Beliefs and Practices
What is more important to you? Your theological beliefs or your spiritual practices? Now think about that because I really want to know. I ask this question because I'm beginning to wonder whether the answer gets to the heart of differences among Pagans.
Some anthropologists define religion based on cultic acts, not beliefs. It's certainly easier to identify Pagans and connect with others based on what we do and not necessarily what we believe. I can go to a public ritual and circle with a hundred people and our diverse beliefs don't really matter. We have managed to agree, for a given period of time, on what we are going to do and how.
Some Pagans have told me that they are not interested in asking theological questions. It's not necessary, they say, to reflect on difficult concepts, as long as the worship or the ritual is meaningful and works for you. The majority of these kinds of Pagans like to eat at the buffet, sampling from different religions and paths, pagan and otherwise, taking what suits them and discarding the rest. Some of them are terrific ritualists because they've learned many techniques from different sources, have dramatic flair, and understand that symbolic language that speaks to our deeper selves. Others are unstable and unfulfilled probably because their spiritual ADD prevents them from learning any tradition thoroughly.
Other Pagans have better defined beliefs, but have more difficulty shaping a practice. They ponder a lot about the meaning of everything, every tool, every word in an invocation or spell, every item on the altar, and so forth. Many appear to be Solitaries because they are more insistent on practicing their spirituality with others who closely share their beliefs. Some are very apprehensive about pairing deities from different pantheons or combining practices from different religions. I've noticed that some of these Pagans are well read and knowledgeable, but often take a mechanical approach and lack ritual and magical skills and talent.
I suppose most of us fall somewhere in the middle. I admit that I spend a lot of time pondering theological questions and analyzing religious practices. I'm the type that asks a lot of questions. However, I do have an active practice, which I'm constantly refining. I have a really hard time understanding certain combinations like Christianity and Paganism or worshipping Flora and Oshun in the same Wiccan ritual. It doesn't make sense to me intellectually and it doesn't feel right either.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.
9 comments:
Thoughtful post, Cosette. I am "old school" in that I think ritual is more important than theology. Ancient Paganism didn't have holy books, after all and it wasn't a revealed religion full of prophets pronouncing the word and will of God, so we don't have to quibble over the things that concern Christians (not that some of us don't anyway, which I think is silly). In the end, it doesn't matter if one person thinks this about Thor and another thinks that, or if one person beliefs the stories in the Poetic Edda are 100% true or another thinks they're myths. The important thing is that we pay our due respects to the Gods and Goddesses we worship.
Like you, I have a hard time understanding the mix n' match approach to Paganism, but I also have a hard time with saying that all Gods are really just aspects of one. My Gods are real to me, and I suppose you can say that in that respect, a certain amount of theology does come into play. I don't buy into Jungian archetypes because for my ancestors, there was no Jung and there were no archetypes unless you were a Greek philosopher, which my Norse ancestors most certainly were not. Even then, Philosophical Paganism was not the religion of 99% of the people in the ancient world.
I'm definately a practice gal. And I don't think the difficulty with those of us who emphasize practice over theology is our tendency toward ADD and a lack of depth, but rather that we are living in a culture where the paradigm of "a religion" involves creeds and theological debate.
The whole concept of going deeply into practice, central to religions like Buddhism, for instance, is just foreign to our culture. The idea that someone may find theology to be beside the point, not because they haven't thought about their religion or lack discipline in it, but because they are busy _experiencing_ their religion, is just not one that comes to us naturally.
Nonetheless,it's an important concept to me. Part of what binds my Quaker practice and my Pagan practice is that both are..._practice_. They're both much more about experiencing and relating to the spiritual world than analyzing it. As a Quaker friend of mine said recently, "I'm not sure God cares if we believe in Her--I think She'd rather we listened to Her."
But that's a hard notion to let in in a world as abstract as that of Western religion. And one of the things I'm hungriest for is some good Pagan writing that focuses less on belief, and more on what _happens_ to us in our practice as Pagans...
FWIW.
I'm a thinky person, and I can definitely see myself in your description of theory-over-practice types. I'm working on it, but it's still much easier for me to hash out what I think about why ritual is done the way it is and how it works and what it would mean to do it at this time of day or that than it is for me to get off my ass and actually do ritual. Like I said, I'm working on it.
I was about to go on and say that I think modern Paganism is lacking in theory, and then I realized, no it isn't. Any given Pagan can pretty much articulate what they believe in and why, and mostly why it doesn't matter if anybody else believes exactly the same thing as they do, and that's pretty much all we need. Cat is right, it's a fundamental cultural difference from what we're used to, but that doesn't mean it's a lack. (Now convince my academic brain of that.)
Very good questions. After reading them, I realized I didn't have to think. For me, my religion is about belief, not practice. Thealogy is very important to me, and I am very happy spending hours thinking on the nature of Goddess and what Divinity means. I'm an academic by training and inclination, so I'm comfortable with complex questions of belief.
I do appreciate ritual, but I am uncomfortable with a lot of rituals, and with ritualization of every day items. Focusing so much on doing takes away from just being, so I tend to avoid ritual.
I am developing a reiki practice now, and I've kept it up for over a week, which is the longest I've kept up any religious practice. I think it's because I've spent 4 years thinking about what reiki is, and how it can fit naturally into my life before taking a class.
However, I consider writing and thinking to be my spiritual practice.
My beliefs have kept me solitary, because I am unwilling to compromise them in order to fit in.
Other Pagans have better defined beliefs, but have more difficulty shaping a practice. They ponder a lot about the meaning of everything, every tool, every word in an invocation or spell, every item on the altar, and so forth.
That's me. Although I like to practice with others.
I think the two - practice and belief - have to go hand in hand to some degree. But I'd have a real hard time constantly doing something without giving any thought as to why I was doing it. That makes no sense to me. But is there any religion where the theology is the same/or practiced the same by all it's believers? I don't think so. And I can understand the mix-n-match to some degree. After all, all religions have in their theology pieces of other (usually earlier) religions in them. Mix-n-match is human nature. Case in point, Judaism which is monolithstic (hope I spelled that right :) has an entire branch devoted to magical practice which in turn shares, when combined with other beliefs, pagan practices. Trying to isolate human theology in one category is impossible. We're too complex.
You're right, Jeff. We are complex, but if we always defer to that answer, then we'll never really be able to discuss anything. Beliefs and practices do indeed inform each other and there's almost always some amount of syncretism. My post was not meant to be a discussion along the lines of of either/or, but rather more/less. And judging by the comments, there's something to what I was saying. I really appreciate all your comments. It gives me more to think about.
Well, the whole point of Elements of Ritual is not to favor one over the other, and to think of one as the "real" religion is a mistake. Belief and practice are indeed two elements of religious life.
That said, maybe because I am an Earthy person, I am all about doing. We are found in what we do, not what we think or even what we feel.
A long time ago a friend said to me "Love is a verb." It sounded so New Age I wanted to dismiss it, but she explained in terms of a loving relationship, it is the behavior of your partner that is love, not how he feels. And indeed, that clarified for me the problems I was having in my relationship at that time. My partner felt love and thought love, but didn't do love, and therefore, looking back at "love is a verb," didn't truly love.
We find this knowledge in such clichés as "fake it 'til you make it." Or when you watch fashion makeover shows and the person talks about how they feel and act more confident, now that they look the part.
It's what you do. It's always what you do.
Thank you, Deb. That's a great analogy. And you know I love that book.
Post a Comment