Caroline et al
Really interesting discussion - not sure if i will ever get any work
done today : )
I agree in part but even so - when the neo-pagan makes it up based on
intuition -
giving a god or goddess some new content -
aren't they acting very much like ancient pagans -
who also gave completely unhistorical spins to existing deities -
isn't this the way religions develop?
And doesn't it show how much like the classical pagan we are -
and also the vitality of pagan belief?
"love and do what you will"
Mogg
(self-confessed compulsive researcher)
i David,
>
> Yes, I agree with what you've said below. And I'm not saying "Pagans
> must be historically-correct and always look to the past" but that if
> one is going to be citing a "Pagan history" from the past - which is
> very much a part of Paganism today, referring to "the past" - and
> talking about gods and other supernatural beings *from past ancient
> socieites*, the least one could do was to actually research those
> deities from within the deities' own cultural and historical contexts.
> Not to say that the way particular deities were perceived by mortals
> stayed the same throughout their [the deities'] entire 'lifetimes"
> back in pre-Christian times, or that the everyday ancient pagan
> bothered to "research" their deities either, but I'd have thought that
> if people today were actually interested in "ancient Pagan deities"
> the least they could do was to exert themselves on a bit of research
> regarding those deities - or else to be truthful and say "Actually, I
> can't be bothered doing that, I'm just going to make it up", rather
> than make up stuff and not admit it?
>
> Which sort of reminds me of how Golden Dawn members used to scry the
> aethyr for the components of missing parts of rituals if they couldn't
> construct them from research. Which is fine... if you believe that you
> can obtain such material from that source. I certainly believe you can
> obtain *material* from scrying, but whether it is historically
> authentic ritual components, I'm feeling mroe sceptical about that.
>
> ~Caroline.
>
>>> I do find the blinkered approach to historical critique was a
> significant limiting factor. When people dealt with this upfront and
> engage with why and how they are making these distinctions it is much
> more honest and leads to better ritual practice. I really love how
> Thorsen does this in Asatru actually where he acknowledges its
> constructed nature and then has a discussion on how we engage with the
> past both in terms of literal history and where and how we can make
> our depatures. Its a very honest and authentic way to approach the
> issue of historicity I think and claims to historical authenticity and
> connection to the past lie at the heart of the very idea of
> contemporary Paganism.<<
>
|