Apocalyptic beliefs have proven remarkably resilient over time.
Especially remarkable, given how they are always wrong and need
reinterpretation.
What makes them so adaptable?
They address profound yearnings in the human soul: a time of justice, when
evil-doers no longer flourish and the good no longer suffer. A time when
people overcome their self-limiting patterns of relationship and make an
evolutionary leap into a new social paradigm.
They address profound psychological needs: they give meaning and purpose
(apocalyptic believers are semiotically aroused--everything, the smallest
details, has meaning), and the meaning lays out a clear program of action into
which they can pour their heart and soul (apocalyptic believers are
vocationally aroused--they are called to their task, their whole life has
prepared them for this moment).
When they come together in an apocalyptic community, the sense of intimacy and
purpose is far more potent than the wan ties that bind us in the messy grey
world of civil society. Thus, when prophecy fails, believers would sooner
reinterpret the prophecy than give it up, leading to what Paula Fredriksen has
called "apocalyptic jazz."
In a sense, one might say that many millennial movements are caused by ADD II.
Type I is the "normal" Attention Deficit Disorder--can't pay enough
attention; type II is can't get enough attention. Some groups play this card
intentionally, "love-bombing" as the Moonies call it.
What tends to trigger apocalyptic movements?
A culture clash in which an operating culture is thrown into turmoil by a more
powerful one, whose impact is to allow systematic defections from the value
systems and commitments of the weaker culture. Crises, rapid and disorienting
social change, signs and wonders in the air (like a solar eclipse followed by a
devastating earthquake), and charismatic apocalyptic prophets capable of
arousing the apocalyptic energy of his or her audiences.
Can you think of some specific examples which demonstrate the ingenuity
people have shown in shaping systems which suit their particular circumstances?
At the approach of 1000 in France, millennial and apocalyptic energies produced
the Peace of God, the first mass peace movement in the history of mankind
(unless we include Lysestrata), when neither the end (Last Judgment) nor the
milllennial kingdom (Return of Jesus) came in 1000, the generation
redated to 1033 and had a second wave of peace assemblies culminating in 1033
and a massive covenantal movement described by Rodulfus Glaber.
I will make some very broad generalizations, which nevertheless I think are
true.
All religions are about achieving well-being, either in the here and now, or in
the afterlife. Most people want both. We want to experience permanent
well-being, and we rebel against the limitations and suffering of the human condition. In other words, "salvation" is a condition of permanent
well-being.
Some religions promise salvation to individuals. Millennialists expect a
condition of collective salvation. Millennial religions offer the hope of
salvation to groups of people.
Often people experience a great deal of suffering, disappointment,hardship, and
persecution. In these cases, what I call "catastrophic millennialism" makes
sense. Society and humans are seen as being so evil
and corrupt, that everything has to be wiped away in a great cataclysm before
the millennial kingdom, the collective salvation, can be established.
People who are more optimistic about society and human nature may adopt what I
call "progressive millennialism." They see themselves working according to a
divine plan to build the millennial kingdom through social
work and personal reform. They are aware of life's imperfections, but they
don't expect catastrophic destruction to precede the establishment of the
millennial kingdom.
These two millennial patterns address the perennial human longing to be free of
life's suffering, and they offer that salvation to collectivities of people.
Individuals and groups may switch back and forth between these two patterns
depending on how comfortable they feel in society.
By the way, I discuss these matters in essays posted on my web page.
| | | |
Barkun is a professor of political science at Syracuse University's Maxwell School
of Citizenship and Public Affairs and and serves on the board of directors of the Center for Millennial Studies at
Boston University.
(more about Barkun) | | |
The adaptability of apocalyptic movements is the result of a number of
characteristics, not all of which may be present at the same time. First,
expectations may be couched in sufficiently ambiguous language to cover a
variety of future events. Not all apocalyptic movements make the kind of
date-specific predictions that the Millerites did.
Second, there may be a closed system of belief that resists disconfirmation.
This is particularly the case where conspiracy beliefs are involved, since
conspiracy beliefs are often nonfalsifiable. The ideas about a "New World
Order" conspiracy that now circulate are of this type. That is, the theory
itself asserts that seemingly contradictory information has been planted by the
conspiracy and thus ought not to be believed.
Third, many apocalyptic belief systems include not one but a sequence of
expected future events, so that even if one fails to materialize, faith in
others remains. Interestingly, more and more apocalyptic texts about the year
2000 advance predictions that go beyond the year 2000 sometimes by at least a
decade or two, thus deferring what might be embarrassing errors. The issue of
"triggering" was at one time the principle concern of students of
millennialism. My own initial book on millennialism (Disaster and the
Millennium) addressed this issue. The dominant view, I think, is that some
sense of crisis is necessary to precipitate large-scale millennialism.
I would, however, add two caveats: First, one has to take account not only of
objective circumstances--the stresses a society undergoes; but also the
perception of crisis. People who appear deprived may have cultural mechanisms
that mute or deflect the sense of deprivation, such as a belief in rewards
after death or confidence that things will improve in the future; and people
who may appear privileged can nonetheless sometimes feel a profound sense of
unease even though their material conditions seem comfortable.
Second, there have been millenarian subcultures that are able to sustain
themselves regardless of social conditions. This goes back to the previous
question about adaptation, because millennialists need to adapt not only to
disconfirming evidence but to circumstances that might lead to an acceptance of
the status quo. In twentieth century America, for example, we have seen the
ability of many Protestant millenarians to maintain their faith regardless of
changing economic and political circumstances. Thus the issue of triggering
relates not so much to the existence of apocalyptic ideas as to the ability of
those ideas to move out of small subcultures into the "mainstream."
The need which strikes me as most important here is the need to believe in a
world characterized by moral order. Apocalyptic beliefs can reinforce a sense
of moral order by, for example, advancing a scenario of struggle between the
forces of light and the forces of darkness; a struggle that is to climax in a
final battle where the forces of light will be triumphant. In a world where
good people often suffer and the wicked prosper, the promise of an imminent
moral accounting is profoundly consoling.
Apocalyptic belief systems are remarkably resilent and enduring, I think,
because they speak to such basic human needs: for a sense of meaning and order
in history, for the promise of a better world, for the drama and excitement
they can add to life. Also, apocalyptic texts
almost be definition wrap their prophetic message in symbolic or metaphorical
language, that by its very amorphousness can be adapted to many different
situations, and interpreted in many different ways.
Apocalyptic movements tend to be triggered by a charismatic figure who has
absolute confidence in his or her particular prophetic scheme, and who comes up
with an interpretive system that seems to address some of the
central concerns of a particular time period. William Miller, for example, in
upstate New York in the 1830s, came up with a complex mathematical scheme based
on the Book of Daniel, which foretold Jesus' return in 1843 or 1844.
Miller conducted his revival services at a time of great revival fervor, when
Charles G. Finney and other famous evangelists were in their prime, so the
northern public was already familiar with this form of proselytizing.
His detailed interpretations of difficult scriptural passages and his complex
mathematical calculations appealed to Americans at a time when the spread of
the public-school system was making the basic skills of literacy
and mathematics widely available. His followers used the latest means of mass
communication: charts and graphs, newpapers and periodicals printed on the new
high-speed printing presses of the day. And he brought his message to America
at a time of intense reform activity, when a new and more righteous world order
did indeed seem within grasp. The Millerite movement is a classic example of a
leader with a message in perfect synchronicity with his era.
Hal Lindsey, publishing The Late Great Planet Earth in 1970 is another
example. Lindsey used the popular language of the day, even slang, to address
such issues as the Cold War, fears of nuclear war, the rise of the European
Common Market, and conflict in the Middle East that were of intense concern to
millions of people, and place them within a particular framework of prophetic
interpretation.
Gene Gallagher comments:
I think that millennial movements are only lightly attached to any particular
calendrical system. The comments about the situations that generate millennial
movements indicate that it's more specific social circumstances, and individual
perceptions of them, that are the triggering mechanisms. The calendar is not
irrelevant, though. I think that Richard Landes' notion that we may be in for a thirty-three year
span of heightened expectations (corresponding to the supposed life-span of
Jesus) at the beginning of the millennium may well be right.
Paul Boyer responds to Catherine Wessinger:
Catherine, I think you make an excellent point when you stress that the
"apocalyptic worldview" is not dependent on specific events. It's rooted in
the human condition: we are all born to die, and thus as human beings we are
probably "hard wired" to try to make some sense of this absurd fact by
projecting it onto a cosmic screen. Also you make the point that dualism, too,
is woven into the fabric of our experience in some very basic ways: night and
day, male and female, left brain, right brain (which people have probably
always understood experientially, even if they didn't have the scientific basis
for understanding it physiologically). So this gives a continuing appeal to
the dualism that is so central to the apocalyptic vision of human history.
You also do well, Catherine, to remind us that the more optimistic "progressive
millennialism" co-exists with the darker visions of "apocalyptic" millennialsm.
I think the reason we may be neglecting it in this roundtable discussion is
that since the Social Gospel era of the early 20th century "progressive
millennialism" has been so thoroughly secularized and absorbed into the
mainstream of the American reform tradition that it
hardly exists as a distinct, biblical-based millennial position. The works of
the theologian Walter Rauschenbusch in the early 20th century seem to me just
about the last example of an effort to work out a fully biblical theology of
progressive millennialism, though I could be wrong.
Michael Barkun comments:
I was intrigued by a comment of Richard Landes's, that the "apocalyptic
community" provides a "sense of intimacy and purpose that is far more potent
than the wan ties that bind us in the messy grey world of civil society."
While this indeed helps explain the response of millenarians to
cognitive dissonance, it also suggests that the experience of an apocalyptic
community is often a kind of millennium-in-miniature or a millennium-surrogate.
That is, the potency of the experience makes it appear to participants as
though for them the millennium has indeed arrived, even when their belief system advances some specific future date.
Richard Landes responds:
Absolutely. That seems to be the experience of the Jesus community.
Michael Barkun continues:
Richard's later reference to "signs and wonders" as a triggering mechanism
alerts us to the importance of millenarians' interpretive framework, for they
indeed usually have a system for classifying events into those that
are portentous and those that have no apocalyptic significance. Hence even
though a "crisis" may not be evident to an outside observer, it may exist for
millenarians when conventionally defined "signs and portents" appear.
Richard Landes response:
E.g., the eclipse followed so rapidly by the earthquake in Turkey. Or, for the
apocalyptically-minded sign-watchers, the unusual number of large earthquakes
(this is great stuff for the 5-5-2000 argument in which a slight additional
gravitational pull from space will trigger large earth-changes here). Or, for
the apocalyptically alert millennial scholar, the large number of suicidal
rages that populate 1999.
Michael Barkun continues:
Catherine Wessinger suggests--correctly, I think--that pessimists and
optimists self-select apocalyptic ideas, the former gravitating toward what
she refers to as "catastrophic millennialism" and the latter to
"progressive millennialism."
But I wonder whether the causal arrows might not also go in the other
direction. That is, a society saturated with catastrophic motifs brings into
being a populace that is fatalistic, while a society where progressive themes
dominate produces a more reform-oriented community. In short, one can be
socialized to pre-existing apocalyptic orientations as well as seeking them out
in order to meet individual psychological needs.
Richard Landes response:
This is a function of the culture. All progressive millennialism is based
on education and a learning curve. Optimism is a feature of cultures with such
commitments. I think Augustine's doctrine of original sin represents his
effort to encourage a culture of fatalism vis-a-vis millennial dreams--we are
fundamentally flawed and an earthly millennium is therefore an impossibility.
Michael Barkun continues:
Finally, Paul Boyer makes the important observation that William Miller's
followers, despite their "old fashioned" ideas, adopted cutting edge
communication and marketing tools. This is by no means an isolated case.
The juxtaposition of traditional beliefs with innovative technology is
frequent, as we see in the fondness contemporary millennarians have for
cable television and the Internet.
Richard Landes response:
This is true from the earliest times onward: millennialists are cutting edge in
communications technology (Christians and the codex, Protestants and the
printing press, Nazis and TV). This makes cyberspace's implications for the 21st
century what printings were for the 16th.
Richard Landes responds to Catherine Wessinger:
CW: Some religions promise salvaton to individuals. Millennialists expect a
condition of collective salvation. Millennial religions offer the hope of
salvation to groups of people.
RL: Crucial point. The collective quality of the salvation is the key to
millennialism. I'd amend slightly Catherine's point here. Religions --
especially Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism--have multiple traditions
about this (e.g. Hinayana and Mahayana Buddhism), and sometimes an "individual
salvation" teaching can wax millennial when there are a wave of
"conversions."
CW: People who are more optimistic about society and human nature may adopt
what I call "progressive millennialism." They see themselves working according
to a divine plan to build the millennial kingdom through social work and
personal reform. They are aware of life's imperfections, but they don't expect
catastrophic destruction to precede the establishment of the millennial
kingdom.
RL: Or, they think the catastrophe is behind us (e.g. after the holocaust...
the sixties)
CW: These two millennial patterns address the perennial human longing to be
free of life's suffering, and they offer that salvation to collectivities of
people. Individuals and groups may switch back and forth between these two
patterns depending on how comfortable they feel in society.
RL: Switching is very important. Millennial groups, once they are "going" tend
to engage in apocalyptic jazz--whatever interpretation, reorientation of
goals and expectations, can best sustain the sense of momentum will have a
chance of drawing their loyalty.
Richard Landes responds to Michael Barkun:
MB: Second, there may be a closed system of belief that resists
disconfirmation. This is particularly the case where conspiracy beliefs are
involved, since conspiracy beliefs are often nonfalsifiable. The ideas about a
"New World Order" conspiracy that now circulate are of this type. That is, the
theory itself asserts that seemingly contradictory information has been planted
by the conspiracy and thus ought not to be believed.
RL: This is like the creationist argument for fossils: God put them there to
test our faith.
MB: The need which strikes me as most important here is the need to believe in
a world characterized by moral order. Apocalyptic beliefs can reinforce a
sense of moral order by, for example, advancing a scenario of struggle between
the forces of light and the forces of darkness; a struggle that is to climax in
a final battle where the forces of light will be triumphant. In a world where
good people often suffer and the wicked prosper, the promise of an imminent
moral accounting is profoundly consoling.
RL: Put differently, millennialism is the express train to theodicy (God's
justice).
Richard Landes responds to Paul Boyer:
PB: Hal Lindsey, publishing The Late Great Planet Earth in 1970 is
another example. Lindsey used the popular language of the day, even slang, to
address such issues as the Cold War, fears of nuclear war, the rise of the
European Common Market, and conflict in the Middle East that were of intense
concern to millions of people, and place them within a particular framework of
prophetic interpretation.
RL: Note, in terms of the current question, about millennialism, that Lindsey's
book, which was a systematic interpretation of current events in terms of
fulfilling the prophecies of Revelation--and, obviously, the belief that we
are fast approaching the final events--was just the kind of thing
that Augustine formally and explicitly banned, and that, for at least six
centuries after Augustine, churchmen were careful never to record in
writing. The popularity of this kind of millennial exegesis of current
events is one of the most powerful dimensions of American apocalyptic.
Michael Barkun's response to Landes (re: preceding paragraph):
The contrast with Augustine suggests the staying power of oral, and possibly
heretical, traditions in popular religion. While "official" religion sometimes
took up the millenarian banner, even when millennialism was officially
condemned, it retained its vigor in non-institutional religion.
Catherine Wessinger comments:
In response to the very thoughtful answers to the first question, I'd like
to emphasize that while catastrophic millennialism (apocalypticism) can a
response to crisis, catastrophe, culture clash, and persecution, the human
condition by its very nature involves suffering and death. Therefore, the
perennial appeal of catastrophic millennialism is that it gives meaning to
suffering, promises defeat and elimination of evil, and permanent
well-being to the believers. So even if widespread social change and
confusion are lacking, catastrophic millennial beliefs always will have an
appeal. Also, I think the tendency to think in dualistic categories is very
human, and dualism is a characteristic of catastrophic millennialism.
Dualism is the tendency to think in terms of good vs. evil, which
unfortunately often translates into a sense of us vs. them. In our culture,
a book, novel, movie, television show, video game, or news story is not
considered to have a good plot unless it is involves a story of good vs.
evil, us vs. them.
I want to call attention to the fact that the discussion so far has focused
only on what I term catastrophic millennialism, or what many of the
scholars here have termed apocalypticism. There is the other millennial
pattern, that I have called progressive millennialism, or that many
scholars of Christianity have termed post-millennialism. It is present also
in America, and this pattern can be discerned in the heightened millennial
expectations we are seeing now that 2000 is approaching.
I encourage people to pay attention to progressive millennial patterns. We need
to learn much more about progressive millennialism. One question is: Does
progressive millennialism ever give rise to violence? Progressive millennialism
is when people believe that the transition to the collective salvation will be
non-catastrophic, and that humans working in accordance with a superhuman plan
will create the millennial kingdom.
Richard Landes responds to Wessinger:
I think the answer to that question is "yes." I think of post and
pre-millennialism as two poles of apocalyptic scenario between which
apocalyptic believers improvise in their efforts to keep apocalyptic beliefs
alive. Thus the difference between enthusiastic purity and coercive purity is
not just ideological but a matter of patience. It is easy to be patient and
gradualist about expectations when there is wind in your sails. When things
slow down, when prophecy is no longer exhilaratingly fulfilled but
incomprehensibly contradicted by events, the urge to abandon an ideological
position to keep the apocalyptic fires burning becomes ever more tempting. In
a sense, the sixties started our post-millennial peaceful (radical
progressive) and ended up pre-millennial violent (Chicago Convention, Black
Panthers, Weathermen).
Catherine Wessinger continues:
It is important to remember that catastrophic
millennialism and progressive millennialism are not mutually exclusive, and often these patterns are
combined in interesting ways. I recently received an email message from a
Catholic millennial movement that said that the Virgin Mary has warned
that if enough believers pray the rosary that the imminent Tribulation can
be averted and the Second Coming of Christ can be non-catastrophic. So,
what shall we term a group that strongly believes that potential
apocalyptic violence is imminent, but that there is the possibility it can
be averted through a particular spiritual practice?
Richard Landes responds:
This is a classic apocalyptic trope that we find repeatedly, often as a
post-factum explanation for why the world hasn't ended (e.g. Elizabeth Clare
Prophet and the non-occurence of the nuclear war she had predicted). We might
call it Ninevite apocalyptic: if you repent the world will be saved. Maybe the
best term is prophetic, since that is precisely the purpose of prophecy --
change your ways, not because it's the end, but in order to save the world from
destruction. in the case of the Peace of God movement in the 990s and early
1030s, collective repentence led to a kind of social covenanting that became
strongly progressive in its hopes for social transformation.
Catherine Wessinger continues:
Perhaps we could call this "avertive millennialism."
Avertive millennialism has been the emphasis of the Church Universal and
Triumphant, which now may be tending toward a progressive millennialism.
Avertive millennialism was the original emphasis of Aum Shinrikyo, although it
pretty quickly shifted to a catastrophic millennial perspective that
legitimated violence against non-believers, and eventually resulted in the
sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway.
So I encourage people to pay attention to progressive millennial patterns,
to how catastrophic and progressive ideas are combined, and to how shifts
take place over time between catastrophic and progressive expectations.
Richard Landes response:
Agreed. Indeed, I'd identify most "New Age" as progressive millennial, and
find their response to y2k--community organizing--some of the most creative
and socially constructive to come out of that phenomenon, along with things
like the Joseph project (c.f. the conspiracist, catastrophic response of some y2k
rapturists).
Michael Barkun responds to Wessinger's comments:
"Avertive millennialism" strikes me as a sort of "second-order"
millennialism--that is, a defensive variety to hedge against the
embarrassment of prophecies that don't materialize. If a mechanism is
suggested that can keep destruction at bay, it offers believers a way out of
failures of catastrophic millennialism.
home ·
apocalypticism ·
book of revelation ·
antichrist ·
chronology ·
roundtable ·
primary sources ·
discussion
readings ·
video ·
glossary ·
links ·
synopsis
web site copyright WGBH educational foundation
|