The Myth of the Blood
Myth is the generative power and creative life itself; it is the source of all values and value systems, the origin of all historical meaning, and the creative unity of all deeds.
Rosenberg was not taken so seriously by church representatives because he proclaimed any ideas that contradicted the value systems of the denominations, or because he made some historically provocative remarks on European church history, but because he proceeded with utmost honesty and consistency to the point where a decision had to be made.
The struggle over the "myth" is not about this or that value, about this or that historical fact, but about value itself and the meaning of human-historical existence in general.
All historical-critical pronouncements on the "myth," whether they originate from theological or non-theological quarters, whether they appear in the guise of scientific innocence or intellectual arrogance, can only elicit a yawn from an attentive and honest reader of this book.
It must be acknowledged that voices within the Protestant camp have more than once been raised that found this kind of "critique" of the whole—juxtaposing critical objections to historical details—shameful.
From the clergy of the Church, confused by the continued study of Scholasticism, nothing but hypocritical "objectivity" could be expected.
Some Protestant preachers were weak enough to succumb to this pseudo-historical critique.
However, many recognized that the “myth” posed a question to their church that could only be answered from within the church itself.
The reaction to the “myth” deserves to be taken seriously only where it is theological: for only the theological answer does justice to the fact that Rosenberg questions the church itself, not through negations of a liberal style, but by demonstrating the creative unity from which humanity truly lives.
The theological answer at least recognizes the level on which Rosenberg’s work operates.
To that Schleswig-Holstein pastor who, with refreshing naivetรฉ, contrasts the myth of man's blood with the message of faith in the blood of Jesus Christ, Rosenberg is misguided, but he has correctly assessed the rank of his work.
“He knows,” he says of Rosenberg, "that there is a truth that is superior to all other facts, a highest value by which all other values are measured, that there is a power that is the primal source of all power and all life, an ultimate meaning and interpretation of all being, which has unconditional validity."
To speak theologically means to go to the whole.
The theological answer does justice to Rosenberg at least insofar as it acknowledges that his work goes to the whole.
One cannot meaningfully respond theologically to an Enlightenment thinker because he does not attack on a level corresponding to theology.
The difference between Voltaire and Rosenberg is not one of degree, but of nature.
The witty satirist Voltaire places himself beyond all denominations and nations; Rosenberg speaks from a historical perspective, in real existence.
He does not feign a timeless superiority of reason that does not exist; he does not speak abstractly, but responsibly as a German from a specific point in German history.
Like Nietzsche, Rosenberg comes historically from German Protestantism—the phenomenon incomprehensible to the theologian lies in the fact that neither the Thuringian nor the Baltic German personally shows the slightest contact with the Christian spirit.
One often finds personal detachment from Christianity portrayed as the result of severe inner struggles.
A convincing account of such struggles has yet to be given; in most cases, the idea of such struggles seems to stem merely from a vague sense of obligation that they must actually exist.
However, it is only a legend invented by theologians that placing oneself outside the church must be connected with any kind of struggle and anguish.
A large number of intellectually active and socially engaged Germans live outside the church with complete naturalness.
"๐ ๐ฌ๐ฏ๐ฐ๐ธ ๐ฏ๐ฐ ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ข๐ญ ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ญ๐ช๐จ๐ช๐ฐ๐ถ๐ด ๐ฅ๐ช๐ง๐ง๐ช๐ค๐ถ๐ญ๐ต๐ช๐ฆ๐ด ๐ง๐ณ๐ฐ๐ฎ ๐ฆ๐น๐ฑ๐ฆ๐ณ๐ช๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ค๐ฆ..."
This quote from Nietzsche's "Ecce Homo" expresses a possibility that has remained all too unknown in theologized Germany, and which is high time to take note of.
It has sometimes been suggested that the author of "The Myth" was somehow influenced by Nietzsche.
In truth, Nietzsche had no part in the development of "The Myth," just as German Romanticism had no influence on it; Rosenberg's intellectual liberators were exclusively Goethe and Schopenhauer.
Since Frederick II, the Hohenstaufen, there have always been great Germans who, unaware of each other, led free lives outside all ecclesiastical constraints.
People spoke of an "anima naturaliter christiana", a "natural christian spirit", and independent minds were labeled as "heretics."
๐๐ฉ ๐๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐ข๐ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐จ๐ฅ๐๐๐ ๐ค๐ ๐๐ฃ "๐๐ฃ๐๐ข๐ ๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐ช๐ง๐๐ก๐๐ฉ๐๐ง ๐๐๐ง๐ข๐๐ฃ๐๐๐" ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐ฃ๐ค ๐ก๐ค๐ฃ๐๐๐ง ๐ซ๐๐๐ฌ ๐๐๐ง๐ข๐๐ฃ ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐๐ก๐ก๐๐๐ฉ๐ช๐๐ก ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐ค๐ง๐ฎ ๐ฉ๐๐ง๐ค๐ช๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ก๐๐ฃ๐จ ๐ค๐ ๐๐๐ช๐ง๐๐ ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐ค๐ง๐ฎ.
๐๐ฃ๐ก๐ฎ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ฎ๐๐จ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐ค๐ก๐ค๐๐๐๐ฃ๐จ ๐ฌ๐๐ค ๐๐๐ก๐๐๐ซ๐ ๐๐ฃ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ฉ๐๐ง๐ฃ๐๐ก ๐๐ช๐ง๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐พ๐๐ง๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ ๐๐ฅ๐ค๐๐ ๐๐๐ฃ ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ฅ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐ข๐๐ฃ๐๐จ ๐๐ฅ๐ฅ๐๐๐ง ๐๐จ "๐๐๐ง๐๐ฉ๐๐๐จ."
The Christian epoch was a world-historical episode.
๐พ๐๐ง๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐ฎ ๐๐จ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฌ ๐ข๐๐ง๐๐ก๐ฎ ๐ฉ๐ง๐๐๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ; ๐๐ฉ ๐ฃ๐ค ๐ก๐ค๐ฃ๐๐๐ง ๐ฅ๐ค๐จ๐จ๐๐จ๐จ๐๐จ ๐๐ฃ๐ฎ ๐๐ค๐๐ง๐๐๐ซ๐ ๐ฅ๐ค๐ฌ๐๐ง ๐ค๐ซ๐๐ง ๐จ๐ค๐ช๐ก๐จ.
๐๐๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ฃ๐๐ง ๐ก๐๐๐ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ง๐จ ๐ฉ๐ค๐๐๐ฎ ๐๐ฃ ๐ฉ๐๐ค๐จ๐ ๐ฌ๐๐ค ๐ฌ๐ค๐ช๐ก๐ ๐๐ค๐ง๐ข๐๐ง๐ก๐ฎ ๐๐๐ซ๐ ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ ๐ช๐ฅ ๐๐ฉ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ ๐๐ค๐ง ๐ฉ๐๐๐๐ง ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐ซ๐๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐จ.
๐๐๐ ๐ฉ๐ง๐๐ข๐๐ฃ๐๐ค๐ช๐จ ๐๐ญ๐๐๐ฉ๐๐ข๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฉ ๐๐ค๐จ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ง๐'๐จ ๐ฌ๐ค๐ง๐ ๐ฅ๐ง๐ค๐ซ๐ค๐ ๐๐ ๐ข๐ช๐จ๐ฉ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฉ ๐๐ ๐๐ช๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ฎ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ง๐๐ช๐ข๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฉ ๐ฌ๐๐ง๐ ๐ง๐๐๐จ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ฃ๐จ๐ฉ ๐๐ฉ.
๐๐ค ๐๐ข๐ฅ๐๐ง๐ฉ๐๐๐ก ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐จ๐ค๐ฃ ๐ฉ๐ค๐๐๐ฎ ๐ฌ๐ค๐ช๐ก๐ ๐๐๐ฃ๐ฎ ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฉ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ฅ๐ค๐ก๐ค๐๐๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ข๐ค๐ซ๐๐ข๐๐ฃ๐ฉ, ๐ฌ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ฉ๐ฉ๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐ง๐๐จ๐ ๐ช๐ฅ ๐๐๐๐๐ฃ๐จ๐ฉ "๐๐ฎ๐ฉ๐," ๐จ๐ช๐๐๐ค๐๐๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ง๐ค๐ข ๐๐ฉ๐จ ๐ค๐ฌ๐ฃ ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐๐ก๐ก๐๐๐ฉ๐ช๐๐ก ๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ง๐๐ก๐๐ฉ๐ฎ.
The book against which the apologists of the churches preached was experienced, fiery, sustained by a transpersonal conviction, and therefore captivating and compelling.
What opposed it everywhere lacked the soul-stirring tone.
Against the experienced idea stood the unexperienced dogma, against myth stood "The Word," against the certainty of faith the security of the institution.
Nevertheless, the unique excitement surrounding "Myth" as a symptom is of great significance.
๐๐๐๐จ ๐๐๐๐ฉ๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ ๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ก๐จ ๐ฌ๐๐๐ฉ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ง๐จ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ช๐ง๐๐๐๐จ ๐๐๐ ๐ก๐๐ฉ๐๐ง๐๐ก๐ก๐ฎ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฉ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ฃ ๐จ๐๐ง๐๐ค๐ช๐จ๐ก๐ฎ: ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ฌ๐๐ง๐๐ฃ๐๐จ๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฉ ๐ ๐ฃ๐๐ฌ ๐๐ง๐ ๐ค๐ ๐จ๐ฉ๐ง๐ช๐๐๐ก๐ ๐๐ค๐ง ๐พ๐๐ง๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐ฎ ๐๐๐จ ๐๐๐๐ช๐ฃ.
Previously, the Church claimed the right to measure everything that happened against itself; now a new standard has been established: the reality of the German people and their history.
It is not we who must answer to the Church, but the Church that must answer to us.
This is the crucial insight that every reader of "Myth" must reach if they do not allow themselves to be captivated by a mysterious "word" that demands the sacrifice of their reason.
๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ง๐ข๐๐ฃ๐๐ ๐จ๐ช๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐๐, ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ง๐๐๐๐๐ก ๐จ๐ค๐ช๐ก ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ง๐ข๐๐ฃ ๐ฅ๐๐ค๐ฅ๐ก๐, ๐๐ญ๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ค๐ง๐ ๐พ๐๐ง๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐ฎ ๐๐ฃ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ค๐ง๐ฉ๐; ๐๐ฉ ๐จ๐๐๐ฅ๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐ค๐ง๐ฎ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ง๐ข๐๐ฃ ๐๐๐๐ฉ๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐ซ๐ ๐ง๐๐จ๐ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐พ๐๐ง๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ ๐๐ง๐ฉ; ๐๐ฉ ๐ฌ๐๐ก๐ก ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐ช๐ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐จ๐๐๐ฅ๐ ๐ค๐ช๐ง ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐ค๐ง๐ฎ, ๐๐ซ๐๐ฃ ๐ฌ๐๐๐ฃ ๐พ๐๐ง๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐ฎ ๐๐จ ๐ฃ๐ค ๐ก๐ค๐ฃ๐๐๐ง ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ง๐๐ก๐๐๐๐ค๐ฃ ๐ค๐ ๐ค๐ช๐ง ๐ฅ๐๐ค๐ฅ๐ก๐.
There is no choice: either one recognizes what the world and life everywhere demonstrate—that all greatness is brought forth by humankind through the grace of its blood, that the history of every people is a great unity and that the individual must find their rightful place within this unity—or one seeks to derive the highest from a revealed, racially unbound word and thus immediately finds oneself entangled in intractable difficulties, especially when it comes to distinguishing this highest from the lesser.
The utter confusion into which theological thought falls as soon as it confronts the realities of life and history (theology is not a discipline of faith, but of discernment—it needs it!), has become fully visible for the first time through Rosenberg's decisive thinking.
By placing the highest value at the center, myth has forced theology onto a battlefield that is highly unfavorable for it.
๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐จ๐ฉ ๐ซ๐๐ก๐ช๐ ๐๐จ ๐จ๐๐ข๐ช๐ก๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐๐ค๐ช๐จ๐ก๐ฎ ๐ ๐ง๐๐ก๐๐๐๐ค๐ช๐จ, ๐๐ฉ๐๐๐๐๐ก, ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐ค๐ง๐๐๐๐ก ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐๐๐ฅ๐ฉ.
๐๐๐ค๐๐ซ๐๐ง ๐๐ก๐ก๐ค๐ฌ๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐๐ข๐จ๐๐ก๐ซ๐๐จ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐๐ ๐๐ช๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ฎ ๐ฉ๐๐๐จ ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐๐๐ฅ๐ฉ ๐๐จ ๐๐๐ก๐ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐ช๐ฃ๐๐๐ง๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ฌ๐ค๐ง๐ก๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ก๐๐๐ ๐๐จ ๐ ๐ช๐ฃ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐ค๐ก๐.
Under theological conditions, however, this concept loses its applicability.
The highest value, in particular, cannot be "revealed" but must originate from within the individual; the other values follow organically from it.
If, on the other hand, a revelation is accepted, then the historical world falls apart.
The sacrifice of reason to the demands of revelation simultaneously means renouncing the understanding of history.
Theological literature on "myth" reveals that, for the first time, the apologists of the denominations find themselves in a predicament.
They attempt to conceal, through loud pronouncements, the fatal fact that they have not yet found the point from which to respond.
Such a point will never be found because none exists.
The traditional categories of apologetics shatter before a mode of thinking that is neither Enlightenment-based and negating nor Romantic-constructive, but rather operates within realities.
๐๐๐๐ค๐ก๐ค๐๐ฎ ๐๐ญ๐๐ง๐๐๐จ๐๐จ ๐๐ฉ๐จ ๐ฅ๐ค๐ฌ๐๐ง ๐ค๐ฃ๐ก๐ฎ ๐๐จ ๐ก๐ค๐ฃ๐ ๐๐จ ๐ก๐๐๐ ๐๐๐จ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฉ ๐ฎ๐๐ฉ ๐๐ค๐ช๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ฉ๐จ๐๐ก๐.
๐๐ฉ ๐๐๐ฃ ๐ข๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ง ๐ฉ๐๐๐ค๐ง๐๐๐จ.
๐๐๐๐ก๐๐ฉ๐๐๐จ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐ค๐ง๐ฎ ๐๐ก๐ช๐๐ ๐๐ฉ.
๐๐ฉ ๐๐๐จ ๐ฃ๐ค ๐ฅ๐ค๐ฌ๐๐ง ๐ค๐ซ๐๐ง ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ข๐ฎ๐ฉ๐ ๐ค๐ ๐๐ก๐ค๐ค๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ช๐จ๐ ๐๐ฉ ๐๐จ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฉ ๐๐ฃ ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐ง๐๐๐ฉ ๐ฅ๐๐๐ก๐ค๐จ๐ค๐ฅ๐๐๐๐๐ก ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐๐๐ฅ๐ฉ, ๐๐ช๐ฉ ๐ก๐๐๐ ๐๐ฉ๐จ๐๐ก๐, ๐ฌ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐จ ๐๐๐๐ค๐ข๐ ๐ข๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ง๐๐ ๐๐ฎ ๐๐ฉ.
๐๐๐ ๐จ๐๐๐ง๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ข๐๐๐ ๐๐ฎ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ง๐ข๐๐ฃ ๐ฅ๐๐ค๐ฅ๐ก๐ ๐๐ฃ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ง๐จ๐ฉ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐๐ค๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ค๐ง๐ก๐ ๐๐๐ง๐จ ๐๐๐ฃ ๐ฃ๐ค ๐ก๐ค๐ฃ๐๐๐ง ๐๐ ๐ง๐๐๐ช๐๐๐ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐ ๐ฃ๐ช๐ข๐๐๐ง ๐ค๐ ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ซ๐๐๐ช๐๐ก ๐๐๐ฉ๐จ ๐ค๐ ๐๐๐ซ๐ค๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ, ๐๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ช๐ฃ๐ง๐๐๐ก๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐ค๐ก๐ค๐๐๐๐๐ก ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐ข๐๐ฃ๐๐จ.
๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ง๐๐จ๐๐๐ฅ ๐ค๐ ๐ฌ๐๐ง๐ฉ๐๐ข๐ ๐๐๐จ ๐๐๐ซ๐๐ฃ ๐ง๐๐จ๐ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐ ๐ช๐ฃ๐๐ซ๐๐ง๐จ๐๐ก, ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐จ๐ค๐ฃ๐๐ก ๐๐ญ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐๐ฃ๐๐; ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐จ๐๐๐ง๐๐ ๐จ๐๐๐ง๐๐๐๐๐๐จ ๐ข๐๐๐ ๐ช๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ข๐๐ก๐ก๐๐ค๐ฃ๐จ, ๐๐ก๐ค๐ฃ๐ ๐ฌ๐๐ฉ๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐๐ง ๐๐๐๐ก๐๐ง๐๐ฃ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ข๐ค๐จ๐ฉ ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐๐๐จ๐๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐จ.
๐๐๐ฉ๐ง๐๐ค๐ฉ๐๐จ๐ข ๐๐จ ๐ฃ๐ค ๐ข๐ค๐ง๐; ๐๐ฃ ๐๐ฉ๐จ ๐ฅ๐ก๐๐๐ ๐๐๐จ ๐๐ค๐ข๐ ๐ ๐ข๐ฎ๐ฉ๐๐๐๐๐ก, ๐ง๐๐๐ก ๐๐ญ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐๐ฃ๐๐.
๐ผ ๐ฃ๐๐ฌ ๐จ๐๐ฃ๐จ๐ ๐ค๐ ๐ง๐๐๐ก๐๐ฉ๐ฎ ๐๐๐ฃ๐๐จ ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ซ๐๐๐ช๐๐ก๐จ ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐ค ๐๐ฃ ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐ง๐ช๐๐ฉ๐๐๐ก๐ ๐ช๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐ฎ, ๐ ๐๐ค๐ข๐ข๐ช๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐ฎ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐ง๐๐ฃ๐จ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐จ๐ค๐ฃ๐๐ก ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐จ๐๐๐ง๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ.
๐๐ฃ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ช๐ฃ๐๐๐ง ๐ค๐ ๐๐๐ฉ๐ฉ๐ก๐, ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ฅ๐๐ค๐ฅ๐ก๐ ๐๐๐ซ๐ ๐ก๐๐๐ง๐ฃ๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฉ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐๐ก๐ค๐ค๐ ๐ฌ๐๐ก๐ก ๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ก๐ก ๐ก๐๐ซ๐๐จ.
๐๐๐ ๐๐ค๐ข๐ข๐ช๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐ฎ ๐ค๐ ๐๐ก๐ค๐ค๐ ๐๐๐จ ๐๐๐ก๐ฅ๐๐ ๐๐ฉ๐จ๐๐ก๐; ๐๐๐๐ค๐ง๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐จ ๐๐ญ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐๐ฃ๐๐, ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ค๐ก๐ ๐ก๐๐๐๐ฃ๐๐จ ๐๐ง๐ค๐ข ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ง๐๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐๐๐๐.
๐๐ค ๐ฃ๐๐ฌ ๐ก๐๐๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐จ ๐ฅ๐ช๐ฉ ๐๐ฃ ๐ฅ๐ก๐๐๐ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ค๐ก๐; ๐๐ค๐ง ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ก๐๐๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐๐ฅ๐ค๐ก๐ค๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐จ, ๐ฉ๐๐๐๐ง ๐จ๐ช๐๐๐๐๐ฉ ๐๐๐จ๐จ๐ค๐ก๐ซ๐๐จ ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐ค ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ๐.
๐ฝ๐๐๐ค๐ง๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ง๐๐๐ก๐๐ฉ๐ฎ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฌ๐ฃ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐ฎ, ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ค๐จ๐ฉ๐จ ๐ซ๐๐ฃ๐๐จ๐.
It has never been truly understood what it means that Rosenberg rejects not only the dogmas of the Christian churches, but all dogma formation.
Through the "myth," not only is the era of any Enlightenment and liberal argumentation against Christianity and the Church brought to an end, not only is any attempt at a "romantic" restoration of the Middle Ages rendered impossible, but it fundamentally alters the entire situation in which Christianity can even be discussed in the future.
How childish it seems to speak of a new "religion of reason" in the face of such a revolution in thinking, and to continue to pit "revelation" against "individual reason"!
The historical thinking that Rosenberg applies with ultimate consistency is not the thinking of 19th-century historical biblical criticism.
The author of "Myth" is not a descendant of Ludwig Feuerbach and David Friedrich Strauss, but the founder of a new understanding of human-historical existence.
He proclaims neither a new dogma nor a new institution, but speaks from the certainty of a new faith in the eternal, reality-creating powers.
It borders on the comical when a theological reader believes they can conclude that Rosenberg presents us with liberal content in mythical garb.
Even the historical powers whose time had passed still attempted to force the new into the thought patterns of the obsolete, in order to make it appear harmless, at least for a short time.
But such tricks no longer work against a sincerity that simply states what is.
Rosenberg only speaks of what he has experienced; his instinct for reality enables him to distinguish the essential from the inessential and prevents him from losing himself in dialectical justifications of what has been handed down and merely exists.
For him, faith is not just any kind of acceptance of truth, but the soul's relationship to that which is active in the creative depths and moves in a formative way.
Faith is a feeling for reality.
๐๐ง๐ค๐ข ๐ ๐ฃ๐๐ฌ ๐จ๐๐ฃ๐จ๐ ๐ค๐ ๐ง๐๐๐ก๐๐ฉ๐ฎ, ๐ ๐ฃ๐๐ฌ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐จ ๐๐ค๐ง๐ฃ—๐ฉ๐๐๐ฉ ๐๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ข๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ค๐ "๐๐๐ ๐๐ฎ๐ฉ๐ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ 20๐ฉ๐ ๐พ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐ช๐ง๐ฎ."
๐๐๐ ๐ซ๐๐ง๐ฎ ๐ง๐๐๐๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ ๐ค๐ ๐๐ก๐ก ๐๐๐ก๐จ๐ "๐ข๐ฎ๐ฉ๐๐จ," ๐๐ค๐๐ข๐๐จ, ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐จ ๐๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ง๐๐ซ๐ค๐ก๐ช๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐๐ง๐ฎ ๐๐จ๐ฅ๐๐๐ฉ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐จ ๐ฌ๐ค๐ง๐ , ๐๐ค๐ง๐ฃ ๐ค๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐๐๐ง๐๐ฉ๐ฎ, ๐ฌ๐๐๐๐ ๐ฅ๐ง๐ค๐๐ก๐๐๐ข๐จ ๐ฃ๐ค ๐ข๐ค๐ง๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ ๐๐ฉ๐จ ๐๐ช๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ง ๐ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฌ๐จ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐ฃ ๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ฃ๐, ๐ฎ๐๐ฉ ๐๐ค๐๐จ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฉ ๐จ๐๐ฎ ๐๐ฌ๐๐ฎ ๐๐ง๐ค๐ข ๐๐ง๐๐ฌ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ช๐ก๐ฉ๐๐ข๐๐ฉ๐ ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐๐ก๐ช๐จ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐จ ๐๐ง๐ค๐ข ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ญ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐จ ๐ฉ๐ช๐ง๐ฃ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ฅ๐ค๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐๐ฃ ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐ค๐ง๐ฎ.
๐๐ค๐จ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ง๐'๐จ ๐จ๐๐๐ฃ๐๐๐๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ ๐๐ค๐ง ๐ค๐ช๐ง ๐ฉ๐๐ข๐ ๐ก๐๐๐จ ๐๐ฃ ๐๐๐จ ๐จ๐ช๐๐๐๐จ๐จ ๐๐ฃ ๐ข๐๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ซ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ญ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ง๐๐๐๐ง๐ฉ๐ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ง๐ข๐๐ฃ๐๐-๐๐๐ง๐ข๐๐ฃ ๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐๐ก ๐จ๐ค๐ช๐ก ๐ซ๐๐จ๐๐๐ก๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ง๐ค๐ช๐๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐๐ก๐ก๐๐๐ฉ๐ช๐๐ก ๐ข๐๐๐ฃ๐จ.
One can only speak of a process shrouded in the mystery of creative life in hints and allusions.
However powerful the language of "myth" may become when it comes to portraying historical characters and institutions, it is restrained wherever it concerns the new faith.
This reveals the difference between a mere literary figure and a writer who speaks and acts on a historical mission: anyone who, without touching hidden realities, seeks to give expression to what moves their time is bound not only to go astray but will also betray themselves through the loud tone in which they speak of what they consider to be nascent life; whereas the one who truly sees what is about to come becomes involuntarily quiet (as at the cradle of a newborn).
Theological critics of "Myth" lacked any willingness to recognize how reservedly Rosenberg speaks of the essential.
Instead of treating his statements as expressions of faith, they treated them as ready-made, polished formulas; instead of seeing them as hints of an inexhaustible content, they took them as dogmatic pronouncements.
This is the ultimate consequence of the habit of speaking dogmatically about faith: that one no longer senses true faith when encountered.
None of the Christian churches today possesses the openness to receive and embrace living faith that once made the Church a historical power.
The sense of reality of a tremendous movement has broken through the barriers that the churches had erected in the Christian West against the spiritual eruptions of European nations.
Once, the Franciscan movement in Italy flowed into the Roman Catholic Church; once, the Pietist movement in Germany renewed Protestantism.
๐๐ค๐๐๐ฎ, ๐พ๐๐ง๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐ฎ ๐ฃ๐ค ๐ก๐ค๐ฃ๐๐๐ง ๐จ๐ช๐๐๐๐๐๐จ ๐๐ฃ ๐ฉ๐ง๐๐ฃ๐จ๐๐ค๐ง๐ข๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ก๐๐ซ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐๐ฉ๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐ค ๐๐ค๐๐ข๐, ๐๐ญ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐ค ๐๐ฃ๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ฉ๐ช๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ.
๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ช๐ง๐๐๐๐จ ๐ข๐ช๐จ๐ฉ ๐๐๐ก๐ฅ๐ก๐๐จ๐จ๐ก๐ฎ ๐ฌ๐๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ฅ๐ค๐ก๐๐ฉ๐๐๐๐ก ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐๐ก๐ก๐๐๐ฉ๐ช๐๐ก ๐ก๐๐๐ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ช๐ฃ๐๐ค๐ก๐๐จ ๐ค๐ช๐ฉ๐จ๐๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐๐ง ๐ฉ๐ง๐๐๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐๐ก ๐๐ค๐ง๐ข๐จ.
๐๐ฃ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐จ๐๐๐๐ค๐ฌ ๐ค๐ ๐๐๐ง๐จ๐๐๐ก๐ก๐๐จ, ๐๐ฃ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฌ๐๐จ๐-๐ฝ๐ค๐ก๐จ๐๐๐ซ๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ง๐๐๐ฉ, ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐พ๐๐ง๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐ฎ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ช๐ง๐๐๐๐จ ๐๐๐จ ๐๐๐ข๐ค๐ฃ๐จ๐ฉ๐ง๐๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ฉ๐จ ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐๐ก๐๐ฉ๐ฎ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐๐ง๐ซ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ง๐๐๐ฉ๐๐ซ๐๐ก๐ฎ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐จ๐ฉ๐ง๐ช๐๐ฉ๐๐ซ๐๐ก๐ฎ; ๐๐ฉ ๐๐จ ๐๐ง๐ง๐๐ก๐๐ซ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐๐ค๐ฌ ๐ข๐๐ฃ๐ฎ ๐๐๐๐๐ง๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐พ๐๐ง๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ ๐๐๐ช๐ง๐๐๐๐จ ๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ก๐ก ๐๐ค๐ช๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐ฉ๐ค๐๐๐ฎ—๐ฌ๐๐ค๐๐ซ๐๐ง ๐๐๐๐ง๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ก๐๐ฃ๐๐ช๐๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฉ ๐จ๐ฅ๐๐๐ ๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐ค๐ง๐ฎ ๐ค๐ ๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐จ ๐ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฌ๐จ ๐ฌ๐๐๐ฉ ๐๐จ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐๐ค๐ข๐.
The churches have abandoned the nations.
Such defeats cannot be overcome by spiritual powers.
In this context, the struggle over the "myth" reveals itself as an event of symbolic significance.
The apologists of the Protestant Church believed they could perceive and combat Rosenberg as a lone figure, and "refuted" the myth of blood as a new nationalist religion based on old dogmas and institutions.
This entire intellectual game is merely a superficial exercise; something entirely different has taken place in the depths of reality.
The theology only appeared to be attacking an individual; in truth, one sensed that it was not merely a single person speaking from subjective authority and presenting a self-invented "religion of reason," but that a new age had taken up residence.
For the first time, the Christian Church truly finds itself, not just in form, on the defensive.
๐ผ๐ฃ๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐จ ๐๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ซ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐ค๐ ๐ง๐๐๐ค๐ง๐ข๐๐ฉ๐ค๐ง๐ฎ ๐จ๐๐๐ฃ๐๐๐๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฉ ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐ฃ๐๐๐ฉ๐จ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐ฉ๐๐ "๐ข๐ฎ๐ฉ๐ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ 20๐ฉ๐ ๐๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐ช๐ง๐ฎ": ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ง๐๐๐ฉ๐๐จ๐ฉ ๐๐ซ๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐๐ฃ ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ง๐ฃ ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐ค๐ง๐ฎ, ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฉ๐๐๐๐ข๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ช๐ง๐ค๐ฅ๐๐๐ฃ ๐จ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐ฉ ๐๐ง๐ค๐ข ๐พ๐๐ง๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐ฎ ๐ฅ๐ง๐๐๐๐๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ฎ ๐๐๐๐ฉ๐ฏ๐จ๐๐๐, ๐๐จ ๐ง๐๐๐ค๐๐ฃ๐๐ฏ๐๐ ๐๐ฃ ๐ฉ๐๐๐จ ๐๐ค๐ค๐ ๐๐จ ๐ ๐ง๐๐๐ก ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐ค๐ง๐๐๐๐ก ๐ฅ๐ง๐ค๐๐๐จ๐จ ๐๐ฃ ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐ฉ๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ค๐ง๐๐ง๐ฎ ๐๐๐ง๐ข๐๐ฃ๐ฎ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ง๐ข๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐ฉ๐ ๐ ๐ฉ๐ง๐ช๐ฉ๐๐๐ช๐ก๐ฃ๐๐จ๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฉ ๐๐ง๐ค๐ค๐ ๐จ ๐ฃ๐ค ๐๐ค๐ข๐ฅ๐ง๐ค๐ข๐๐จ๐.
The total collapse of 1918 had to mean the end of German national identity unless a breakthrough to a new form of existence occurred.
Only a miracle could still save the German spirit.
This miracle was accomplished through the faith that the World War had kindled in Adolf Hitler and a few other courageous men.
The German people will always be grateful to the man who, in a politically hopeless situation, wrote the words:
"๐ผ๐๐ฉ๐๐ง ๐ฉ๐๐๐จ ๐๐ญ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐๐ฃ๐๐, ๐ฌ๐ ๐ฅ๐ง๐ค๐๐ก๐๐๐ข ๐๐ฉ ๐๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ง๐๐ก๐๐๐๐ค๐ฃ ๐ค๐ ๐๐๐ง๐ข๐๐ฃ๐ฎ'๐จ ๐๐ช๐ฉ๐ช๐ง๐: ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฉ ๐ฌ๐, ๐ฉ๐ค๐๐๐ฎ ๐ฅ๐ค๐ก๐๐ฉ๐๐๐๐ก๐ก๐ฎ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ฉ๐๐, ๐๐ช๐ข๐๐ก๐๐๐ฉ๐๐, ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐จ๐๐๐ช๐ฉ๐๐, ๐๐๐ซ๐ ๐๐ค๐ช๐ฃ๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ง๐ค๐ค๐ฉ ๐ค๐ ๐ค๐ช๐ง ๐จ๐ฉ๐ง๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐, ๐ฉ๐ง๐ช๐ก๐ฎ ๐๐๐จ๐๐ค๐ซ๐๐ง๐๐ ๐๐ฉ, ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ญ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ ๐๐ฉ ๐๐ฃ๐๐ฌ ๐ฌ๐๐ฉ๐ ๐ ๐ฅ๐ค๐ฌ๐๐ง ๐ช๐ฃ๐ก๐๐ ๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ฎ ๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ง๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ ๐๐๐๐ค๐ง๐ ๐ช๐จ.
๐๐ฎ๐ฉ๐๐๐๐๐ก ๐๐ง๐๐จ๐ฅ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐จ๐๐๐ค๐ช๐จ ๐ง๐๐๐ค๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ, ๐๐ฃ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐จ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐ฉ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ง๐ข๐๐ฃ ๐๐๐๐ ๐ค๐ ๐ง๐๐ฃ๐๐ฌ๐๐ก, ๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ก๐ก๐ฎ ๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฉ ๐๐ฃ ๐ค๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ค๐จ๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ, ๐๐ช๐ฉ ๐ข๐ช๐ฉ๐ช๐๐ก๐ก๐ฎ ๐ง๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ค๐ง๐๐๐ฃ๐: ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ข๐ค๐จ๐ฉ ๐๐ง๐๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐๐ก๐๐จ๐ข, ๐ฃ๐ค ๐ก๐ค๐ฃ๐๐๐ง ๐๐๐ง๐๐๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ฉ ๐ฉ๐ง๐๐๐๐จ, ๐๐ฎ๐ฃ๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐๐จ, ๐ค๐ง ๐๐๐ฃ๐ค๐ข๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐จ, ๐๐ช๐ฉ ๐๐ฉ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ฅ๐ง๐๐ข๐๐ก ๐จ๐ช๐๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐๐, ๐๐ฉ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ง๐๐๐๐๐ก๐ก๐ฎ ๐๐ค๐ช๐ฃ๐ ๐ฅ๐๐ค๐ฅ๐ก๐ ๐๐ฉ๐จ๐๐ก๐, ๐๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ข๐๐จ๐จ๐๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฉ ๐ฌ๐๐ก๐ก ๐ค๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐ฎ ๐ข๐๐ก๐ฉ ๐๐ฌ๐๐ฎ ๐๐ก๐ก ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ง๐ค๐จ๐จ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐๐ญ๐ฉ๐ง๐๐๐ฉ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ฃ๐ค๐๐ก๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ง๐๐๐๐๐๐ฉ๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฃ๐ค๐๐ก๐"
~๐ผ๐ก๐๐ง๐๐ ๐๐ค๐จ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ง๐~
(๐๐ฎ๐ฉ๐, ๐ฅ. 85).
~Alfred Baeumler~
Alfred Rosenberg und der Mythus Des. 20 Jahrhunderts. Chapter 12, Page 72.
Hoheneichen Verlag Mรผnchen 1943.
