September 2007 Archives

Yesterday, I posted a link to a syncrhoblogging event focused on dialogue between Paganism and Christianity. Today, I wanted to highlight one of my favorite posts among the excellent collection. I've chosen to highlight Paul Walker's contribution on the grounds that in my book, the man deserves a medal for bravery (and quite possibly a second one for his steallar integrity).

Paul admits at the outset of his post that as he discovered what the topic for this month's synchroblog (the first he planned to participate in, no less) was something he knew nothing about. However, he chose to press on anyway, which in itself takes guts. Talking about a topic you know nothing or very little about can be a frightening thought, as it opens yourself up to the possibility that a large group of people will happily point out just how little you know about the subject (and not always nicely, no less).

What impresses me more than that, however, is how Paul chose to alleviate his lack of knowledge in order to write his post. He didn't choose to simply move on based on what he thinks Paganism might be. Nor did he choose to ask fellow Christians about Paganism. Instead, Paul chose a much more direct approach. Consider his own account:

Here's what I decided to do : since I know pretty well nothing about paganism, I decided to try and find out more. I searched around to find one of the larger pagan forums on the Net, created a user account, announced to the members that I was writing a piece for my blog on Christian-Pagan dialogue, asked if anyone there would help me out, and sat back to wait for the fur to fly....

He found a group of Pagans and asked them questions. In my book, that shows a great deal of integrity. He didn't want second-hand knowledge, but direct communication. Information from the horse's mouth, if you will.

It also took courage, because based on Paul's own statement, he expected there to be something of a negative reaction to his inquiries. Now, I will admit forthrightly that I don't blame Paul for that expectation because when I got to this point in his narrative, I became worried about what kind of response he might report getting.

Truth be told, we Pagans sometimes have a tendency to respond to inquiries from Christians with a certain amount of hostility. (I know I've been guilty of it to some degree at various times.) And while I can certainly point out that this is because many Christians tend to make their inquiries disrespectfully or often are only making them to start an argument in order to prove us wrong, I think that only explains our tendency for a negative response. It does not excuse it, however.

Of course, even when Pagan's don't respond with hostility, we can sometimes be rather condescending and even arrogant in our attempts to "educate" the inquirer. Too often, we tend to like to think of ourselves as more learned or "spiritually advanced," and it comes through in our dealings with people who honestly want to understand us better.

Unfortunately, this can have an unfortunate effect, as such condescension is far too often counter-productive to our stated goals of fostering mutual understanding. Such an attitude more often creates a further rift and resentment between the two groups. After all, who wants to enter into dialogue with someone who doesn't treat you with the respect deserved by a fellow equal?

While I admire Paul's courage, I do have to admit that his post and concerns about what kind of reception he might receive continues to give me pause. Based on some of my own past experiences with exchanges between Pagans and Christians, I do find myself wondering how well prepared Pagans as a whole are for sincere dialogue. In the past, Pagans have accused many Christians (and in some cases, rightfully) of not being open to sincere dialouge. But I have seen cases where some Pagans (myself included, in some instances) use that fact to hide our own lack of willingness to converse civilly. I hope that Paul's very positive experience is a sign that we're more open to such dialogue now than some of my own past experiences might suggest.

Today, there's a synchroblog event going on in which a number of bloggers are discussing Paganism and Christianity. So far, I've read a couple of the posts from the event and find the whole thing wonderful. For anyone who might be interested, I suggest you get the list of participants from Pastor Phil Wyman's blog and check out what people are saying.

Saturday morning, I got up around eight in the morning and spent some time watching cartoons and relaxing until Belinda called at around 8:30. She and I were scheduled to work at Psychic's Thyme together that day, so she suggested we meet for breakfast before the shop opened. So I got my shower and did everything else I needed to before heading to Perkins, where we agreed to meet. Belinda got there about ten to fifteen minutes after me. We were quickly seated and our omelettes over light conversation.

Once breakfast was done, we ran over to Staples to get some audiocassettes, then headed on up to the shop. Our timing was perfect, because Char was just getting stuff out of the trunk of her car when we pulled in the parking lot.

Saturday was the first time that I worked at the shop as a reader -- or at least when I actually got readings. (Earlier this month, I worked a Saturday with Michele and was marked as available for readings, but I didn't get any.) I ended up doing three readings all day. They went pretty well, and I certainly feel better about the idea now that I've done it once.

I've been doing readings off and on for a few years, but this was the first time I've ever done them professionally. I've mostly done them for friends or random people with no money involved. It's a lot less stressful that way. Especially considering my general lack of confidence (which yesterday helped alleviate immensely). You see, I normally worry that I won't be able to read someone, that nothing will come. Now, if I'm doing the reading for free, the way I see it, that's fine. I'll just shrug and point out to the person that you get what you pay for. But when they're handing over money, there's an expectation, so the idea of not picking up anything becomes much more frightening.

I talked about it with Belinda at breakfast, and she pointed out that she's always nervous about that, too. But she pointed out it's okay. And she pointed out that in those instances (though she assures me they're fairly rare) that you can't read someone, you simply tell them as much and don't charge them. (Also, if there's someone else around that might be able to read them, you pass them off.) Fortunately, it didn't prove to be a problem Saturday, anyway. And as I said, it built confidence. And Belinda and I are hoping to work together like that again, soon. It was a fun day all around.

After the shop closed, Belinda and I headed to Red Robin for dinner. I haven't been there in a couple of months, and the hostess who seated us harassed me about that a bit. Belinda thought it was funny that she recognized me so quickly, actually.

A couple days ago, a friend decided to express his views on the Kathy Griffin "Suck it, Jesus" comment at the Emmy's. I thought I'd share it with you because while not exactly praising Ms. Griffin, James actually applauds her comment as one of the most honest he's heard. He goes on to express why he finds other celebrities (namely the one's Ms. Griffin referred to before telling Jesus to "suck it") worthy of his criticism:

Why does it not offend us when celebrity after celebrity thanks Jesus, yet their lives and films show very little (if any) of actually following him? And do we really think that the Emmy Board is spending time in prayer and fasting to determine who Jesus thinks is the best actress in a comedy series? Doesn't thanking Jesus for an award imply that Jesus prefers Ricky Gervais over Charlie Sheen?

One of the things I've always appreciated about James was his ability and willingness to portray a topic in a rather unique perspective. Of course, there are days that I think it's nothing short of a miracle that he hasn't attracted any hate notes yet.

InterstateQ blogger Matt has a post advertising the Can you be gay and Christian forum hosted by Michael Brown and the Coalition of Conscience. I'm looking forward to reading Matt's thoughts on the forum, as he went to it. In the meantime, I'd like to draw attention to the conversation between Dr. Brown and myself in the comments regarding slippery slope arguments. I'd also like to expand on my thoughts further.

I have a big issue with the use of slippery slope arguments to justify discrimination of any sort. (Actually, I have a big issue with the use of slippery slope arguments to justify just about anything.) As I mentioned in the comments, I find myself wondering how one ultimately draws the line in determining whether a slippery slope is legitimate in a particular situation. Again, can my own argument about the correlation between a belief in absolute truth and a tendency to persecute those who don't subscribe to that truth be used to outlaw the belief in absolute truth? After all, by closing the door to a belief in absolute truth, we keep the door to persecution based on that belief closed as well. Similarly, can we shut the door to all automobile future crashes by outlawing the use of automobiles? After all, if one supports Dr. Brown's slippery slope argument, what unique argument can they provide against supporting either of my slippery slope argument? Indeed, the fact that the slippery slope argument can be used against itself is possibly one of the best reasons to discount it.

But let me suggest a hypothesis here. The fact that someone would even bring up a slippery slope argument may well suggest that the reason to argue against something is poor indeed. After all, a slippery slope argument relies on what might happen (often suggesting it's too inevitable to chance) rather than considering the original proposition on its own faults and merits. It's a red flag that tells those listening, "We can't come up with a better reason why we oppose this, so we're going to rely on everyone's fear of something else that may come up as a result to make our case." And one must wonder, if no case against the original proposition can be made on said propositions own faults, should any case be made at all?

And does reacting to something based solely -- or even primarily -- on a fear of what may be make any sense? To put an even finer point, is such a rationale appropriate for adherents of a religion that has a rather negative opinion of fear? Indeed, one must wonder why Christians who have been given a spirit of love and power as well as a sound mind would be so strongly motivated by the fear of what may be? And one wonders why Christian leaders would encourage such motivation through slippery slope arguments.

When considering your bridal registries do not register with Kohl's. If you do choose to register with them, please make sure you register with other stores as well. Failure to do so is liable to annoy your guests who prefer to do their gift shopping online for convenience.

Here's the deal. My cousin, Melissa is getting married on October 6. Back in mid-July, I got the information on where she and her husband-to-be are registered. I noted that one of the stores she was registered at was Kohls, so I decided to browse their registry and buy them something from it. I picked out a lovely blanket and placed the order at the same time I ordered the wedding gift for James and Michelle. (They also had a Kohl's registery, but chose to shop from their registry at Bed Bath and Beyond instead, thankfully.) I then patted myself on the back for getting all of my gift shopping done so early and proceeded to forget about the whole thing.

Well, today, I got an email from Kohls, politely informing me that my order had been cancelled. Over a month after I had placed the order. So I went from being prepared well ahead of schedule to needing to find a new gift. It was upsetting, but not a major catastrophe. After all, October 6 is still just three weeks or so away. So I went back to Kohl's website (after all, it's the only registry I'm aware of, other than their registry at Macy's, an overpriced store I'd like to avoid doing business with if at all possible) and took another look at their registry. I scroll through the various items left and pick out a nice cuisinart they have listed. I add it to my new order and go to check out, only to be informed that the cuisinart isn't available! (Then why is it still on people's gift registries?!?!?!)

So now, I'm severely pissed and cursing the name of Kohls. It's quite obvious to me that I will not be buying Melissa and her man a gift from this department store (nor will I be giving them any future business), but will instead have to find out from my mother where else they've registered (praying that Macy's isn't my only ohter option) and go through this whole process again.

I keep telling myself that at least I still have three weeks to order and receive a new gift. But damn it, you do not wait over a month before you tell a customer you can't fulfill their order when you know it's a bridal gift. Kohls should be run out of business for such incompetence.

While going through my computer, I found a file in which I wrote about my old dog, Trixie. According to the comptuer, I originally created the file back on 27 December 2005. I don't remember why I wrote it, but I decided I liked it well enough to publish it here.

I can't remember exactly how old I was when my sister and I used to play with Trixie at my grandparents' trailer. All I know for sure is that it was back when my paternal grandmother was alive, back when Trixie was still her dog rather than ours. I had to be either in preschool or the first couple years of elementary school. My family would go to visit her and my grandfather every week. Each visit would require that one of the adults take my sister and me down to the pen where they kept Trixie.

She was an adorably plain dog. To this day, I don't think I could even begin to guess at the breeds that made up her muttly heritage. She was about the size of a Pomeranian, with brown and white fur and a curly tail. Her lower jaw stuck out just enough so that her four front-most lower teeth were visible when she closed her mouth. Under other circumstances, this would have made her look constantly ferocious. But to me, it just made her all that more adorable.

Being small children, we loved to play with Trixie. Often, we would pester my grandfather (often, with the help of our grandmother, who loved nothing more than to see her grandchildren having fun) to let us let the dog loose. Then she would run around with us and we'd have a great time.

On some occasions, we'd even convince the adults (again, usually with Grandma helping us to persuade the others) to let us bring Trixie into the trailer with us for a half hour or so. On these occasions, we got to play our favorite game. My sister and I would lie on our stomachs and bury our faces in our arms. Trixie would run around us excitedly, trying to get at our faces and lick us. We'd laugh and giggle.

Every now and then, Trixie would start to wander off. My sister or I would immediately raise our heads up and call to her with a little chant. "Trixie, Trixie, try and kiss me." At hearing this, the dog would become excited again and the game would start all over, making both my sister and I squeal with laughter. Grandma would watch all of this with a smile on her face. Grandpa wasn't always as impressed, but she managed to keep him from getting too upset.

Eventually, Grandma succumbed to the cancer that had been trying to claim her life ever since I knew her. Just before she went into the hospital the final time, she asked my sister and me to take care of Trixie for her. That's how that adorable little dog with the constantly bared teeth eventually came to be my dog. We had her until my second year in college. And while I never plaid the "try and kiss me" game with her after Grandma died, I loved her that entire time. Some days, I still miss her.

This past Saturday, I went to Fingerlakes Pagan Pride Day. As I was feeling lazy and wanted to do other things, I didn't arrive until a little before 2pm. Once there, I immediately found Wendy and determined which Quarter I'd call during the closing ritual. Since they left it up to me, I chose to call Air. After all, both my sun sign and rising sign are air signs, and that's how many groups assign quarters anyway. Of course, I realized after the fact (and after the other Quarters had been assigned, so it was too late to change my mind) that this meant I'd be the first one to call a Quarter during the ritual. As a rule, I don't mind going first, but I'd never participated in a ritual organized by Wendy's coven before. In such a case, I'd normally choose a Quarter to allow me to observe someone else call their Quarter first just to work out some of the details of how a given coven does things through observation. Fortunately, I did get a chance to ask someone about those details (e.g. "Do you normall call Quarters facing the Quarter or facing the altar?") beforehand.

Pride itself was rather enjoyable. I can't comment on a lot of details, as I didn't participate in a lot. None of the workshops planned really tripped my trigger, so I spent most of my time just socializing. After all, as I said in a previous post, I find such events most valuable for networking anyway. And it gave me a chance to catch up with a few people I haven't seen in a couple months or so.

I will say that one thing I like about this particular Pagan Pride is that because of how new it is, it's still relatively small. It tends to give it a much more intimate atmosphere, and you feel like you can meet and get to know just about everyone. That may change in a few years, as I noticed a considerable increase in turnout compared to last year. Hopefully, those in charge can find a way to maintain the same style of atmosphere as it grows each year.

One particular moment from the festival I'd like to point out occurred during the closing ritual. Just after Wendy and Kiree served cakes and wine (well, cookies and water), a young man who identified himself as Zach asked if he could say something. After he received permission (not to mention heavy encouragement), he commented that there had been a time when he was afraid to identify as Pagan and speak up about his beliefs. He went on to comment that coming to Pride that day gave him the chance to meet kind-hearted and like-minded people, which both comforted him and gave him courage. His comments were deeply heart-felt and moving, and I think it once again reminded everyone in attendance just why we participate in such events.

Last night, I went to the weekly Pagan Meet and Greet over at Jitter's Cafe. By the time I arrived there, Belinda and Karen were already there. So I got my drink and ordered a wrap for dinner before taking my seat with them. I don't recall much about what we talked about while there. That's probably because I was too busy daydreaming and watching the rather good looking kid who was playing pool at the time.

Eventually two people, who I will call V and P since I'd rather not use their names without their permission, stopped in at eight. V and P are husband and wife, and Belinda and I had met them while at the naturist festival. We originally met them when they came to the Thursday night seance and kept bumping into them for the remainder of the festival. When we found out V and P were also from the Rochester Area, we told them about the meet and greets, because they seemed really interested in getting to know more about us and learning what we believed and practiced.

This means that V and P love to ask lots of questions, and the three of us (Belinda probably carried the conversation while Karen and I each chimed in when appropriate) spent at least an hour happily answering each query. We covered topics ranging from the meaning(s) of the pentagram to psychism and psychic development to totem animals, and everything in between. V also asked about the local Spiritualist church and how they compared to us. We gave the best answer we could give, having never been to the local Spiritualist church. When V asked if I'd recommend them, I told him that I wouldn't make a recommendation for against something I have no personal knowledge of. However, I also pointed out to him that in general, I'm inclined that just about any experience is a positive experience, even if that experience leads someone to say, "This really isn't for me."

I found out later that our conversation had apparently upset another customer at the coffee shop. According to Belinda (I was too engrossed in conversation at the time to notice), a man sitting about twenty feet from us got fed up during the part of the conversation when we were discussing Wicca, witchcraft, and the pentagram. In fact, we apparently offended his sensibilities so much that he eventually stood up, walked back out to the front room of the coffee shop, and glared at us as he passed our table on the way. When Belinda told me about this, I just smiled in amusement and made a rather unapologetic comment.

About a half hour after V and P left, our original trio decided it was time to leave as well. After all, the coffee shop was closing in five minutes, and we try to make sure the owner doesn't have to kick us out. As is our usual custom, the three of us stood by our cars gabbing for a while longer. As the coffee shop closed, a car drove buy us and the driver glared at the three of us. I glanced at Belinda and she confirmed (at least as well as she could be certain) that it was the same gentleman who stormed by us earlier in the evening due to our conversation.

At this point, I was amused beyond maturity and admit (though unrepentantly) to making a rather juvenile comment at this point. The idea that our conversation upset him so much that he was still stewing over it after walking away almost an hour previously simply astounded me. I cannot imagine letting someone else's actions have that much control over my moods -- especially for such a prolonged time.

I am assuming -- and maybe incorrectly, though I doubt it -- that this man was a fundamentalist Christian. I can't think of any other group of people who would be so offended by our conversation, to be frank. And this experience just reminds me how completely worked up some fundamentalist Christians get over such topics. I just don't get it.

He was not a part of our conversation. We did not direct our conversation towards him. And while I admit that it would've been rather difficult for someone in the back room of the coffee shop to overhear at least parts of our conversation (we're a lively bunch, after all), I'd argue that's merely the nature of such venues. It's still no big deal. And if you don't like what you overhear, you try your best to ignore it or move where you're less likely to overhear without acting all uppity about it.

I'd certainly understand his reaction a bit better if we had been discussing Christianity negatively. But we weren't. In fact, we barely discussed Christianity at all. The only time the topic came up at all was (1) when V mentioned his upbringing in the Catholic church briefly and (2) when I commented that Spiritualists often tend to get into some of the same practices some Pagans do (e.g. mediumship, healing work, trance channeling) but tend to do so from a more Christian frame of reference.

Now, to the man's credit, I'll admit his reaction could've been much worse. He could've become confrontational and openly hostile towards us. Or he could've made a complaint to the owner of the coffee shop (though I doubt it would've done him much good, as said owner seems to have an affinity for our merry band of gabbers). Instead, he chose to just keep his anger to himself. But even that seemed to be a bit of an overreaction.

But I guess what really gets me is when I ask myself who this man's reaction will ultimately affect. If he gets angry so easily over such things -- and he's bound to come into contact with such conversations more than this one time -- it's not the people he's mad at who will eventually develop ulcers and other problems.

This past Saturday, I went to the wedding of my friend, James, to his seminary sweetheart, Michelle. It was an absolutely gorgeous wedding ceremony, though a bit longer than most I've been to. This was primarily because whereas most weddings I've attended have strictly focused on the process of marrying a couple (vows, rings, etc.), there was a much broader element of worship involved this time. It was all quite beautiful.

One of the most interesting aspects (to me, at least) was the fact that the newlyweds administered Communion to everyone. James had mentioned to me that they planned to do it, as both he and Michelle had wanted their first act as a couple to be one of service to others. It was a beautiful thing.

Another interesting twist they put into the service was the dismissal process. Rather than having everyone pass through a receiving line, James and Michelle chose to re-enter the church and individually dismiss their guests themselves. It was a wonderful touch and made the whole process seem more personal.