Hearth & Horn

Vagueblogging because I'm Cranky and I don't want to bring the vibe down in another space but

crikey i am so disenchanted with historical literalism as an approach to Paganism. I'm just done with it; my pendulum will likely swing back around, eventually, but this year is a year for making shit up then taking it seriously.

I wouldn't ever have an expectation that Christians go about saying "I believe Jesus is the son of God, even though I know that's totally fake because Gods aren't factually real and there's no evidence that the miracles as recorded in the Bible actually happened in history". Part of tolerating a multi-faith is allowing people a little space to speak and practice. It's a problem when 'Biblical history' is taught in schools; but I wouldn't mind it if I went to a church. I'd expect to be told that Jesus lived, and was God's son.

There's a very real disrespect towards the idea of religious pluralism in here, about how Pagans should just suck it up and acknowledge - over and over and over - that their religion is really a kind of fancy hobby rooted in the placebo effect, and therefore they should stick to reading textbooks and doing what they say, or shifting their life and faith when the winds of politics change, or falling in line with a world faith and approaching it Correctly, or stop doing it at all. Especially the last one: to stop doing anything, except amateur academia. & the expectation to stick only to recorded history becomes far murkier when faiths are in conflict about the facts; a situation where live-and-let-live is essential.

I'm troubled by the extent to which eclectic and syncretic traditions are expected to be constantly footnoting faith with an apology. I feel it's better to not assume that a spiritual community is the correct place for accurate history, and that there are other resources better at providing that kind of outcome. I prefer to talk about my spiritual truth as a truth, in a religious context - the appropriate place in which to do so.

I just want to start calling people's bluff on it, like - firstly, I don't care. I have zero interest in this being the terrain on which I engage with my spiritual life. I enjoy reading about religious history, but it's confetti: it isn't the work. I am not an academic. This is not my hobby - or a fanfiction being written by committee. It endures: politics complicates, but doesn't change it; history informs, but doesn't define it. it is no less real than mountains (though i'm not always so sure about those)

And the second thing is that I'm the one true prophet of the land and I've been handed these facts by the divine, personally. So - what are you going to do about that? Sorry that your textbook is wrong, I guess. They should update that. That's maybe a boastful or absurd response, but it's a damn sight more spiritually enlivening than "did you know that everything is FAKE and was MADE UP by some guy who got it WRONG". like oh shit, next you'll be telling me the Pope is just some guy with an expensive house and gold slippers. There's a horseshoe of cleverness there that spins right back around into foolishness: what kind of person needs to go around asserting they're definitely very sure about objective, observable, recorded reality - and while doing religion, no less. It expresses a kind of insecurity about both fantasy and reality; instead of committing to one or the other as is appropriate, and knowing that you know the difference.

everything is fake; choose something to believe in. love isn't real and we're all going to die. isn't this fun. your parents were Father Christmas, and nothing you do will have any permanent value or endure beyond the grave; all time is wasted time; emotions are chemicals, desires mechanical impulses; your dog only likes you because you exchange food for serotonin, and the same is true of your spouse. what a wonderful thing it is, to respire automatically because our lungs know no other impulse.