Ask a Pagan (Again!)

[Warrenton]

I think the vast majority of Pagans realize that cheating, pedophilia, and bestiality is wrong and that being very open regarding sexuality isn’t an excuse to do something stupid. Consensual sex between adults is generally not a problem, but would certainly seem ‘illicit’ to certain people.

But why are these things wrong? The minotaur was the product of bestiality, and so were Apollo and Luna, at least their father took the form of a swan when they were conceived.

Zeus seduced Europa in the guise of a bull. The centaurs had a penchant for mortal women.

Zeus’s favorite was Ganymede, and he was under age. Except for some of the goddesses, all the gods seem to cheat on one another. Vulcan’s wife is Venus, and she cheated on him with Mars, which the other gods and goddesses found rather amusing.

I cant’ think of anywhere in mythology where the gods expressed the slightest concern about what the shepherds did with the sheep deep in the vales of arcady. They liked their songs, and that was that.

And if the gods don’t care about smashing babies against walls, or skewering them on spears in front of their mothers, it is difficult to imagine they care that much about pedophilia, as long as their altars are not defiled. Except for a few lucky heroes, who the gods set in the firmament, the rest of us go to hell anyway.

Pagans have to make a decision on which way to turn regarding morality. They either follow the old morality, which was based on custom, or they concede that modern paganism has no morality and let the chips fall where they may. It is fruitless for pagans to assert Christian morality - if people won’t accept it when one god commands, they won’t accept it if fifteen gods command, either.

 

[vsedriver]

Most Pagan traditions aren’t dualistic in that there is good and there is evil and never shall they meet. (Heathenry comes close, but between order/chaos rather than good/evil.) I think it’s more of a recognition that life is way more complicated than simple black and white.

then how do you determine right and wrong? You say stealing is wrong because it huts people and raises prices. What if I’m starving or want to feed my family. Is stealing right for me?

Sometimes doing the right thing does hurt people. So how do you know you are doing the right thing? What are the perks for doing the ‘right’ thing? What are the consequences?

 

[Lokabrenna]

If “pro-lifers” wanted zero abortions no matter the excuse, how could you want fewer?

What I meant was that I don’t think banning all abortions is the solution, as women are just going to go back to using coat hangers and back alleys. What I do support is educating people to make better choices (that includes comprehensive sex education, abstinence as well as proper use of contraceptives).

I’d love to live in a world where there were fewer children who were wanted and loved than many children who are neglected because their parents can’t (or won’t) care for them.

 

[vsedriver]

As I said, the gods don’t tend to micro-manage every aspect of our lives, they have bigger things to worry about.

What sort of bigger things do they worry about? And if they are worried about big things why would they bother with what a human wants or needs? What’s in it for them?

Freya, snip does have children, but her primary concern is the fecundity/fertility of the land itself, not just humans. One could (and people often do) argue based on the available lore that she would be more supportive of women who are seeking abortions, but it’s not strictly spelled out in the original texts (they were stories meant to entertain–not moralize).

Somehow I can’t see a goddess of fertility being supportive of abortion. It’s oxymoronic.

 

[vsedriver]

True, after all, the only course I took on philosophy was one on philosophy and religion taught by an atheist, and it wasn’t one of my more enjoyable classes. I would also say that my incomprehensibility probably has something to do with the way monotheists and polytheists see the world. There are aspects of both that seem baffling to either side. It might just be me though.

You might enjoy a course in Logic. It’s a little more of a practical application of philosophy and religious orientation doesn’t play any part.

 

[vsedriver]

why continue to honour them?

Why do you honor them? what have they done to deserve any honor? Is honor the same as worship? Because Catholics honor Mary but worship God. They are two different things.

 

[vsedriver]

I think most of us can agree that the modern Church isn’t exactly like the Medieval Church, because we moderns aren’t Medieval people.

But the church is not a human person. In fact, the truths of the medieval church are the same as the truths of the modern church. Only the outside trappings have changed, ie use of technology, clothing, etc but the moral and religious foundation has remained unchanged.

 

[Lokabrenna]

then how do you determine right and wrong? You say stealing is wrong because it huts people and raises prices. What if I’m starving or want to feed my family. Is stealing right for me?

Sometimes doing the right thing does hurt people. So how do you know you are doing the right thing? What are the perks for doing the ‘right’ thing? What are the consequences?

Even in such an extreme case, there are still options available. Is there a soup kitchen or a food bank nearby that you can use? Do you have friends or family who can put you up for the night? Can your religious community help in some way? There are alternatives to stealing, and dire circumstances don’t automatically make it right. In my tradition, it’s believed that your actions impact your luck (hamingja) and the luck of those around you, crime doesn’t just hurt you, it hurts everyone who associates with you.

Sometimes the right thing does hurt others, Tyr knew he was doing the right thing when he stuck his hand in Fenris’ mouth, but he still lost his hand over it.

As for perks and consequences, it doesn’t make sense to me that you would do something just because you might derive some benefit or receive punishment for it. But since you asked, a “perk” in this case might simply be that my community is better off, a “punishment” might be that my community is less inclined to trust me, or (if I committed a crime) jail time.

 

[Lokabrenna]

What sort of bigger things do they worry about? And if they are worried about big things why would they bother with what a human wants or needs? What’s in it for them?

I’m told they worry most about maintaining cosmic order. As for why they do what they do, sometimes they pick particular humans to accomplish certain tasks for them. Maybe they just like us a whole lot. Who knows, the fact is that they have chosen to make themselves known to people.

Somehow I can’t see a goddess of fertility being supportive of abortion. It’s oxymoronic.

You certainly wouldn’t be alone in thinking that.

Why do you honor them? what have they done to deserve any honor? Is honor the same as worship? Because Catholics honor Mary but worship God. They are two different things.

Some Pagans use the term “honour” in place of “worship” because worship has negative implications, so it’s not used in the same way that Catholics use it. The root of the term is interesting, literally “to give worth to”. I personally don’t feel that you should honour/worship the gods simply because they are more powerful than you (although that is part of it) but because you see something in them that is worth something. I honour Freya for her independence, for the way she owns her own sexuality. I honour Njord because he is generous, because he was willing to sacrifice much to create peace between the gods. Every god has some quality, something in their character that is of value.

 

[PRmerger]

But why are these things wrong? The minotaur was the product of bestiality, and so were Apollo and Luna, at least their father took the form of a swan when they were conceived.

Zeus seduced Europa in the guise of a bull. The centaurs had a penchant for mortal women.

Zeus’s favorite was Ganymede, and he was under age. Except for some of the goddesses, all the gods seem to cheat on one another. Vulcan’s wife is Venus, and she cheated on him with Mars, which the other gods and goddesses found rather amusing.

I cant’ think of anywhere in mythology where the gods expressed the slightest concern about what the shepherds did with the sheep deep in the vales of arcady. They liked their songs, and that was that.

And if the gods don’t care about smashing babies against walls, or skewering them on spears in front of their mothers, it is difficult to imagine they care that much about pedophilia, as long as their altars are not defiled. Except for a few lucky heroes, who the gods set in the firmament, the rest of us go to hell anyway.

Pagans have to make a decision on which way to turn regarding morality. They either follow the old morality, which was based on custom, or they concede that modern paganism has no morality and let the chips fall where they may. It is fruitless for pagans to assert Christian morality - if people won’t accept it when one god commands, they won’t accept it if fifteen gods command, either.

These are quite insightful questions.

Loka? Ian?

Why would you presume to be pagan yet condemn bestiality, when your own deities are products of such things?

 

[PRmerger]

Sticking my schnoz back into this thread…

There are a bunch of assumptions about the nature of man, the divine and religion that would need addressing to get anywhere with this.

Let’s start with religion. Pagan religions aren’t ‘revealed’. The Gods or their heralds don’t generally descend and explain to mortals how to worship them, what offerings are proper, etc. Rather, Pagan religion is devised. Wise and inspired humans (called Rishis - Seers, in Hinduism, for example, and probably called ‘prophets’ in early biblical phases… i.e. “Saul is with the Prophets”…) discover the methods of communicating with the Gods, and aply them. Those that catch on with the people become tradition, and tradition defines the basics for future generations. At any time a new Seer or Wise One might appear, to offer new approaches, which may or may not become part of tradition. Each or any of these may produce ‘scripture’, or poetry or ritual text, and some of those writings may become hallowed by tradition.

This is possible because humans are understood to posses an indwelling spark of the divine. We are not different in kind from the Gods and Spirits, only in degree. Someone asked whether a human spirit could be greater than some gods. I’d say yes. There are some very small gods, and some very large heroes. In any case, our very human minds are reflections of the divine mind, and when we focus and clarify ourselves we can be inspired in many ways. Pagans don’t see this so much as hearing the voice of a god, as realizing truth by our own divine discernment.

Of course it can happen in the more common way, in which a god or spirit sends a dream or vision. That’s how a lot of temples and Shrines get built.

In Neopaganism, this process is just being restored. Our 50 or 60 years of invocation and seeking of the Gods is beginning to be answered in dreams, visions and inspirations. Very few of these have reached the level of tradition yet. When we get a few generations under us we’ll see more of that.

In any case, this is not self-worship. Rather it is an active reaching out to the divine other. In an animistic polytheism, the divine is never restricted to one place, person, condition or name. The divine inheres in me, and in you; in trees and stones and art and music and turds and the flow of stars across the sky. To know the divine in fullness we must be open to the divine wherever it presents itself, and seek it where we might not otherwise seek. That’s the mystic’s work, but many people just want enough religion to get by. We see no problem in that, and the simple business of making an offering to a god and getting a blessing in return is enough for a lot of Pagans. No one is required to seek mystical understanding in order to get some good of religion.

Now as to why the gods don’t ask for nasty stuff…
First, understand that the practice of making offerings is based on the setting of a feast for a noble guest. A ‘Sacrifice’ (latin for sacred work, but RCs should know that…) is a banquet arranged for a god - incense to sweeten the air, wine poured in libation, cakes burned or buried, and a nice lamb or goat roasted, butchered and either shared between the god and the folk or given whole to the god.

Smaller offerings are essentially a scale-down of that approach. You give what you would give a friend. The gods don’t so much demand or prescribe what’s given, rather they graciously appreciate the small welcome most folks can give, and respond with noble gifts in turn. Of course different friends like different things, and you don’t lay in reisling for your stout-drinking friend. That brings us back to inspiration, experiment and tradition, by which these customs arise.

For a spirit to ask a repugnant thing would be a strange deal. It isn’t their custom to ask us to ‘prove ourselves’ to them (except a few folks who may have some sort of ‘destiny’ or something), or to require us to jump through hoops for them. Especially in these early stages of our revival, the gods are pleased to be receiving offerings again.

On yet another level, remember that the divine is infinitely multiple in form, and no one person can be in religious relationship with all of those forms. The beings that come to be part of human religion are beings that like humans, and may even be like humans, including our ancestors, and spirits of the lands we live in). They are beings that respond when we make offerings of wine and bread. Beings who want offerings of turds (divine as they may be) can mostly look somewhere besides my house for worshippers.

Can I sum up…? It’s unusual to have a god ask for anything in particular. Rather, offerings are devised through inspiration, experiment and tradition. The goal is to please the deity with our gifts. Therefore, no turds.
Incidentally, that would be entirely different from asking a god or spirit to bless a turd for, say garden fertility…

Thank you for your informative summary, Ian.

It prompts so many questions!

Firstly I’d like to note that much of what you proffer lies in direct contrast with what Loka has maintained regarding paganism.

But perhaps, like the differences in Christianity between SDA and Baptists, each of you is only offering your own “denomination’s” views. I get that.

So my first question to you is: what is your view of the influence pagan lore has on your practice? That is, do you view it as “mostly entertainment” as Loka does, or does it have some other utility?

 

[Aelred_Minor]

Sticking my schnoz back into this thread…

There are a bunch of assumptions about the nature of man, the divine and religion that would need addressing to get anywhere with this.

Let’s start with religion. Pagan religions aren’t ‘revealed’. The Gods or their heralds don’t generally descend and explain to mortals how to worship them, what offerings are proper, etc. Rather, Pagan religion is devised. Wise and inspired humans (called Rishis - Seers, in Hinduism, for example, and probably called ‘prophets’ in early biblical phases… i.e. “Saul is with the Prophets”…) discover the methods of communicating with the Gods, and aply them. Those that catch on with the people become tradition, and tradition defines the basics for future generations. At any time a new Seer or Wise One might appear, to offer new approaches, which may or may not become part of tradition. Each or any of these may produce ‘scripture’, or poetry or ritual text, and some of those writings may become hallowed by tradition.

This is possible because humans are understood to posses an indwelling spark of the divine. We are not different in kind from the Gods and Spirits, only in degree. Someone asked whether a human spirit could be greater than some gods. I’d say yes. There are some very small gods, and some very large heroes. In any case, our very human minds are reflections of the divine mind, and when we focus and clarify ourselves we can be inspired in many ways. Pagans don’t see this so much as hearing the voice of a god, as realizing truth by our own divine discernment.

Of course it can happen in the more common way, in which a god or spirit sends a dream or vision. That’s how a lot of temples and Shrines get built.

In Neopaganism, this process is just being restored. Our 50 or 60 years of invocation and seeking of the Gods is beginning to be answered in dreams, visions and inspirations. Very few of these have reached the level of tradition yet. When we get a few generations under us we’ll see more of that.

In any case, this is not self-worship. Rather it is an active reaching out to the divine other. In an animistic polytheism, the divine is never restricted to one place, person, condition or name. The divine inheres in me, and in you; in trees and stones and art and music and turds and the flow of stars across the sky. To know the divine in fullness we must be open to the divine wherever it presents itself, and seek it where we might not otherwise seek. That’s the mystic’s work, but many people just want enough religion to get by. We see no problem in that, and the simple business of making an offering to a god and getting a blessing in return is enough for a lot of Pagans. No one is required to seek mystical understanding in order to get some good of religion.

Now as to why the gods don’t ask for nasty stuff…
First, understand that the practice of making offerings is based on the setting of a feast for a noble guest. A ‘Sacrifice’ (latin for sacred work, but RCs should know that…) is a banquet arranged for a god - incense to sweeten the air, wine poured in libation, cakes burned or buried, and a nice lamb or goat roasted, butchered and either shared between the god and the folk or given whole to the god.

Smaller offerings are essentially a scale-down of that approach. You give what you would give a friend. The gods don’t so much demand or prescribe what’s given, rather they graciously appreciate the small welcome most folks can give, and respond with noble gifts in turn. Of course different friends like different things, and you don’t lay in reisling for your stout-drinking friend. That brings us back to inspiration, experiment and tradition, by which these customs arise.

For a spirit to ask a repugnant thing would be a strange deal. It isn’t their custom to ask us to ‘prove ourselves’ to them (except a few folks who may have some sort of ‘destiny’ or something), or to require us to jump through hoops for them. Especially in these early stages of our revival, the gods are pleased to be receiving offerings again.

On yet another level, remember that the divine is infinitely multiple in form, and no one person can be in religious relationship with all of those forms. The beings that come to be part of human religion are beings that like humans, and may even be like humans, including our ancestors, and spirits of the lands we live in). They are beings that respond when we make offerings of wine and bread. Beings who want offerings of turds (divine as they may be) can mostly look somewhere besides my house for worshippers.

Can I sum up…? It’s unusual to have a god ask for anything in particular. Rather, offerings are devised through inspiration, experiment and tradition. The goal is to please the deity with our gifts. Therefore, no turds.
Incidentally, that would be entirely different from asking a god or spirit to bless a turd for, say garden fertility…

I’d like to ask you the same question I asked Lokabrenna. How would you differentiate Pagan religions from non-Pagan religions? You mentioned Paganism as being devised rather than revealed. Am I right in inferring that this is the key difference in your view? Also would you, as you seem to, include Hinduism as Pagan? What about Buddhism and Taoism?

 

[Lokabrenna]

Thank you for your informative summary, Ian.

It prompts so many questions!

Firstly I’d like to note that much of what you proffer lies in direct contrast with what Loka has maintained regarding paganism.

But perhaps, like the differences in Christianity between SDA and Baptists, each of you is only offering your own “denomination’s” views. I get that.

So my first question to you is: what is your view of the influence pagan lore has on your practice? That is, do you view it as “mostly entertainment” as Loka does, or does it have some other utility?

Part of that is that Ian has much more first-hand experience not only with the gods, but with other Pagans than I do. It could be a difference of religion, but offhand I don’t know of any faith where the deities have asked for excrement. My gods personally prefer alcoholic beverages and home-cooked meals, like any good friend or family member.

I should also clarify something about lore. I don’t think of the stories just as entertainment, although they did often have that purpose. Think about it: You’re stuck inside during winter and you don’t have the modern technology we use to amuse ourselves, so you listen to the local skald tell stories, but the stories also have another function: to teach, to teach the listeners about the gods they honour, to teach them about what their culture values. The lore isn’t either entertaining or a teaching tool, it’s both! (It’s also a good example of both/and thinking as opposed to either/or thinking.)

 

[IanCorrigan]

These are quite insightful questions.

Loka? Ian?

Why would you presume to be pagan yet condemn bestiality, when your own deities are products of such things?

Because the Gods don’t exist as moral examples. In my opinion, morality does not derive from divine mandate delivered from the gods. Morality is a social matter, based on custom and local ways. In most Pagan story, moralities are shaped by some famous king or philosopher of the past, and goven that weight of tradition I spoke about before.

The Gods are said to value certain sorts of things - the keeping of oaths, courage, love and strength as opposed to cowardice, spite and sneakery. Killing in a duel might be lauded - murder by stealth is crime.

Incidentally, I see ‘adultery’ as wrong because it involves oathbreaking. Of course some Pagan weddings don’t include an oath of exclusivity, so in that case extramarital sex is not illicit in itself.

RCs should know the term ‘mystery’. It is often defined as a symbol of tale which is not best understood through reason, but through faith or inspiration. The various wild and strange tales of the gods interactions with nature are of that sort, I think.

The gods are about as moral as a cliff-face or a sunny day, imo. Morality is for mortals, so that we can live together in peace.

Incidentally, was bestiality condemned by the ancients? Most sexual variances were vaguely sneered at, at most. For instance, even in societies where ‘homosexuality’ was frowned upon, they almost always meant those who played the passive role. The sticker-in wasn’t judged nearly as harshly.

It’s all cultural - there is very little unversal, spiritual moral truth, only the laws of societies.

 

[IanCorrigan]

I’d like to ask you the same question I asked Lokabrenna. How would you differentiate Pagan religions from non-Pagan religions? You mentioned Paganism as being devised rather than revealed. Am I right in inferring that this is the key difference in your view? Also would you, as you seem to, include Hinduism as Pagan? What about Buddhism and Taoism?

The broad definition of Paganism, one which can include all the self-defining groups out there, is still in flux at this stage. I recommend a book “Pagan Theology; Paganism as a World Religion” by Michael York for a long think on the matter.

I rather agree with him that a Pagan religion includes:

• Nature viewed as a primary revelation of the divine to mankind
• a polyvalent description of deity, including both ‘gods’ and other kinds of spiritual beings
• An acceptance that human nature is also holy, as is all nature

NonPagan religions:

• separate a creator from creation, making the latter a possession of the former.
• view a specific scripture as the primary revelation of the divine to mortals
• view human nature, and often material nature, as flawed and even unholy.

York takes time to parse the vast array of sects called ‘Hinduism’. Some come up pretty Pagan, some less so. Disputes arise over monistic and even atheistic sects, and over what constitutes a philosophical overlay on a Pagan tradition. Buddhism is exactly that in some places, but much more independent of it in others. Chinese Traditional Religion is surely Pagan, and Daoism is a philosophy grown inside a Pagan system, though it is less theistic than some. Practical, ritual Daoism is quite Pagan as are the various Daoist yogas, like Chi Gung.

To me, Pagan = polytheist, humanist and nature-centered.

 

[IanCorrigan]

Thank you for your informative summary, Ian.

…So my first question to you is: what is your view of the influence pagan lore has on your practice? That is, do you view it as “mostly entertainment” as Loka does, or does it have some other utility?

Let’s discard that ‘just entertainment’ thing. The tales were often used as entertainment, as in they were retold at firesides, reqorked by local bards and priests, varied widely from district to district. Nevertheless they were also part of worship, helped shape (and were shaped by) ritual and helped transmit traditions about the gods and spirits to the next generations.

I do my best to know the stories of my gods as they come down to me. I know that they are fragmentary and questionable. When possible I incorporate material from them into my practice. I don’t treat them as ‘scripture’ or view them as literally true or inerrant - and I don’t think the ancients did, either.

 

[Lokabrenna]

Incidentally, was bestiality condemned by the ancients? Most sexual variances were vaguely sneered at, at most. For instance, even in societies where ‘homosexuality’ was frowned upon, they almost always meant those who played the passive role. The sticker-in wasn’t judged nearly as harshly.

This is true in Viking age Scandinavia, at least, homosexuality had way more to do with power (and who had it) as opposed to the fact that two men were getting it on (although you were still expected to marry and have children).

I also mentioned Grettir, who slept with “maidens and widows, everyone’s wives, farmers’ sons, deans and courtiers, abbots and abbesses, cows and calves, indeed with near all living creatures,” (so basically anything that moved) and he was never punished for any of it, in fact, he’s lauded as a hero. More info here: vikinganswerlady.com/gayvik.shtml

I’m not sure about bestiality as a whole, but mythologically Loki was made fun of for giving birth to Odin’s horse as a mare, Odin was criticized for dressing as a woman and learning seidr, which was thought of as “women’s magic” and brother-sister relationships among the Vanir were banned by the Aesir, so yeah, even my gods make fun of other gods for certain sexual practices.

 

[mwok]

Yes, in fact there are Pagans who have to deal with mental illness. It’s not uncommon for a Pagan who first experiences contact with a god to question their own mental state. For all I know, since Pagans come from all walks of life, there are those who work to help people with mental health issues.

But I obviously can’t speak for everyone, and there are people out there who don’t believe in mental illness. Generally speaking, though, I would say that many would say there is such a thing, but leave the question of who is and is not mentally ill to the professionals.

So what you are saying is that there are professionals that can determine that one’s reality is not true?

 

[mwok]

What I meant was that I don’t think banning all abortions is the solution, as women are just going to go back to using coat hangers and back alleys. What I do support is educating people to make better choices (that includes comprehensive sex education, abstinence as well as proper use of contraceptives).

I’d love to live in a world where there were fewer children who were wanted and loved than many children who are neglected because their parents can’t (or won’t) care for them.

So should murder be legal in cases of rape, incest, pedophelia, beastiality? Should we be allowed to kill someone because their presence is inconvenient to us? I mean, it is illegal to kill and yet people still do it. What I am calling BS on is that other people deciding that a defenseless, innocent person should die because of situations that are less that preferable.

 

[Lokabrenna]

So what you are saying is that there are professionals that can determine that one’s reality is not true?

What I’m saying is the same sort of thing anyone on CAF says regarding those who ask for medical advice–there are professionals who can properly diagnose a mental illness. Why do you think the church has regulations regarding individuals supposedly suffering from demonic possession that say they should be evaluated psychologically before getting an exorcism? To rule out symptoms of mental illnesses that might be the cause of the problem.