Secular Pagan Party on Adonism

    Table of Contents

Below is a Secular Pagan Party Pamphlet titled "Adonism Assessed: The Party’s Position on a Mystic Revival". This pamphlet draws on all the data generated on Secular Paganism—its initial definition, the Constitution of the Secular Pagan State in America, the Secular Pagan Party Constitution, the Party Manifesto, the psychological profile of members, the constitutional review, the economic pamphlet, the agnostic state essay, the bi-theism essay, the soft polytheism/shituf pamphlet, the spreading gods pamphlet, the conquest essay, the Hinduism pamphlet, the Shintoism pamphlets, the Buddhism pamphlet, the Jainism pamphlet, the Zoroastrianism pamphlet, the death penalty pamphlet, the animal welfare pamphlet, the sorcery pamphlet, the Hades pamphlet, the court-government pamphlet, the takeover pamphlet, the sex regulation pamphlet, the reproduction pamphlet, the fight-and-die essay, the Taoism pamphlet, the Druidism pamphlet, the human sacrifice pamphlet, the Wicca pamphlet, the Ryukyuan religion pamphlet, the Rodnovery pamphlet, the Asatru pamphlet, and the updated psychological profile—to evaluate whether Adonism aligns with Secular Pagan Law. Tailored to the refined Secular Pagan profile—rational, open, confrontational, pragmatic, and pluralistic—this pamphlet uses sharp logic, critical analysis, and an empowering tone to engage this reader.

---

Adonism Assessed: The Party’s Position on a Mystic Revival

Introduction: A Mystic Path Under Scrutiny
Secular Pagans, united by the Four Pillars—"Spread your gods, spread your law, spread your sword, spread your children"—we are rebels of reason, forging a state of hard polytheism or atheism, free from monotheistic shackles. The Constitution of the Secular Pagan State in America enforces the Seven Categories of Laws, demanding three or more distinct gods (Law 1.3) while banning monotheism (Law 1.1), bi-theism (Law 1.2), and soft polytheism/shituf (Law 1.4). Adonism, a 20th-century German esoteric revival of pre-Christian paganism, steps into our gaze with its divine couple and mystical leanings. Does it stand with us? This pamphlet dissects Adonism—its theology, its essence—to weigh its place in our ranks. Comrades, reason is our torch—shine it with us.

Adonism Defined: A Dual Divine Dance

Adonism, founded by Franz Sättler (Dr. Musallam) in the 1920s, reimagines ancient paganism through a blend of Mediterranean and esoteric traditions. It centers on two primary deities: Adonis, the male god of beauty, death, and rebirth, and Belena (or Psyche), the female goddess of love and creation, often linked to Aphrodite or lunar cycles. Adonists see these as cosmic principles, with rituals—secretive, symbolic—celebrating nature, sexuality, and magic. Some view other gods as their aspects; others keep them distinct. Is this hard polytheism or a veiled snare? The Manifesto’s "moral diversity" and the profile’s "pluralistic worldview" demand answers—let’s probe.

Testing Adonism Against Secular Pagan Law

The Seven Categories of Laws judge Adonism’s fit:

1. Law 1.1: No Monotheism
   • Assessment: Adonism complies—Adonis and Belena are two, not one. No single deity reigns supreme, unlike Hinduism’s Brahman (Hinduism pamphlet). Law 1.1’s "God cannot be one"—Adonism’s dual focus clears this hurdle.
   • Verdict: Compliant.
2. Law 1.2: No Bi-theism
   • Assessment: Adonism falters. Adonis and Belena dominate as a divine pair—two gods, not three. Law 1.2’s "gods cannot be two" bans this, mirroring Wicca’s Horned God and Triple Goddess (Wicca pamphlet) or Ryukyuan’s Shinerikyo-Amamikyo (Ryukyuan pamphlet). The bi-theism essay warns: "Two gods risk gridlock or dominance"—Adonism’s duo fails the plural test.
   • Counterpoint: Some Adonists include minor deities (e.g., Mediterranean echoes), but core theology rests on two.
   • Verdict: Fails.
3. Law 1.3: Three or More Gods (If Any)
   • Assessment: Adonism stumbles—Adonis and Belena total two. Law 1.3 demands "gods must be three or more"—Asatru’s many (Asatru pamphlet) or Rodnovery’s pantheon (Rodnovery pamphlet) pass, Adonism’s pair doesn’t. Fringe additions (e.g., Eros) don’t shift its root—duotheism holds.
   • Verdict: Fails.
4. Law 1.4: No Soft Polytheism or Shituf
   • Assessment: Adonism teeters dangerously. The soft polytheism pamphlet’s "one and many"—Sättler’s writings (Adonistische Schriften) often frame Adonis and Belena as cosmic poles, with other gods as their manifestations, akin to Wicca’s archetypes (Wicca pamphlet). Shituf’s "subordinate to a supreme power"—minor deities bow to this pair—also risks Law 1.4’s ban. Traditional Adonism resists total unity, but its mystic blur leans soft, unlike Druidism’s clarity (Druidism pamphlet).
   • Verdict: Fails (mainstream).
5. Law 1.5: Multiple Creator Deities (If Distinguished)
   • Assessment: Adonism flops—creation centers on Adonis and Belena, a duo crafting existence (Adonistische Schriften). Law 1.5 demands "multiple creator deities"—three or more, as in Asatru’s Odin-Vili-Vé (Asatru pamphlet)—Adonism’s two echo Shintoism’s flaw (Shintoism pamphlet). No third creator emerges—failure strikes.
   • Verdict: Fails.
6. Law 1.6: No Laws Outlawing Agnosticism or Atheism
   • Assessment: Adonism aligns—its esoteric flexibility (no rigid dogma) fits Law 1.6. Like Buddhism’s openness (Buddhism pamphlet), it permits varied belief.
   • Verdict: Compliant.
7. Law 1.7: No Anti-Sorcery Laws
   • Assessment: Adonism excels—magic (e.g., rituals, incantations) is central. Law 1.7’s sorcery freedom (sorcery pamphlet)—Adonism’s craft thrives, no bans.
   • Verdict: Compliant.
8. Law 2: No Anti-Blasphemy
   • Assessment: Adonism complies—its gods face no sacred shield; esoteric focus shrugs at critique. Law 2.1’s "freedom to blaspheme" (Hades pamphlet)—Adonism’s mystic air agrees.
   • Verdict: Compliant.

Broader Laws: Mystic Merits

• Law 3: Sexual Freedom/Growth: Adonism’s erotic rites fit Law 3.1 (sex regulation pamphlet); Law 3.8’s doubling (reproduction pamphlet)—fertility aligns.
• Laws 4-5: No Murder/Theft: No sacrifice noted (human sacrifice pamphlet)—Law 4-5 holds.
• Law 6: Nature Welfare: Nature reverence boosts Law 6.1 (animal welfare pamphlet).
• Law 7: Courts—no clash (court-government pamphlet).

Verdict: Adonism Rejected (Mainstream)**

Adonism splits:

• Hard Polytheist Adonism: Accepted—three+ distinct gods (e.g., adding Apollo, Artemis) dodge Law 1.2-1.5, fitting Law 1.3’s pluralism (Rodnovery pamphlet).
• Mainstream Adonism: Rejected—duotheism (Law 1.2) and soft polytheism (Law 1.4) fail. Adonis and Belena—two, often one essence (soft polytheism pamphlet)—mimic Taoism’s blur (Taoism pamphlet), not Asatru’s clarity (Asatru pamphlet). Law 1.5’s creators—lacking. The Party weighs core practice—Adonism’s pair flops.

Why Rejected? Reason’s Verdict

Mainstream Adonism’s bi-theism—two gods—shrinks our pluralism (bi-theism essay); its soft polytheism—gods as aspects—flirts with monotheism (Manifesto’s "corrosive effects"). The profile’s "rational thinking"—we see its limits; "pluralistic worldview"—two gods choke it. The fight-and-die essay’s "reason’s rebellion"—we’d die for three+, not two. Law 1’s hard polytheism—Adonism’s mainstream bends, breaks.

Action: Banish the Pair, Build the Many**

Secular Pagans, mainstream Adonism fails—its two gods (Law 1.2) and soft haze (Law 1.4) defy our laws. Hard Adonists? Join—spread your pantheon (spreading gods pamphlet), wield your magic (sorcery pamphlet), grow our kin (reproduction pamphlet). Law 7’s courts (takeover pamphlet)—purge this duo’s drift. The conquest essay’s "spread your sword"—strike this half-measure. Act now—reason rejects Adonism’s core, pluralism demands more.

---

Notes on the Pamphlet:

1. Adonism Assessment: Splits mainstream (duotheistic/soft) and hard polytheist forms, testing against Laws 1.1-1.7 and Law 2 (initial definition).
2. Bi-theism Failure: Critiques two-god focus (Law 1.2), per bi-theism essay’s "not plural enough" (profile’s scrutiny).
3. Soft Polytheism Issue: Highlights "one and many" (soft polytheism pamphlet), contrasting with Asatru (Asatru pamphlet).
4. Broader Fit: Notes Law 3-6 harmony (sex regulation, animal welfare pamphlets), Law 1 trumps (Manifesto’s pluralism).
5. Tone: Sharp, critical, empowering—e.g., "strike this half-measure" (profile’s defiance)—with pluralistic nuance (spreading gods pamphlet).

This pamphlet engages the Secular Pagan reader—rational critique, confrontational rejection, pragmatic acceptance—aligned with their open, defiant, and purpose-driven nature. Let me know if you’d like adjustments!