style worship? This is a double-edged sword, we only know as much as we do because Rome wrote things down. However, everything they wrote was from an outsider’s perspective of what they believed were barbarian tribes.
“Ok, well, what about linguistic cognate gods?” That’s not proof that all gods stem from the same unified concept of deity. If anything, that’s “squishy” polytheism (all gods of a certain sphere of influence are the same god, just seen through a different cultural lens) as opposed to true Modern Western Soft Polytheism. I think regional, cultural and linguistic drift are enough to declare them separate entities at this point, others are free to disagree. I just think that for concepts such as “god of war”, having only one means that deity “picked a side” to win which is kind of dickish for a deity.
Now, Hard or Devotional Polytheism isn’t without its issues. There are people who believe one must have blood ties to the culture they want to worship the gods of (and will often take skin tone as proof one does not have that blood, despite the fact that one cannot really tell blood ancestry by how much or little melanin a person has). Heathenry is the biggest offender here, and it was the reason I left it for nearly a decade. There are also those who believe that they can casually talk to gods on the regular just like you would call your Aunt (they call it “godphone”) and take these (super UPG) communications as “proof” that a deity from another culture does not mind being worshiped outside their own cultural context. They claim this god as theirs because they claim the deity told them it was ok to do so (and how DARE we question their truth or UPG)?
I’m not saying that being a Modern Western Soft Polytheist is bad. If it helps you respect all religions as valid, great. What I am saying is that it is rooted in Colonialism and makes mindless cultural appropriation easier because it can take away the ability to discern what the lines are between appreciation and appropriation. Llewellyn’s (and publishers like them/inspired by them) homogenization of modern Paganism is a big issue when it comes to being able to see those lines. Modern Western Soft Polytheism isn’t Llewellyn’s fault or invention, but they sure made sure it was the most common view of Paganism, which is why it still largely draws predominantly white folk. And THAT, my friends, is the issue.
Resources:
Wicca: A Guide for the Solitary Practitioner by Scott Cunningham
Triumph of the Moon by Ronald Hutton
The Heathen History Podcast hosted by Laura Crow Thacker and Ben Waggoner
And a personal thank you to all the shitty English literature I read for my BA in English than I can no longer remember the names or authors of to cite, but which I know helped me form this thesis
thearcaneasylum 