Risking Enchantment

In the nineteenth century, Max Weber described what he called the dis-enchantment of Modernity. Morris Berman and Thomas Moore call for its re-enchantment, as does Sharon Blackie. Rod Dreher worries that the real danger in our brave new world of New Age and Occult lunacy is not dis-enchantment but mis-enchantment, since when people cease to believe in God, they do not then believe in nothing, but in anything. Sharon Blackie thinks he’s a nutjob (sic).

Who are the orthodox here? Who are the heterodox? Who are the heretics? Of those who risk enchantment, which will find it and which will lose it?

When it comes to psychedelics, this is is a matter of (spiritual) life and death. Personally, I have come to the conclusion that the whole issue turns on the head of one tiny pin (on which are dancing an indefinite number of angels). Or perhaps thorn is more accurate. I’m talking about the OG – God.

This will annoy many people of course. Let it be known that I don’t mean “Old Grey Beard”, “Sky Daddy” or even “The Christian God”. I mean the actual, ineffable, living God that spiritual traditions the world over point to in their various different ways. It’s God or Babylon, whichever way you turn it, twist it or try to wriggle out of it.

The actual presence of God is primary. Everything else is secondary. In my idiosyncratic terminology, “One, Three, Seven” are primary and “Twelve” is secondary (see Between the One and the Many). And safety is found only within the orbit of the Twelve (planet Earth). Beyond that, you risk finding yourself lost in space, drifting between Saturn and the fixed stars (see William Blake’s The Marriage of Heaven and Hell).

On earth Thou hidest, not to scare
The children with Thy light,
Then showest us Thy face in heaven,
When we can bear the sight.

Frederick William Faber