Category Archives: Religion

Books, Religion

Divine Nobodies: Great Title, Greater Paradox

1 Comment

As I mentioned in my last entry, I picked up a copy of Jim Palmer’s Divine Nobodies and began reading it this weekend. I finished the book yesterday while at my aunt’s home for the extended family Thanksgiving. Let me just say right up front that it is a great book, and I highly recommend it.

The title of the book is the perfect label for the series of chapters about “ordinary” people that Jim has met throughout his life and learned important lessons from in regards to his faith. Indeed, he relays each of these experiences to underscore his own growing belief that God most often brings spiritual growth and understanding not through “big name preachers” (or even preachers at all), but average Joes that we meet all through our lives. In effect, these people — often seen as “nobodies” in the greater religious movements of Christendom — truly offer a direct experience of and encounter with the Divine.

What I personally find interesting in addition to the individual stories (which are all touching and moving), there seems to be a handful of underlying themes that run through many of the chapters. One such example is the fact that Jim constantly finds his tendency to try and “do enough” and “be good enough” to justify his existence and God’s love for him challenged. (This is a theme I can particularly identify with, as that’s a tendency I’ve also struggled with at times.) Many of his experiences he describes offers another chance to revisit this particular struggle in his life and experience further healing from it.

Another common theme in many of the chapters is Jim faced with his own prejudiced opinions about others and the problems they cause. Whether it’s his opinions of Catholicism and closely related denominations being challenged by Father Jeff, his opinions of liberals being blown apart while he peruses the bookshelves at the home of his daughter’s swim instructor, or his understanding of hip hop being shattered by Doug, the author finds himself having to rethink his hard-line assumptions when faced with real people who should fit those stereotypes, but don’t. Indeed, these many experiences strongly show Jim’s own discovery of a more relational approach to faith and those around him.

In many ways, I saw much of my own perspective in Jim’s outlook on life and the world in general, and even found much theological common ground in the rare instances where he delved (however lightly) into theology. Of course, reading his thoughts gives me a few suspicions about the kind of reception his ideas might find in the greater Christian (particularly evangelical and fundamentalist) community. Indeed, I find myself wondering if a witch writing a glowing review of his book might merely give his biggest critics more “ammo.” But I’m hoping Jim would appreciate my words anyway.

Overall, Divine Nobodies was well worth my time. In fact, I hope to follow up by obtaining and reading a copy of Wide Open Spaces in the near future.

Religion

Paid Clergy: Not Just a Pagan Debate

9 Comments

I used to think that the argument about whether to have paid clergy was a uniquely Pagan thing. So imagine my surprise when Pastor Phil brought it up in the context of the Christian Church on his synchroblog post from yesterday. Then I found a post by Adam Gonnerman detailing some of his own thoughts on paid clergy. (He’s for it, but with certain qualifications). It’s a fascinating read and I highly recommend giving it careful consideration.

Beyond my own surprise at this discovery, I think that it’s important. Christians have had paid clergy for a long time now, and if they’re re-evaluating their own take on the matter, I think that we as Pagans would do well to pay attention and consider what they have to say. Even if Pagans, in part or as a whole, do decide to continue the quest for developing paid clergy, we can at least benefit from hearing the lessons people like Adam and Phil have learned through their own experiences and those of their predecessors. In effect, perhaps we can avoid a few mistakes by being attentive listeners.

Personally, I still have mixed feelings on the idea of Pagan getting paid (and especially full time) clergy. And I think I’m still against it in some ways (at least for my tradition, which I strongly feel calls for each member to be their own priest, which would make paid full-time clergy unnecessary and wasteful), but I don’t feel as strongly about it as I once did.

Paganism, Religion, Spiritual Development, Witchcraft

Leaping into Darkness?

Leave a comment

I’ve been thinking about writing a spiritually-themed post for the past couple of weeks. However, until tonight, I haven’t gotten around to it. In part, this is due to laziness on my part. I simply haven’t taken the time to sit down and try to put my thoughts in order.

Of course, it’s also in part because we have entered the dark half of the year, and the part of the Wheel where silence tends to reign. So my thoughts have turned inward, and I find myself wanting to spend most of my time mulling about spiritual matters — especially how they apply to my life — rather than blathering on about them.

And then there’s the fact that my musings and experiences have taken me into realms that I’m simply not sure I want to talk about quite yet. In many ways, I’m still adjusting to recent events and new things in my life and I’m not ready to be broadcasting some of it. So in many ways, I expect this post will be short and somewhat vague.

It is clear that I have started a new leg of my spiritual journey, and one that will be guided and influenced quite heavily by my lady and patroness, Freyja. This is not surprising, as anyone who knows me well likely has a good sense of how dear and important she is to me. So it’s probably not too surprising that she has chosen to strengthen and deepen our relationship.

Of course, this has not been a sudden thing. Indeed, the first conscious indication that new things were coming occurred during the Friday night seance at the naturist festival I went to back in August. During that seance, Freyja began to prepare me energetically. I spent the entire evening feeling like my head was buzzing. (She even made her presence known to Belinda in order to confirm for me what was going on.)

Since that time, things have continued to progress between her and I, and it’s been an exhilarating if nerve-wracking experience. I’m not entirely sure where everything is going, though I’m becoming more comfortable with the overall experience.

I do know that it means that I’m going to end up taking a more visible and active role in the world around me. I have work to do, and I have work to do in order to get ready for it.

Online Life, Paganism, Religion, Society

Another great synchroblog

1 Comment

Last month, I posted a bit about a synchroblog wherein a number of Christian bloggers talked about Christianity and Paganism and discussions between members of both faith groups. This month, the same group is having another synchroblog, with the topic being about Halloween this time. So far, I’ve read a handful of posts from the event and enjoyed them thoroughly. The link above is to Sonja’s post, where anyone interested can find links to the rest of the participants’ blogs.

I’m not going to say much about the synchroblog yet, as I’m still reading. I expect to have many thoughts to share by the time I’m done. I will briefly note that Sonja’s daughter cracked me up with her “emergency vampire protection” though.

Paganism, Religion

Thoughts on a Synchroblog post

4 Comments

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.

Religion, Society

A Kathy Griffin post worthy of some link love

1 Comment

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.

Gender and Sexuality, Religion, Society

The Most Slippery Slope?

2 Comments

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.

Paganism, Religion, Society

Uptight people amuse me some days

Leave a comment

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.

Religion, Society

Thoughts on Justice

Leave a comment

Recently, I joined Circle and Cross Talk, an email discussion list dedicated to dialogue between Christians and Pagans. The other day, one of the list members posted an article, The Just World Theory. I posted my own thoughts to the list and thought it appropriate to post them to my blog as well.

Hello all.

After giving some thought to the topic (as well as what I want to say about it), I’ve decided to weigh in on the “Just World” hypothesis. Unfortunately, I’m at work and thus have access to neither the article nor the excellent thoughts everyone else has already shared. So please forgive me if my thoughts are rambling and don’t stay quite on target. Of course, in fairness, my thoughts would probably stray even if I *did* have access to the discussion so far. 😉

I honestly can’t say that I’m surprised by the article’s suggestion that most people operate under the philosophy that we live in a “just world,” and that therefore we are inclined to think that people have somehow brought their fate upon themselves. And to some degree, I don’t think that this is an entirely bad thing. While I cringe in horror and disgust at the suggestion that a rape or murder victim did something to deserve such brutal treatment, I also cannot deny that some people find themselves in situations of their own making due to the choices they have made. For example, the person who gives into our society’s consumer mentality and consistently spends money in excess of their income will need to recognize the part they played in creating their situation when they eventually find themselves crushed under insurmountable debt. Until they do so, and correct their spending habits sufficiently, they will continue to find themselves in that situation. (Indeed, many people who do not learn this lesson before making use of consolidation loans and other tools for making one’s debt more manageable simply spend their way back into a worse situation than the one they were trying to escape.) After all, there are those situations in which the concept of personal responsibility does apply.

However, there is a huge difference between such a scenario and a situation where someone is victimized by another person (or a case where someone who finds themselves in debt due to the high costs associated with an unexpected medical emergency, to offer my own counter-example) is unthinkable. A victim has been clearly wronged by someone acting in a reprehensible manner. There are no factors that nullify that or even mitigate that fact. And to suggest that a victim “had it coming” for any reason is unthinkable and, in my opinion less, morrally reprehensible. In short, comparing the two scenarios is like comparing apples and bicycle tires.

What bothers me even more deeply about the whole concept of the “just world” hypothesis, though, is the implications of how we as a society understand justice. It suggests a paradigm in which justice is nothing more than the process of punishing wrongs and rewarding right behavior. To my mind, this understanding of justice is incomplete, poorly devised, and practically useless.

To me, justice is about maintaining and restoring the right order in all situations. To again draw back to the example of someone being raped, punishing the rapist alone is not justice. A victim has been traumatized and seriously wronged, and true justice must address that and rectify these wrongs as much as possible. This means helping the victim to heal from this ordeal, physically, emotionally, and spiritually. It means helping the victim to put their life back in order as best as anyone can accomplish. In this sense, I sometimes think that the civil law system offers more true justice than the criminal justice system in the fact that it enables victims (and their families) of violent criminals to sue those who wronged them, as they can then use that money for expenses that reasult as a part of the healing process.

To go back to my own example, justice is not served if we simply determine that someone is in debt due to their own poor financial choices, either. Even if said person is in that situation due to his own choices, he doesn’t deserve to be left there. In that instance, justice is served by not only helping him get out of debt, but gently pointing out his own part in getting there and showing him how to make better choices in the future so that he can avoid returning to the same situation down the road.

I’m convinced that the belief that the world is a just world is a false one, no matter how appealing the idea is to all of us. But I think that part of the reason it’s false is that the underlying premise of what justice actually entails is flawed. True justice requires action, and we are the actors.

My apologies for being so long-winded.

Regards,
— Jarred.