![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Give Me That Old Time Religion?
Disclaimer: This entry speaks somewhat strongly of my own spiritual orientation, one which is quite different from that of several friends here, friends whose faith I not only respect, but whose own meditations frequently inspire me. I fear that the tone of what follows may be more critical than I intended. If so, it arises from my sense of what is lacking for me in traditional faith paths; it's not a condemnation of those paths.
A recent internet search about Freyja led me to the fascinating website of Heidhrun Freyjasdottir*, a gydhia of Freyja. Heidhrun is very proud of her Heathen tradition, and in an essay titled "Call Us Heathen" she makes a strong statement of the differences she perceives between her tradition and those of Wicca and other Neo-Pagan paths:
Heathenry is a reconstructionist religion and folkway, based upon 20,000 years of archeaological evidence and surviving lore. It is neither invention or self-styled spiritualism, but a living tradition based upon historical fact.
This statement reminded me strikingly of the attitude of a good friend of mine who was raised Evangelical Christian, became an Episcopelian as an adult, and is now in the process of formally coverting to the Eastern Orthodox church. One of the primary reasons for his conversion is that he sees the Orthodox Church remaining consistent in theology and practice for centuries while other Christian sects are, in his opinion, changing too much with the times.
Setting aside for a moment the accuracy of either his or Heidhrun's claims for their traditions (I personally am neither qualified nor interested in judging them), this raises a significant point of distinction between them and me, namely: the relative importance of remaining as true as possible to the historical forms and theology of a spiritual tradition, or seeking to remain true to the foundational beliefs and principles while allowing practice, ethics, and theology to develop and evolve over time.
(Please understand, I'm not saying that traditional faiths don't evolve. It's a matter of degree of openness.)
As a scholar of religion, I have deep respect for those who diligently study the texts and artifacts of our ancestors and try to interpret them as honestly as possible. And I see nothing wrong in trying to re-create the ancient practices. But personally I don't want my spirituality to be confined to revelations and beliefs of hundreds or thousands of years ago. I want my spirituality to grapple meaningfully with the challenges and issues of modern life, not point to an ancient text and say "But it says here. . . ." and have that settle the issue. Not when I believe so many of the mores of any tradition have been conditioned by the circumstances of their times.
Do we not have the right to a spirituality that is grounded in and responsive to our own time, just as our forebears' was grounded in and responsive to their own?
Like Heidhrun, I worship and call on Freyja -- but if I believed it was important that I do so in strict accordance with the way my ancestors called on Her early in the first millenium, I wouldn't bother. In fact, the most important elements of my observances are not found in any saga or artifact I'm aware of. But I've felt Her presence and power nonetheless, and I am not going to give up those rites just because they are not historically based.
I'm not advocating throwing all of tradition out the window, nor depending entirely on subjective mystical experience. As a spiritual director, part of my role is to help people reflect on their private spiritual experiences and help them discern if they are truly tapping into the Divine or have gotten lost in vanity, depression, or delusion. One (not the only) standard is how what they've experienced fits with revelations which have been recorded and preserved through tradition.
The sifting of authentic revelation from the culturally relative (or personally expedient) is, in my opinion, a major issue in modern spirituality.
At the same time, it's clear that Heidhrun -- like my friend -- finds that her spiritual path speaks more than adequately to her modern life, and very likely brings something to it that she can't find elsewhere. Being a reconstructionist doesn't make her path less valid than mine, just not one that I care to tread.
I'm interested in the thoughts of this community. For those of you who are reconstructionists or place a high value on the stability and roots of your tradition, how do you balance historical fidelity and preservation with modern challenges? Where and how do you draw the line between what you keep and what you discard from the past?
* Heidhrun's website: http://www.freefolk.org/leaves.html
A recent internet search about Freyja led me to the fascinating website of Heidhrun Freyjasdottir*, a gydhia of Freyja. Heidhrun is very proud of her Heathen tradition, and in an essay titled "Call Us Heathen" she makes a strong statement of the differences she perceives between her tradition and those of Wicca and other Neo-Pagan paths:
Heathenry is a reconstructionist religion and folkway, based upon 20,000 years of archeaological evidence and surviving lore. It is neither invention or self-styled spiritualism, but a living tradition based upon historical fact.
This statement reminded me strikingly of the attitude of a good friend of mine who was raised Evangelical Christian, became an Episcopelian as an adult, and is now in the process of formally coverting to the Eastern Orthodox church. One of the primary reasons for his conversion is that he sees the Orthodox Church remaining consistent in theology and practice for centuries while other Christian sects are, in his opinion, changing too much with the times.
Setting aside for a moment the accuracy of either his or Heidhrun's claims for their traditions (I personally am neither qualified nor interested in judging them), this raises a significant point of distinction between them and me, namely: the relative importance of remaining as true as possible to the historical forms and theology of a spiritual tradition, or seeking to remain true to the foundational beliefs and principles while allowing practice, ethics, and theology to develop and evolve over time.
(Please understand, I'm not saying that traditional faiths don't evolve. It's a matter of degree of openness.)
As a scholar of religion, I have deep respect for those who diligently study the texts and artifacts of our ancestors and try to interpret them as honestly as possible. And I see nothing wrong in trying to re-create the ancient practices. But personally I don't want my spirituality to be confined to revelations and beliefs of hundreds or thousands of years ago. I want my spirituality to grapple meaningfully with the challenges and issues of modern life, not point to an ancient text and say "But it says here. . . ." and have that settle the issue. Not when I believe so many of the mores of any tradition have been conditioned by the circumstances of their times.
Do we not have the right to a spirituality that is grounded in and responsive to our own time, just as our forebears' was grounded in and responsive to their own?
Like Heidhrun, I worship and call on Freyja -- but if I believed it was important that I do so in strict accordance with the way my ancestors called on Her early in the first millenium, I wouldn't bother. In fact, the most important elements of my observances are not found in any saga or artifact I'm aware of. But I've felt Her presence and power nonetheless, and I am not going to give up those rites just because they are not historically based.
I'm not advocating throwing all of tradition out the window, nor depending entirely on subjective mystical experience. As a spiritual director, part of my role is to help people reflect on their private spiritual experiences and help them discern if they are truly tapping into the Divine or have gotten lost in vanity, depression, or delusion. One (not the only) standard is how what they've experienced fits with revelations which have been recorded and preserved through tradition.
The sifting of authentic revelation from the culturally relative (or personally expedient) is, in my opinion, a major issue in modern spirituality.
At the same time, it's clear that Heidhrun -- like my friend -- finds that her spiritual path speaks more than adequately to her modern life, and very likely brings something to it that she can't find elsewhere. Being a reconstructionist doesn't make her path less valid than mine, just not one that I care to tread.
I'm interested in the thoughts of this community. For those of you who are reconstructionists or place a high value on the stability and roots of your tradition, how do you balance historical fidelity and preservation with modern challenges? Where and how do you draw the line between what you keep and what you discard from the past?
* Heidhrun's website: http://www.freefolk.org/leaves.html
no subject
The magic and the layered mysteries of truth lie in the practices, such as giving, tithing and helping others, confessing, surrendering, breaking bread together, recognizing holy days and carrying out traditional ritual practices, etc. The Christian Easter rituals and story have changed meaning for me countless times throughout my life as my beliefs and perceptions have changed. But there has always been meaning there, and I think it's tied to the traditional practices.
This viewpoint is partly due to my perception of the evolution of consciousness. It's also due to my strong conviction (perhaps a temporary belief!) that the judgment that resides within religious doctrine is unfortunate and unholy. No scripture or artifact or tradition should be used to judge or condemn one's soul. In the same way, excluding a current experience from the possibility of revelation simply because it's had no predecessing existance in scripture (like having an openly gay priest) seems narrow and stagnant. One of our greatest gifts as humans is the ability to respond creatively to new situations. We are built to do that.
I feel that everything in the universe should be given equal footing as sources of revelation (phenomenological existence as revelation), and our ethics should be founded simply on consent.
There is also, however, the matter of constantly re-inventing the wheel. I can understand why traditions of belief develop. People write wisdom teachings down and canonize them so that they are easier to refer to, and easier to pass on to future generations. There also seem to be cores of wisdom in religious teachings, but again, I would say those refer to how to love and live well in peace, not how and why to judge each other and group ourselves accordingly.
I have a lot of unanswered questions in this discussion...I don't have it all figured out. The lover of neutrality and amoralism in me wants to say that religious moralism creates more problems than it solves. But there is also much beauty and truth to all religious traditions, and I find little beauty in neutrality. I am biased toward beauty and taking pleasure in beauty, especially that which I find in the holy and the sacred.
I hope more people respond to your questions. I hope I haven't offended any readers; I know my viewpoints are limited, but there they are.
no subject