Secular Paganism on Soft Polytheism and Shituf

  Table of Contents

 

Below is a Secular Pagan Party Pamphlet titled "Unmasking the Deception: Why Soft Polytheism and Shituf Are Banned". This pamphlet uses 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, and the bi-theism essay—to explain why soft polytheism and shituf are prohibited. It defines both terms, highlights their similarities and overlap, and contrasts them with hard polytheism, arguing that their blurring of the one-and-many divide disguises monotheism, undermining the Party’s commitment to true pluralism.

---

Unmasking the Deception: Why Soft Polytheism and Shituf Are Banned

Introduction: The Threat of Disguised Monotheism
Comrades of the Secular Pagan Party, united under the Four Pillars—"Spread your gods, spread your law, spread your sword, spread your children"—we stand as guardians of ethical polytheism. Our Constitution of the Secular Pagan State in America bans monotheism, bi-theism, and two insidious pretenders: soft polytheism and shituf (Law 1.4). These are not innocent variations but monotheism in disguise, blurring the lines between one and many gods to erode the pluralism we champion. This pamphlet defines soft polytheism and shituf, exposes their shared deception, and contrasts them with hard polytheism—the true, distinct plurality of powers we defend. Read on, and join us in rejecting these veiled threats to our Secular Pagan vision.

Defining Soft Polytheism: A Masked Unity

Soft polytheism is a belief system that appears plural but collapses into singularity. It includes:

• Making God One and Many: Viewing multiple gods as aspects, manifestations, or expressions of a single divine essence—e.g., all deities as facets of one cosmic force.
• Making God an Intermediary Between One and Many: Positing a unifying divine principle that connects or underlies multiple gods, reducing their autonomy.
• Distinguishing a Singular Creator God vs. Multiple Non-Creator Deities: Elevating one god as the sole creator while relegating others to lesser, non-creative roles, implying a hierarchy with one supreme power.

In soft polytheism, gods lack true independence. A Wiccan might see all deities as reflections of "the Goddess and God," or a New Age thinker might call them archetypes of one spirit. This blurring—where many gods are really one—mimics monotheism’s "single ideological and ethical culture," as the Manifesto warns, stifling the diversity Secular Paganism demands.

Defining Shituf: A Compromised Plurality

Shituf, a term from Jewish theology adapted here, refers to a flawed polytheism that compromises with monotheism. It includes:

• Making God One and Many: Associating multiple deities with a single supreme god, treating them as extensions or agents of one power—e.g., angels or saints under a monotheistic deity.
• Making God an Intermediary Between One and Many: Positioning lesser gods or divine beings as mediators between a singular ultimate god and humanity, diluting their sovereignty.
• Distinguishing a Singular Creator God vs. Multiple Non-Creator Deities: Recognizing one creator god above all, with other deities as subordinate creations or functionaries, not co-equal creators.

Originally, shituf described beliefs like Christianity’s Trinity—three "persons" but one God—or venerating saints alongside a sole deity. In Secular Paganism, it extends to any system where multiple gods are tethered to a monotheistic core, undermining their plurality. Law 1.4 bans "religion that would be considered shituf by a Noahide court," targeting this hybrid deception.

Similarities and Overlap: One in Many Disguises

Soft polytheism and shituf are two sides of the same coin—both blur the lines between one and many gods, veiling monotheism in pluralistic garb. Their shared traits include:

• Unified Essence: Both reduce multiple gods to a single underlying reality—soft polytheism through aspects of one essence, shituf through subservience to one god.
• Hierarchical Compromise: Both often elevate one creator above lesser deities, as Law 1.5 rejects: "If the religion distinguishes between creator and non-creator deities, there must still be multiple creator deities, not just one."
• Intermediary Ambiguity: Both use gods as bridges to a singular power, whether a cosmic unity (soft polytheism) or a supreme deity (shituf), eroding their distinctness.

Though soft polytheism might emerge from pagan traditions and shituf from monotheistic ones, their effect is identical: they masquerade as polytheism while preserving monotheism’s dominance. The Party essay on bi-theism notes that perfect alignment of two gods is "almost like having one god"—soft polytheism and shituf extend this flaw to any number, collapsing plurality into unity.

The Party Argument: Monotheism in Disguise

Secular Paganism bans soft polytheism and shituf because to blur the lines between one and many gods is monotheism in disguise. The Manifesto warns of monotheism’s "corrosive effects," creating "a single ideological and ethical culture which strangles the moral diversity needed for growth." These systems—despite their many names or faces—replicate this singularity:

• Soft Polytheism: By treating gods as aspects of one essence, it denies them separate agency, echoing monotheism’s one-will tyranny.
• Shituf: By subordinating gods to a supreme deity, it mirrors monotheism’s hierarchy, with lesser beings as mere tools.

Both violate Law 1’s core: "The gods must be three or more" (Law 1.3), distinct and plural, not unified or subservient. The Constitutional review notes that Secular Paganism replaces the U.S. Constitution’s neutral liberty with "a militant, polytheistic legalism"—soft polytheism and shituf undermine this militancy by sneaking monotheism through the back door. Our psychological profile—open yet defiant—rejects such compromise; we demand true diversity, not a monotheistic wolf in polytheistic sheep’s clothing.

Hard Polytheism: The True Plural Powers

Contrast this with hard polytheism, the standard Secular Paganism upholds. In hard polytheism:

• Gods Are Separate and Distinct: Each deity is a unique, sovereign power—Odin is not Zeus, nor are they facets of one being.
• Plural Powers: No single essence unites them; no hierarchy subordinates them to a creator god. If creators exist, there are multiple (Law 1.5).
• Ethical Diversity: Their differences—wisdom, war, fertility—offer a spectrum of ethics, avoiding monotheism’s uniformity or bi-theism’s gridlock.

The essay on bi-theism argues that "three gods—or more—introduce a dynamic interplay of perspectives," preventing domination or stagnation. Hard polytheism delivers this: a pantheon of distinct voices ensures ethical balance, aligning with our rational, pluralistic state. The agnostic state essay adds that Secular Paganism is "a big tent" for such diversity—hard polytheism fits, while soft polytheism and shituf do not.

Why the Ban Matters: Protecting Our Vision

Banning soft polytheism and shituf is no petty rule—it’s a defense of our core mission. The Party Constitution’s oath demands we "reject monotheism and its tyranny," and these systems are its stealth agents. In a capitalist economy, they might spawn monotheistic corporations under polytheistic names; in communism, a unified "people’s god" masking control; in socialism, a state-sanctioned "diversity" that’s secretly singular. The economic pamphlet shows our adaptability, but soft polytheism and shituf threaten it by reintroducing monotheism’s stranglehold.

For our members—rational, rebellious, and pluralistic—this ban is a call to vigilance. Law 2’s blasphemy mandate (Amendment I) critiques even pagan beliefs, ensuring no soft polytheistic unity or shituf hierarchy takes root. The Constitutional review notes that "diversity of gods" is our priority—hard polytheism delivers, while these pretenders betray.

Action: Root Out the Deception

Party faithful, your task is clear: unmask soft polytheism and shituf wherever they lurk. Challenge those who call many gods "one essence" or bow lesser deities to a supreme power—call it what it is: monotheism in disguise. Spread hard polytheism’s truth—separate, plural powers—or embrace agnosticism’s freedom. In debates, courts, or streets, enforce Law 1.4: no blurred lines, no intermediaries, no singular creators. Our Secular Pagan State demands at least three gods—or none—not a veiled one hiding in many. Take up the Four Pillars, reject these deceptions, and build a truly plural future.

---

Notes on the Pamphlet:

1. Definitions: Soft polytheism and shituf are defined per your instructions, incorporating "one and many," "intermediary," and "creator vs. non-creator" distinctions, with examples for clarity.
2. Similarity: Their overlap is shown as a shared tendency to unify or subordinate, aligning with the monotheism-in-disguise argument.
3. Hard Polytheism: Contrasted as distinct, plural powers, tying to previous essays on pluralism and bi-theism’s flaws.
4. Party Argument: The ban is framed as protecting ethical diversity, echoing the Manifesto and Constitutional mandates (Laws 1.3-1.5).
5. Tone: Direct and rallying, suited for a pamphlet, appealing to members’ analytical and defiant traits.

Let me know if you’d like more historical examples or further elaboration!