![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Answers for Amqu
A couple of weeks ago, ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
amqu responded to my Old Time Religion post with several challenging questions. My spiritual path has a lot of ambiguity in it, and when faced with her very good but hard-to-answer questions, the Queen of Swords went into a panic. After all, if I couldn’t answer them all, immediately, in a compelling manner that would convince her that my faith and my reason were sound, there was something wrong with me and my path, right?!?!
When we rational types get irrational, we go all the way.
It took me several days to get up my courage to re-read her questions. And I still couldn’t answer them quickly. It took a conversation with both my spiritual director and my priestess teacher to talk myself around to the point of seeing her questions as a valuable opportunity to clarify certain topics in my own mind, and accept that fact that due to the differences in our beliefs, it’s entirely possible that the answers that work for me might not be valid for her. And that’s okay. Neitheramqu nor I have ever asked or expected the other to change her beliefs because they are different from our own.
So, after a two week delay, here are my answers to her questions.
Quotes from my original entry are in italics.amqu’s questions are in bold. My answers are in plain type.
Feel free to jump in and join the discussion.
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?
Amqu: It depends. Is the religion about you or about the god?
I think that religion (in this context) is about the relationship between humanity and God. Setting aside for a moment the question of whether or not the Divine changes over time, it’s clear that human society has changed. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to believe that new practices can be just as valid or pleasing to the Divine as old ones.
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 millennium, 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.
Amqu: Do you believe Freyja is an actual person? Or do you consider her a manifestation of a general free-floating "divine"?
This question was particularly challenging to me. I’ve struggled a great deal over the years (since 1985) with what I believe about how much a person or persons the Divine is, and had pretty much shifted that particular question to the “impossible to know for sure” column. My working answer, the one that fits with my experience, is that the Divine can and does manifest to humanity in a variety of recognizable individual beings. Whether these beings are, in fact, distinct individuals who share the name basic nature (divinity) or whether they are different aspects of the One is beyond my ability to answer.
I do know this: that the more individualized my experience of the Divine is, the richer and more satisfying my spiritual life is. When I try to relate to the Divine as the One, or the Almighty Creator, I get lost in the vastness. The rich spirituality of my childhood and young adult years was all about my relationship with Jesus. God wasn’t a distant king or judge or savior, God was Jesus who was my loving friend, who shared my daily life with me, encouraged me, and whose good opinion I wanted to keep.
Do I struggle with the possibility that I’ve deluded myself and am “working with” figments of my very strong imagination? Sometimes, yes. Do I wonder sometimes if I’ve lost touch with the “true God” and am settling for spirits of another order? It’s crossed my mind.
And so I fall back on the principles of my early Christian formation and ask “What are the fruits of this work?” Over the past few months, those fruits are increased compassion, greater peace, more patience, healing. My conclusion: whatever the nature of the beings with which I am associating, I seem to be moving in a direction recognizable to most spiritual paths as being “the right way.”
If, on the other hand, my practices were accompanied by an increase in arrogance, sense of entitlement, anger, selfishness, and etc. then there would be good reason to doubt the nature of my allies.
Which perhaps doesn’t specifically answer Amqu’s question in the definite way it was phrased, but does explain why it’s not a question I worry about most of the time.
Amqu: Do you think Freyja is satisfied with a simple acknowledgment of her existence, or do you think she is particular in how she is worshiped?
She seems satisfied. I think that sincere intention counts for a great deal. Bear in mind that the practices to which I alluded may not be historically based, but they do involve the areas of her interest and authority (sexuality and pleasure, sacred marriage). At the same time, I have done some research recently, and am looking forward to performing my first blot for her, which is a traditional Heathen ritual, attested to in the Sagas.
One (not the only) standard is how what they've experienced fits with revelations which have been recorded and preserved through tradition.
Amqu: If it fits, what does it mean? If it doesn't fit, what does it mean?
There are some mystical experiences which are attested to widely by the spiritual literature of more than one path: the dark night of the soul, union, certain types of images. If a person came to me and talked about those experiences, I could reassure them that it seemed they were experiencing something that is a common element of spiritual practice. Given their own path, are the images or messages consistent with that path?
If it doesn’t fit. . . then we dig deeper, and we test for the fruits that I referenced above. How do these experiences or images make her feel? What would be the consequence of taking them seriously and following them? Do they lead to the light or toward darkness?
The sifting of authentic revelation from the culturally relative (or personally expedient) is, in my opinion, a major issue in modern spirituality.
Amqu: How can you tell? How are we to judge what is authentic revelation and cultural relativity? Is it completely subjective? What is the sifting criteria?
I wish there was a single answer that everyone agreed to on this. Personally, I believe that movements that are in line with compassion, justice, equality, and dignity are in line with the fundamental values of the Divine.
...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?
I accept the fact that human nature doesn't change. The Bible was written for people just like me. However, I don't hold with human tradition, so I question all historic Christian beliefs. If it doesn't measure up to a Biblical standard, it goes the way of the dodo. In the same manner, if current cultural ideas contradict the Biblical standard, they also get jettisoned.
To which I guess my question is: How do you make the distinction between “historic Christian beliefs” and “Biblical standard”?
amqu responded to my Old Time Religion post with several challenging questions. My spiritual path has a lot of ambiguity in it, and when faced with her very good but hard-to-answer questions, the Queen of Swords went into a panic. After all, if I couldn’t answer them all, immediately, in a compelling manner that would convince her that my faith and my reason were sound, there was something wrong with me and my path, right?!?!When we rational types get irrational, we go all the way.
It took me several days to get up my courage to re-read her questions. And I still couldn’t answer them quickly. It took a conversation with both my spiritual director and my priestess teacher to talk myself around to the point of seeing her questions as a valuable opportunity to clarify certain topics in my own mind, and accept that fact that due to the differences in our beliefs, it’s entirely possible that the answers that work for me might not be valid for her. And that’s okay. Neither
amqu nor I have ever asked or expected the other to change her beliefs because they are different from our own. So, after a two week delay, here are my answers to her questions.
Quotes from my original entry are in italics.
amqu’s questions are in bold. My answers are in plain type.Feel free to jump in and join the discussion.
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?
Amqu: It depends. Is the religion about you or about the god?
I think that religion (in this context) is about the relationship between humanity and God. Setting aside for a moment the question of whether or not the Divine changes over time, it’s clear that human society has changed. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to believe that new practices can be just as valid or pleasing to the Divine as old ones.
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 millennium, 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.
Amqu: Do you believe Freyja is an actual person? Or do you consider her a manifestation of a general free-floating "divine"?
This question was particularly challenging to me. I’ve struggled a great deal over the years (since 1985) with what I believe about how much a person or persons the Divine is, and had pretty much shifted that particular question to the “impossible to know for sure” column. My working answer, the one that fits with my experience, is that the Divine can and does manifest to humanity in a variety of recognizable individual beings. Whether these beings are, in fact, distinct individuals who share the name basic nature (divinity) or whether they are different aspects of the One is beyond my ability to answer.
I do know this: that the more individualized my experience of the Divine is, the richer and more satisfying my spiritual life is. When I try to relate to the Divine as the One, or the Almighty Creator, I get lost in the vastness. The rich spirituality of my childhood and young adult years was all about my relationship with Jesus. God wasn’t a distant king or judge or savior, God was Jesus who was my loving friend, who shared my daily life with me, encouraged me, and whose good opinion I wanted to keep.
Do I struggle with the possibility that I’ve deluded myself and am “working with” figments of my very strong imagination? Sometimes, yes. Do I wonder sometimes if I’ve lost touch with the “true God” and am settling for spirits of another order? It’s crossed my mind.
And so I fall back on the principles of my early Christian formation and ask “What are the fruits of this work?” Over the past few months, those fruits are increased compassion, greater peace, more patience, healing. My conclusion: whatever the nature of the beings with which I am associating, I seem to be moving in a direction recognizable to most spiritual paths as being “the right way.”
If, on the other hand, my practices were accompanied by an increase in arrogance, sense of entitlement, anger, selfishness, and etc. then there would be good reason to doubt the nature of my allies.
Which perhaps doesn’t specifically answer Amqu’s question in the definite way it was phrased, but does explain why it’s not a question I worry about most of the time.
Amqu: Do you think Freyja is satisfied with a simple acknowledgment of her existence, or do you think she is particular in how she is worshiped?
She seems satisfied. I think that sincere intention counts for a great deal. Bear in mind that the practices to which I alluded may not be historically based, but they do involve the areas of her interest and authority (sexuality and pleasure, sacred marriage). At the same time, I have done some research recently, and am looking forward to performing my first blot for her, which is a traditional Heathen ritual, attested to in the Sagas.
One (not the only) standard is how what they've experienced fits with revelations which have been recorded and preserved through tradition.
Amqu: If it fits, what does it mean? If it doesn't fit, what does it mean?
There are some mystical experiences which are attested to widely by the spiritual literature of more than one path: the dark night of the soul, union, certain types of images. If a person came to me and talked about those experiences, I could reassure them that it seemed they were experiencing something that is a common element of spiritual practice. Given their own path, are the images or messages consistent with that path?
If it doesn’t fit. . . then we dig deeper, and we test for the fruits that I referenced above. How do these experiences or images make her feel? What would be the consequence of taking them seriously and following them? Do they lead to the light or toward darkness?
The sifting of authentic revelation from the culturally relative (or personally expedient) is, in my opinion, a major issue in modern spirituality.
Amqu: How can you tell? How are we to judge what is authentic revelation and cultural relativity? Is it completely subjective? What is the sifting criteria?
I wish there was a single answer that everyone agreed to on this. Personally, I believe that movements that are in line with compassion, justice, equality, and dignity are in line with the fundamental values of the Divine.
...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?
I accept the fact that human nature doesn't change. The Bible was written for people just like me. However, I don't hold with human tradition, so I question all historic Christian beliefs. If it doesn't measure up to a Biblical standard, it goes the way of the dodo. In the same manner, if current cultural ideas contradict the Biblical standard, they also get jettisoned.
To which I guess my question is: How do you make the distinction between “historic Christian beliefs” and “Biblical standard”?
no subject
You show a deep and powerful connection to your spirituality, and an unshakeable intellect. That is, if you ask me, far more valuable than blind faith. You willingly ask the questions that shake YOU, and then give those answers up to your life, and thus to your gods. That, in my opinion, is a sacrifice far above and beyond the usual fare of the Divine.
One of my favorite opposing arguments I hear from people is whether the gods are individual, or one great being with lots of masks.
It's interesting to me, because I've learned that any time one is presented with a seeming paradox in nature, it's fastest to just acknowledge that both are true, and let the reason present itself.
For example, when I work with deities, I work with them under the understanding that they are all one great divine power, and that the face is merely a facet. To which, one of them said the following: "Of course we're just faces of the Grand Divine! But so are you! And so is everything, so that's just silly. You don't go up to your grandmother and say, 'You're just a mask for the family, and that's all,' when you first come up to her, do you?"
So, yes. Gods are apparently all secretly one, and the Faces and Names we call on are merely Masks. But try telling THEM that! *laughs*
no subject
And I love this:
Gods are apparently all secretly one, and the Faces and Names we
call on are merely Masks. But try telling THEM that! *laughs*
I'm going to copy that into my BOS!
;-)
no subject
no subject
That's a wonderful way to put it! I struggle, sometimes, to describe monolatry/monism (pick your favorite term for a sort of soft polytheism) and explain that "yes, the gods are all aspects/pieces/facets of a greater whole, but they're also very individual and distinct, and you wouldn't approach Aset the same way you'd approach Yinepu just 'cos she's 'only a facet'"... I've tried using a metaphor of ecosystem - it's all one ecosystem, and the components are just parts/components/pieces of the greater whole, but you still don't approach a wolf the same way you approach a rabbit.
The grandmother-mask-family descriptor is even better, I think. I'll have to remember that one. :)
no subject
My spiritual path has a lot of ambiguity in it, and when faced with her very good but hard-to-answer questions, the Queen of Swords went into a panic. After all, if I couldn’t answer them all, immediately, in a compelling manner that would convince her that my faith and my reason were sound, there was something wrong with me and my path, right?!?!
I firmly believe that faith should be based on reason. But we are reasoning on evidence that is infinite. From the grand mysteries of the universe to the personal secrets of our hearts, it is a lot of information to sift through. Therefore, even if your view is absolutely correct and you could clearly and concisely convey it to others, you still wouldn't be able to convince everyone. And maybe some people could be convinced but not at that point in their lives.
It took a conversation with both my spiritual director and my priestess teacher to talk myself around to the point of seeing her questions as a valuable opportunity to clarify certain topics in my own mind, and accept that fact that due to the differences in our beliefs, it’s entirely possible that the answers that work for me might not be valid for her.
Our viewpoints on religion and faith are so different, that our questions to each other can often seem to be coming out of left field. But oftentimes it's those questions that make us stop and think about what we really believe. For instance, I know you were heading in that direction anyway, but I think a question of mine a couple years ago clarified in your mind that you weren't really Christopagan, but just plain pagan. --Not that I feel great about that... ;) But if clarity is possible, it's always better to have it than not.
Re: Frejya being a real person or a manifestation of the divine.
The answer seems to be you're not sure. I find your thoughts on it very interesting. A) A personal deity is much easier to relate to and brings a stronger sense of spirituality. B) As long as your fruits indicate you are moving toward "increased compassion, greater peace, more patience, healing," then ultimately whatever is true, your uncertainty about it is not a pressing issue.
She (Frejya) seems satisfied. I think that sincere intention counts for a great deal.
Given their own path, are the images or messages consistent with that path?
How do these experiences or images make her feel? What would be the consequence of taking them seriously and following them? Do they lead to the light or toward darkness?
Personally, I believe that movements that are in line with compassion, justice, equality, and dignity are in line with the fundamental values of the Divine.
Given the preceding quotes which were taken from successive paragraphs in your post, I think the answer to your original question can only be answered by you and no one else. Although you seem to have a baseline measurement (your religion must be "good" according to your standards of compassion, justice, equality and dignity), it is one of trial and error and doesn't necessarily translate to another person. It is a very individual religion. For you, that means you can modify your worship practices for the world you are currently living in. For others, it might mean they follow closely the ancient practices. As long as it's moving you both in the "right" direction, then they are both equally valid.
That's my take. If I've misrepresented your thoughts, please let me know.
no subject
Your question to me:
To which I guess my question is: How do you make the distinction between “historic Christian beliefs” and “Biblical standard”?
I look at the historic Christian beliefs and then I look at the Bible. If the historic belief cannot be verified in the Bible, then it fails. Some things are easier to verify than others. The Bible is a big book and you have to be very familiar with it. You have to take it as a whole and you have to understand the purpose and theme of the Bible.
Priestly celibacy is easy. Immortal soul is harder. Mixing pagan religious practices with Christian religious practices is easy. The trinity is harder. Those are all historic Christian beliefs that I feel are false according to the Biblical standard. But even the easy ones are hotly disputed no matter how reasonable my arguments. Which brings us back to the fact that just because you can't convince someone of your argument doesn't necessarily mean it's wrong. Doesn't mean it's right either, of course.