Pagan morality

[iambiguous]

Ethical Guidelines Pagans
at RE: ONLINE

Some Pagans believe that there is a natural justice in the way the universe is organised, and that ‘what goes around comes around’.

Okay, but if each and every Pagan connecting the dots between their spiritual/intrinsic Self and Nature come to completely conflicting assessments of what constitutes natural justice? Let alone how this is pertinent to the entire universe...?

How does that work for all practical purposes? And, in particular, among Pagans who are not members of a more or less one size fits all community such as was portrayed in The Wicker Man or Sommar.

What exactly do all Pagans agree will come around given particular behaviors?

They may even use the Indian term karma for this idea. Some Wiccans talk about the ‘threefold return’ that applies to magic – everything wished for others will come back to the practitioner three times as much, which is a deterrent to using magic for negative ends.

Ever and always from my frame of mind, it is one thing to believe such things "in your head" and another thing altogether being able to demonstrate that in fact they reflect the... objective truth?

Others dismiss these ideas and hold that we should behave well towards other beings without any thought of reward or punishment.

Now all we need are [you guessed it] a whole bunch of contexts in order to assess how this might unfold "for all practical purposes". Whose rendition of karma given whose rendition of right and wrong, good and bad behaviors?

[iambiguous]

Paganism: politics, ethics and cults – and their absence
Liz Williams

At the beginning of this series, I said that Paganism covered an extremely broad range of bases, both quasi-theological and political. It is fair to say that a large percentage of contemporary Pagans support the environmental movement in some form, whether this consists of the road protest movement – perhaps the most visible engagement of paganism in environmentalism – or tree planting programmes, or opposing the proposed badger cull.

That's what you get when nothing is written down. No actual Scripture...scripted commandments. So, for any number of Pagans, Paganism itself basically becomes whatever they want -- need? -- it to mean.

Which, I suspect, is why films like The Wicker Man spark conflicting reactions. On the one hand, it portrays a community seemingly united in shared beliefs about any number of things. The whole point then being they are all "as one" on the One True Path.

On the other hand, it also depicts the consequences for those who refuse to toe the party line. Ghastly consequences.

Still, Sergeant Howie himself is no less embedded in his dogmatic Christian beliefs. So, it's basically a battle between conflicting objectivists. God "up there" and God "down here".

Imagine then their reaction to someone like me. In other words, I explore the circumstantial parameters of value judgments embedded in particular historical and cultural contexts ever evolving over time. The parts rooted existentially in dasein. In that regard then, Paganism is construed by me to be but one more manifestation of religion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... traditions

In particular: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goddess_movement

In many respects, paganism is intrinsically anarchic, at least in the UK. It resists formal structures and organisation: anyone who has ever tried to organise a pagan event will testify to this. It also resists a formalisation of the very loose theological principles and beliefs gathered beneath its conceptual umbrella.

On the other hand, even within communities that embrace one or another moral and political rendition of anarchism, there's the part where conflicting goods need to be...resolved? Abortion, gun control, capital punishment, sexuality, conscription, drugs, censorship, religion, social justice, economic policy, immigration, animal rights, climate change and on and on and on.

The part where those like Maia connect the dots between conflagrations of this sort and their own understanding of Nature as manifested in an Intrinsic Self.

[iambiguous]

Paganism: politics, ethics and cults – and their absence
Liz Williams

The situation in the US is somewhat different, as registered religious organisations can get tax breaks, so structures tend to be more formalised.

Formalized? Let's just say that God is everywhere here. On our currency, in our courtrooms, on the campaign trail, in the very pledge of allegiance citizens make to an America "under God".

And not just any God, of course.

There's also a tendency for American Wiccans to become more hung up on initiatory lineages, and to be more dogmatic about a spiritual path that doesn't actually have any dogma.

Wiccans then would seem more in sync with many traditional religions. They don't have an official Wiccan Scripture, perhaps, be they do have access to what some construe to be a reasonable facsimile: https://www.amazon.com/Wiccan-Bible-Exp ... ral%20bath.

For Wiccans, much seems to revolve around rituals. And what are rituals other than the practice of doing exactly the same thing over ands over and over again. But you wouldn't do the same things over and over and over again unless "somehow" the dots are connected "in your head" between the rituals, an Intrinsic Self and some sacred reality.

But this is evidence of a particular mindset, common to all religions and political paths: insisting you're right is a bug, not a feature, and there's nothing in any pagan texts that insists on the primacy of one's personal belief system.

Again, in my view, it's the perfect moral philosophy. As long as particular behaviors are linked to this Intrinsic Self, then one wouldn't expect others who have lived very different lives to share the same moral, political and spiritual convictions. So, individual Pagans can "just know" the "right thing to do" even if it it s completely at odds with what other Pagans believe.

Which is basically my point to Maia. Among Pagans either might makes right, right makes might or some form of moderation, negotiation and compromise prevails in regard to conflicting goods. In other words, like most other religions, it's rooted largely in dasein.

[iambiguous]

Paganism: politics, ethics and cults – and their absence
Liz Williams

Because contemporary paganism is essentially so new, its underlying ethical structure is not particularly sophisticated.

On the other hand, that can actually be...the good news. Why? Because then you aren't burdoned with a Scripture that commands you ever and always to do the right thing. Or else. And here for any number of denominations there's no other "or else" quite like enduring the agony of eternal damnation in Hell.

Instead, you can basically believe you are in possession of an Intrinsic Self. And that intuitively, spiritually and/or naturally you "just know" what is good and what is evil. And if they come into conflict? That's the part I am most interested in with those like Maia. She seemws to argue that films like the Wicker Man provide us with the one and the only way in which not to imagine a Pagan community. Whereas from my frame of mind the point is just the opposite. It's the all for one and one for all mentality that binds everyone to this particular One True Path.

Here's one assessment from reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueFilm/comme ... ?rdt=34394

One exception might be heathenism, the set of practices based on Norse/Anglo-Saxon spirituality, which formulates its ethics on the Havamal, a 13th-century text that provides a surprisingly useful conduct guide.

Any Heathens here among us? If so, how can a formulary derived from human interactions in the 13th century be used to guide human interactions in the 21st century. Or is that the whole point?

Although these days I wouldn't rely on the section, in stanzas 80-100, about seducing women:

"let him speak soft words and offer wealth
who longs for a woman's love,
praise the shape of the shining maid
he wins who thus doth woo."

Otherwise, Pagan ethical principles tend to be somewhat rudimentary: the oft-repeated "An [as long as] Ye Harm None, Do What Ye Will" derives from St Augustine (Dilige, et quod vis fac) via Rabelais and thence Crowley, and is obviously open to a wide variety of philosophical interpretations.

Still, that is not applicable to any number of moral, political and spiritual conflagrations that plague mere mortals today...literally thousands of years after the birth of philosophy in the West. It's not for nothing therefore that religions manage to prevail.

[iambiguous]

Paganism: politics, ethics and cults – and their absence
Liz Williams

Early (1950s and 60s) Paganism ran on the ethical engine of the Threefold Law, based on a very simple karmic principle: do a bad thing and it will come back to you three times.

Okay, is having an abortion a good thing or a bad thing? How about being a Wall Street banker or a Communist? Which is more "natural"? Which is Mother Nature more likely to be forgiving of?

It can get tricky...

A quick glance at the life of the average merchant banker will provide instant empirical disproof of this, and its main virtue was that enough people believed in it to put a halt to a certain amount of interpersonal disagreement and hold back from cursing each other.

The bottom line is that over and again all that really matters is this...that you do believe what you do and as such feel it is entirely warranted to either agree or to disagree with others...to curse or to applaud what others do.

Then this part:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... traditions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_p ... ideologies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_s ... philosophy

There's bound to be something that floats your boat as they say.

It's not found in most indigenous spiritual practices to which some modern western pagans may adhere, such as voodoo or candomblé, and it's not a feature of the kind of magic that cunning folk practised in Britain over the last few hundred years, in which cursing people was, like it or not, pretty standard: a quick visit to the excellent Museum of Witchcraft in Boscastle will attest to the fact that not all early practitioners of magic were dear old herb-gathering midwives with only the good of the local parishioners at heart.

In other words, as with many other One True Paths, Pagans are themselves divided into different "schools" of thought. And some are anchored more firmly to their own set of assumptions than are others. Thus "or else" will loom larger for some communities than for others.

[iambiguous]

Paganism: politics, ethics and cults – and their absence
Liz Williams

One advantage of this resistance to formalisation and structure is the relative lack of pagan cults. Although in the early days of Wicca it was known as the "witch cult", there's little that's cult-like about pagan practice. It's too diverse, and lacks central figureheads.

Again, this works both ways. No Scripture and Paganism becomes whatever some are able to convince themselves that it is. And that will generally coincide with the most comfort and the most consolation one is able to attain and then sustain from the least amount of effort or sacrifice.

So, there's no way in which to pin down those who are said to be "True Pagans" because that can mean many different things to many different people. And with no Scriptures to fall back on who is to say when any particular community has or has not become an actual cult. A "cult of personality" say re The Wicker Man narrative. Or a community almost entirely embedded in particular rituals and ceremonies as were depicted in the film Midsomer.

There are a few people who are, let's say, personality-challenged, who would like to set up a cult, but in large part they fail, due to the innate stroppiness and independence of their fellow pagans. Very small cult-like groups might form and these tend to be classically abusive, but don't in general attract large numbers.

So, for those Pagans who do need something analogous to a paint by numbers spiritual experience...a community where there's a place for everyone and everyone is expected to be where they are supposed to be in more structured, liturgical relationships.

Let's just say that some, re one or another combination of genes and memes, nature and nurture, are more hard-wired to react to the world around them with authoritarian personalities than are others.

As with every generalisation, there are possible exceptions: Damanhur, the extraordinary structure currently being built in northern Italy, might function as an instance of a cult, with commensurate accusations surrounding it of brainwashing and tax evasion. Central figures of its worship include Horus, Sekhmet and Pan, which brings it beneath the Pagan aegis. However, Damanhur's leader, Oberto Airaudi, has recently died, so quite what will happen to the admittedly remarkable temple that he inspired is open to some question.

So, the bottom line -- one of them -- is that, as with most other religious denominations, for Pagans, one size will almost never fit all. It's just that by and large any number of Pagans seem more inclined to keep things more or less "official".

Then the part where many seem to connect the dots here between their own rendition of Paganism and that crucial Intrinsic Self enabling them to "just know" intuitively/spiritually/naturally what is sacred and what is not?

[iambiguous]

Paganism: politics, ethics and cults – and their absence
Liz Williams

In contrast Philip Carr-Gomm, the nominal head of one of the largest pagan organisations – the Order of Bards, Ovates & Druids – is so low-key that many druids would be hard-pressed to pick him out of a line-up: a deliberate approach that avoids the abuses of many religious organisations.

Then this part...

Druidcraft is a spiritual practice embracing elements of both Druidry and Wicca, developed by Philip Carr-Gomm, and is also the title of a book he wrote about the same topic. That book deals with the combination of Druidry and wicca in a new, combined practice.

Again, for anyone here inclined to agree with Carr-Gomm, please note how "for all practical purposes" these "combined practices" impact the behaviors that you choose from day to day. Given a particular context.

And then the part where, as with Maia, Carr-Gomm either does or does not practice his faith given a deep down inside him Intrinsic Self. You "just know" you're on the right spiritual path because it provides you with the comfort and the consolation that only religion itself can sustain beyond the grave.

Then this [to me] intriguing part...

Within this book, Carr-Gomm claims that the differences between Wicca and Druidry do not stem from hundreds or thousands of years worth of tradition as these two distinct paths evolved separately.

He claims that in fact the differences between modern Wicca and Druidism are due to the differences between two friends, Gerald Gardner and Ross Nichols who were deeply involved with these paths less than 75 years ago.

See if you can spot the Benjamin Button Syndrome here. Two friends disagree, setting into motion any number of actual consequences.

I might not be understanding this correctly, but it seems to revolve around the manner in which I construe dasein.

Might we draw comparisons with other, decentralized religions such as western Buddhism? I think we can, and in this light paganism is appearing increasingly progressive.

As opposed to, say, increasingly woke?

[iambiguous]

Pagan Values, Pagan Morals
Sam Webster at Witches and Pagans Magazine

If we want to discuss Pagan values first we need go back to a much older mode of thought. To do that we need to first separate Ethics from Morals.

Ethics are those prescriptions that forbid or require action which we have arrived at through reason and experience. The negatives of not hurting, not killing, not stealing, not cheating, etc. fit here. Likewise, are the positives of being kind, altruism, civic duty, mutual support. These matters we can work out for ourselves from thought and observation. We don’t need a God to tell us that these are the right things for us to do.

On the other hand, the gaps -- large and small -- between thoughts and observations embraced by those on these paths...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... traditions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_p ... ideologies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_s ... philosophy

...pertain to all manner of ethical conflicts. Whose rendition of the positive and the negative behaviors will be manifested in the mores and in the laws of the land.

Morality, often confused with Ethics, is religious. For a Jew, it is immoral to eat pork. I enjoy my bacon. Christians are not allowed to worship any other God than theirs. Pagans can worship who they please. Muslims are to pray five times per day. I must make offerings at the Dark of the Moon.

And that's the beauty -- the fascination? the foreboding? -- of it all for mere mortals in a No God world. No one is actually able to pin down -- philosophically, scientifically, politically, socially, economically -- what is essentially, objectively, universally moral, so all one need do is to believe that their very own moral philosophy really and truly is the One True Path.

Thus...

We don’t have to behave the same way to be moral. Each of us needs to behave in the manner told to us by our religious obligations.

Right. And if we lived in a world where all those who embraced this or that One True Path lived apart from all the others...?

But we don't. Instead, we live in a world where any number of objectivists append to their own moral or ethical convictions the part that revolves around one or another rendition of, "or else!"

A proper understanding of this, along the separation of Church and State, would eliminate many conflicts in the Law. Ethics are what we agree upon. Morals are the other things we do to embody our religions.

Of course, out in the real-world morality and ethics are often used interchangeably to mean basically the same thing: my way or the highway. And religion might also be construed here as interchangeable with ideology or deontology or biological imperatives.

The point [mine] being that The Gap, Rummy's Rule, the Benjamin Button Syndrome, dasein, childhood indoctrination, historical and cultural parameters, uniquely individual experiences etc., are simply subsumed in "right makes might".

[iambiguous]

Pagan Values, Pagan Morals
Sam Webster at Witches and Pagans Magazine

One of the ways this manifests in traditional religions is through taking on commitments to do or to avoid. The Irish called it a geis, the Tibetians a damsig, Indians, samaya, Masons an obligation, or generally a vow, or an oath.

Which, of course, always brings me back around to the fact there are so many different religions [traditional or otherwise] to choose from, what are the odds that given "10,000 distinct faiths" your own really is the one and the only One True Path? Most of course are relatively small and based locally around the globe but that is not likely to make their own commitment any less fervent.

Or is God up there keeping a tally on them all and [for now] going with Christianity because it's got the biggest flock? Of course, that assumes there are not zillions other planets out there with zillions and zillions of additional faiths.

And then perhaps the part where none of them exist at all.

So, what do you call it? And since any number men and women call it any number of conflicting things, there's the part where they collide given any number of circumstances such that for some if they are not on their own One True Path they damn well better be come Judgment Day.

As part of the entry into a religious practice, or in ancient times even civic office, one would swear to do or not do certain practices. Failure in this would incur significant penalties or losses, which can often be repaired by further rites and practices.

Of course, the beauty of Paganism is that you can describe it in lots and lots of different [or even conflicting] ways. Why? Because as long as nature is in there somewhere it counts. So, within any particular Pagan community, either might makes right, right makes might or attempts are made to practice moderation, negotiation and compromise. Not unlike lots of other communities in the democratic West.

Or, rather, what's left of it?

And then this part...

For instance an ancient Irish King had a geis laid upon him at his coronation to only travel a certain way about the Hill of Tara. In the tale of his fall, the failure to do this was one of the things that lead to his death.

Now, for this ancient Irish King, and for many who recognized his power and authority, this may well be deemed the Real McCoy. And it is because none of these religious denominations can actually produce their God that all of them can insist it is their own. And then all the faiths that have no God at all or [as with some Pagans] there are multiple Gods and Goddesses.

[Flannel Jesus]

Okay, admittedly, in regard to the quote thread, I really have gone out on the limb there. But that's only because I thought that ILP was about to collapse and i was concerned that all the stuff I posted there would -- poof! -- be gone forever. So, I accumulated it all in the quote thread here. A thread, by the way that lots and lots and lots of people click on.

You were worried that mountains and mountains of copy-pasted 'stuff' that you spammed up the other site with, that's not even written by you, would disappear so you decided to transfer it here and spam up this site as well?
FFS. No words...

I by pure serendipity ended up perusing this thread, and when I came across this quote from you biggy... I actually fucking laughed the most ugly laugh I've ever laughed, this was hilarious. "lots of people click on". Jesus christ man grow up.

Nobody cares about your quotes, nobody finds the stupid nonsense you post after them entertaining, insightful, or interesting in any way. Do you know? NOBODY KNOWS WHAT THEY FUCKING MEAN!

Accelefine is right, it's pretty pathetic that you were so desperate to save meaningless content that you spent all that time re-posting it one by one here. Content that's like... 99% not even yours (and the content that is yours is meaningless to everyone else). You're genuinely delusional.

[MikeNovack]

Again, this works both ways. No Scripture and Paganism becomes whatever some are able to convince themselves that it is.

Might I suggest however, we humans have had religions long before we had any written scriptures. So the fact that today we till have religions without scriptures shouldn't mean that much. The largest ten or so religions have scriptures, but many hundreds (thousands?) of religions don't.

"And that will generally coincide with the most comfort and the most consolation one is able to attain and then sustain from the least amount of effort or sacrifice."

WHY do you think that? Might I suggest Sweet Medicine by Father Peter J. Powell << it's about the "Sun Dance" ritual >> Pagans are as likely as non-Pagans to believe "the greater the pain, the greater the gain."

PS: The term "Pagans" as used in the discussion so far might best be the more specific Neo-Pagans. But in what I just wrote I am mainly meaning it in the older sense "as Christians, Muslims, and Jews perceive other religions.

[accelafine]

Is New Mike Big Mike?

[Martin Peter Clarke]

Why am I thinking Ren and Stimpy?

[accelafine]

A bot is the most intelligent man on here.

[MikeNovack]

Is New Mike Big Mike?

??????

If you are asking about me, I always use my real name in forums. I am new to this forum. If I had been here before, left, and came back, if that required me to choose a new user name, would have picked one making clear same person.