December 2005 Archives

A couple weeks ago, I was looking through my old diary entries. I ran across an "unsent letter" I wrote to my ex, Zech. In it, I talked about my relationship with Mike. I decided I wanted to go back and comment on what I said there, considering how things with Mike finally ended up. Excerpts from the original letter are in italics, while my new thoughts will be in normal text.

I'm dating a wonderful guy now. His name is Mike.

Ah yes. These were "the good old days" when I actually thought Mike was a catch. (Actually, I wrote the original letter almost a full year before I broke up with Mike.) My opinion has changed since then. Funny thing is, I probably am having more fond thoughts of Zech right now than of Mike. That's a scary thought, in some ways. Mike and I had our issues, but the "relationship" with Zech was just one huge mess. So you'd almost think that I'd have less fondness for Zech.

I suppose the fact that it's been over seven years since Zech and I broke up, time has healed those wounds. Compare that to the fact that it's only been six months since I told Mike I didn't want him in my life any more, and I suppose that's understandable. But I think there's more to it than that. Zech and I had real issues back then, both individually and as a couple. And in Zech's case, I can cut him some slack due to the fact that he was a lot younger -- not even twenty yet. In comparison, Mike's turning thirty in January. Being that old and still thinking it's perfectly reasonable to tell someone, "You mean the world to me, but I'm not going to do anything to meet your emotional needs because it'll require me to accept some personal discomfort" is unthinkable. So in that sense, I think he deserves my contempt.

But I'm slowly learning something. There's a huge difference between you and Mike.

Unfortunately, I'm also learning there were a lot of similarities between them, too. It's ironic that I spent so much time teaching myself to not react to Mike out of my issues with Zech, only to find out there really were some things they had in common. Don't get me wrong. I'm glad I went through that process anyway. I did need to learn that not everyone was exactly like Zech.

But in the end, both of my exes were wrapped up in their own little worlds. They were too busy trying to keep their worlds so perfectly balanced, that they were willing to sacrifice my needs and feelings if it came to it. Perhaps Mike wasn't as dastardly about it, but does that make it any better? And besides, he also should've known better.

In retrospect, I think I've decided to re-make my rule against not dating guys who are still "in the closet" -- at least to their family. I made that rule after Zech and broke it when dating Mike. When Mike and I started going together, I told him about my reservations. But I went ahead on the grounds that he was otherwise wonderful and he promised me that he'd make sure that the fact that his friends and family didn't know about his sexual orientation wouldn't get in the way. He broke that promise. And I'm now convinced that when push comes to shove, most guys in the closet will break that promise. So if they're not ready to be honest with their family, they deserve a pass in the realm of relationships. They're just not ready.

It's been a while since I started my book book review of Wicca's Charm: Understanding the Spiritual Hunger Behind the Rise of Modern Witchcraft and Pagan Spirituality by Catherine Edwards Sanders. As such, I decided to take the time to read through and review chapter two of the book, which the author gave the title, "Tired of Sitting in Pews." In this chapter, Sanders attempts to look at the reasons that so many people are looking to find spirituality in Paganism rather than seeking it through Christianity. The four reasons that she compiles are as follows:

1. Concern for the earth
2. Empowerment for women
3. Frustration with consumer culture
4. The draw of the supernatural

What interests me here is that Sanders does not try to dismiss these reasons. In fact, she shows a certain amount of sensitivity towards these sentiments. She even goes so far as to admit that many Christians and churches do seem to ignore these matters, and can even be antagonistic towards them.

Once acknowledging these differences, she speaks of the complaint of hypocricy within "the Church" that many Pagans complain about. Again, she does not shy away from this and does not deny that these things happen. However, she does rightfully point out that not all Christians play the part of the hypocrite. She also rightfully points out that there are some less-than-perfect people within Paganism.

As she discusses the tensions between Christians and Pagans alike, as well as the preconceived notions each side has about the other, Sanders makes what is both one of the simplest and one of the most important observations about the whole affair:

Sadly, many Christians don't take the time to get to know people like Ginny [one of the witches the author interviewed for this chapter]; instead, they judge her from afar. And, like Ginny, many Pagans judge Christians from afar. This only alienates neo-Pagans from Christians. It would be better if Christians defied the stereotypes by getting to know neo-Pagans, as the apostle Paul did.

I would add to Sanders's thoughts that it would also be helpful if more Pagans took the time to temporarily "forget" the stereotypes when meeting a Christian for the first time and got to know that individual as a real person. Until we're willing to stop filtering every experience through the stereotypes and our past experiences, no sincere attempt by Christians to get to know us better is likely to be all that successful.

One of the specific incidents that Sanders mentions where Christians have generated some "bad blood" involves an incident that happened three and a half years ago. (Incidentally, this is another area where Sanders demonstrates a need to be a bit more exacting in her research. The incident that she is describing did not occur at Midsummer, but during a ritual honoring the Spring equinox.) A small group of overly-zealous Christians attempted to interrupt a rite being performed outside a Craft store in Lancaster California and generally harassed those in attendance. This is one of those cases where Sanders certainly shows her willingness to look critically at some of the things adherents of her own faith have done.

Overall, I felt this chapter was a bit short and more than a little superficial. The author certainy did not cover the widh and breadth of reasons why people might leave Christianity, or what theological issues individual Pagans might have with Christianity. For example, she did not consider the fact that many Pagans question the need for "salvation," or the fact that many find Christianity's all too common focus on the afterlife to be rather life-negating in nature. It's not clear to me whether Sanders just picked the "top four" reasons she ran across and chose to focus on them, or whether she really believes those four reasons actually "cover all the bases."