Abstract
If the essential features of a pagan religion consist of, or at least include, nature worship, this-worldliness, corpo-spirituality, enchantment, hedonism, deific pluralism and humanism, idolatry is not necessarily among them. In the broader sense, of course, the spiritual as tangible and corporeal provides the rationale and justification for any veneration of idols. Idolatry may also come under the remit of polytheism. The key thing here is that the idol may be approached as embodiment of the sacred as well as representative of something special but other, something beyond the immediate confines of the tangible presence. It is both the god and a symbol of the god.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
For the Catholic theology tradition of Burggraeve et al. (2003: 266), “The idol is only an expression of one’s own desire, merely a form projected outside of oneself of one’s own finite, injured desire.” This book will be discussed further and critiqued in Chap. 14. Despite the negative evaluations of idolatry held, the authors of this work are astute, fair and reasonable and come across as people with whom pagans could stimulatingly engage.
- 3.
Bell (1790: II 6) distinguishes between idols and images with the former representing a fiction or something that does not exist (e.g., sirens, centaurs, tritons and sphinxes); the latter being a similitude of something that actually does exist (e.g., a man, tree, dog, star, etc.) However, the author adds, “Generally speaking the words image and idol are used indifferently, to signify one and the same thing.”
- 4.
The English words ‘idol’ and ‘idea’ both derive from an Indo-European root signifying ‘to see’. The reconstructed radical *weid- is conjectured to have given rise to Greek eidos ‘form, shape’ and idea ‘appearance, form, idea’ (Watkins 1969: 1548). The actual condemnation behind the idea of the idol appears to have originally been against the seeing of ‘God’. In other words, the Abrahamic God is to be invisible at all times. Making and/or seeing the godhead in the visible world were judged to be an anathema.
- 5.
Taylor (2001: 105); my italics.
- 6.
Bell (1790: II 6) claims that “it was a prevalent notion that, by virtue of consecration, the gods were called down to inhabit or dwell in their statues.” For deification of the idol or image, “three things were necessary …viz. proper ornaments, consecration, and oration” (ibid. 4).
- 7.
- 8.
Abram (1996: 240); author’s italics.
- 9.
Personal communication 6 March 2014.
- 10.
Nevertheless, even in Genesis (31:19) we hear of Rachel taking the idols or teraphim of her father. “Gideon’s Ephod and Micah’s Teraphim are remarkable instances of Israelitish idolatry” (Bell 1790: II 4). Then too, of course, there is the story of the Golden Calf in the Sinai (Exodus 32).
- 11.
Spinoza Ethics III Proposition 16 [II/153] (Curley 1996: 79).
- 12.
Vide McGraw (2003: 73, 87f et passim).
- 13.
Halbertal & Margalit (1992: 109–112).
- 14.
Diana Eck, ‘Seeing the Sacred’ in Mumm (2002: 15).
- 15.
Corrington (1997: 10).
- 16.
As a caveat, it may be said that even if everything is sacred, it may not all be necessary – at least to human well-being. This last is a tricky concept, however. For example, while we may have subdued the smallpox virus and seek to do the same with the retro-virus behind Aids, it may not be to our advantage to eliminate such entities entirely in consideration of humanity’s on-going and continual efforts to find cures or preventions for future pathogens.
- 17.
Sacks (2004). The underlying notion of an idol as “a statue or image of some false god” (Bell 1790: II 3) is still retained. An earlier yet similar usage is Francis Bacon’s idola fori, specus, theatri, tribus which the English philosopher (1561–1626) considers to be four fundamentally incorrect ways of understanding nature: the idols of the tribe (natural human errors based on the assumption that man is the measure of all things), the idols of the cave (errors caused by individual bias), idols of the market place (incorrect inferences and assumptions based on language), and idols of the theater (errors caused by the influence of faulty philosophy, illogical empirical inference, and/or superstition). A discussion of Bacon’s idols is also to be found in Burggraeve et al. (2003: 122–5).
- 18.
For this supposition and what could follow as the basis of a theological if not also actual exclusion of the Abrahamic mind-set from a collective human quest, see York (1995).
- 19.
Bowker (1997: 465).
- 20.
Reese (1999: 805).
- 21.
M.K. Gandhi, ‘Images as an Aid to Worship’ in Mumm (2002: 24).
- 22.
Swami Vivekananda, ‘Defence of Image Worship’. Ibid. 22.
- 23.
Abram (1996: 68).
- 24.
References
Abram, David. 1996. The spell of the sensuous: Perception and language in a more-than-human world. New York: Vintage Books/Random House.
Bell, John (pub.) 1790. A new pantheon; or, historical dictionary of the gods, Demi-gods, heroes, and fabulous personages of antiquity: Also of the images and idols adored in the pagan world; Together with their temples, priests, altars, oracles, fasts, festivals, games, etc. as well as descriptions of their figures, representations, and symbols, collected from statues, pictures, coins, and other remains of the ancients, the whole designed to facilitate the study of mythology, history, poetry, painting, statuary, medals, etc. and Compiled from the Best Authorities, 2 vols. London: J. Bell/The British Library.
Bell, Martin (trans.). 1990. David Hume. Dialogues concerning natural religion, X. London: Penguin. X
Bowker, John (ed.). 1997. The Oxford dictionary of world religions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burggraeve, Roger, et al. (eds.). 2003. Desirable god? Our fascination with images, idols and new deities. Peters: Leuven.
Corrington, Robert S. 1997. Nature’s religion. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.
Halbertal, Moshe, and Avishai Margalit. 1992. Idolatry. Cambridge/London: Harvard U.P.
Harvey, Graham. 1997. Listening people, speaking earth: Contemporary paganism. London: Hurst.
Langer, Susanne K. 1942. Philosophy in a new key, 3rd ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
McGraw, Barbara A. 2003. Rediscovering America’s sacred ground: Public religion and pursuit of the good in a pluralistic America. Albany: SUNY.
Mumm, Susan. 2002. Religion today: A reader. Milton Keynes/Burlington: The Open University/Ashgate.
Reese, William L. 1999. Dictionary of philosophy and religion. Amherst: Humanity Books/Prometheus.
Sacks, Jonathan. 2004. True religion is about sharing, not self-worship and self-esteem. The Times (The Register: Credo), 10 January: 51.
Spinoza, Benedict. 1665. Ethics. Trans. Edwin Curley, 1994. London/New York: Penguin, 1996.
Taylor, Bron R. 2001. Earth and nature-based spirituality (Part II): From earth first! And bioregionalism to scientific paganism and the new age. Religion 31(3): 225–245.
Watkins, Calvert. 1969. Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans. In The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, ed. William Morris, 1496–1550. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
York, Michael. 1995. The divine versus the asurian: An interpretation of Indo-European cult and myth. Bethesda: International Scholars Publications.
York, Michael. 2003. Pagan theology: Paganism as a world religion. New York: New York University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
York, M. (2016). Idolatry and Ethics. In: Pagan Ethics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18923-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18923-9_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-18922-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-18923-9
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)