"Let's pretend" religions?

[Skwim]

In a lively discussion of religions the other day a couple of people were of the opinion that today Druidism, Wicca, Witchcraft, and the like were not honest, sincerely held religions, but part of a game of "let's pretend." An activity where the attraction wasn't the espoused core beliefs, but the novelty of it all, a novelty that necessarily was at odds with more main stream religious beliefs and practices. That were it not for this novelty, and its unconventional, abnormal?, trappings, these religions would never have reemerged in today's world.

Thoughts?

 

[Valjean]

In many cases I suspect your friends might be right.

 

[Breathe]

Sometimes.

In my opinion, some people (of course) do it for rebelliousness though. I'm not sure if this is rebelliousness against their parents, society, or the God they were brought up with. I've known a few people who have done it to 'rebel' and to conform to nonconformism. Only a very small number of people join a religion because it's new (or different) from what they were raised with.

Whatever floats their boat, though. :angel2:

From my experience, people tend to join religions because they believe in what these religions teach, whether the religion is 5,000 or 50 years old.

 

[bain-druie]

In a lively discussion of religions the other day a couple of people were of the opinion that today Druidism, Wicca, Witchcraft, and the like were not honest, sincerely held religions, but part of a game of "let's pretend." An activity where the attraction wasn't the espoused core beliefs, but the novelty of it all, a novelty that necessarily was at odds with more main stream religious beliefs and practices. That were it not for this novelty, and its unconventional, abnormal?, trappings, these religions would never have reemerged in today's world.

Thoughts?

On a personal level, I find that kind of ignorant judgment quite offensive. My Druidry has nothing to do with Wicca, and should not be lumped in with it, for one thing. I also find it offensive as a general rule for people to judge the motives and thoughts of entire groups of other people without any actual knowledge. I am a Druid, and your friends apparently made sweeping judgments regarding my decision as to my faith without ever knowing me or anything about what I believe.

I am not a Druid because it is novel, exciting, or unconventional. I am a Druid because my people are Druids and have been for a long time, and because I have experienced profound beauty and strength connected with my gods, my ritual, and my practice. My Gran brought her Druidry with her from Wales when she came over to the US, and taught me without brainwashing me (in stark contrast with the brainwashing my fundie Christian parents tried giving me). She taught me to observe closely what went on around me in nature; human nature as well as the wider natural world. I learned that art and story as well as all living things are sacred; that all life deserves my respect. And many other things.

I'm a Druid in the 21st century. I don't dress up in robes and carry a sickle into the woods with me in search of mistletoe. I don't indulge in farcical activity you might see on network television involving pentagrams and candlelight. I apply my Druidry to every aspect of my life always; as a mother, a lover, a student, a nurse, a friend, and so forth. My faith complements my work in medicine; I never sacrifice scientific knowledge to obscure ritual practice.

My gran taught me this: Druidry is ancient, yes; but it is also still alive. The only way an ancient thing can survive is that it learns to adapt, to change with its environment. So no, I am not a Druid priestess like the black-robed banshees on the Isle of Mona who tried in vain to repel the Roman army. But I am a Druid who values life, who sees no division between sacred and profane, who applies science every day and equally applies my spirituality every day.

I object to the insult offered to my dignity in the characterization unjustly made by your friends. This kind of prejudice continues to eat away at the world, and when it touches me, I admit freely that it wounds.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Existence in itself is a novel phenomenon.

We pretend all the time in our everyday lives. We have roles that we act out, and masks we wear. We play the game.

Are we different when we assume the role of "religious"?

Eclectic Neo-pagans certainly see the world differently (but maybe not so much) than those who stick to core beliefs and dogmatic structure, and if those people you refer to wish to clothe their opinions of this worldview in wrappings of childish make-believe, then they need to unmask their own characters and look in the mirror.

It's the art of living and experiencing the throbbing, vital essence of the world that attracts Neo-pagans to their worldview. And perhaps its that same essence that brings a child to play.

I don't remember (I think it was Sunstone) who first quoted this on the forum, but I've held this quote close:

"Soon the child's clear eye is clouded over by ideas and opinions, preconceptions and abstractions. Simple free being becomes encrusted with the burdensome armor of the ego. Not until years later does an instinct come that a vital sense of mystery has been withdrawn. The sun glints through the pines, and the heart is pierced in a moment of beauty and strange pain, like a memory of paradise. After that day . . . we become seekers."

- Peter Matthiessen

 

[Father Heathen]

In a lively discussion of religions the other day a couple of people were of the opinion that today Druidism, Wicca, Witchcraft, and the like were not honest, sincerely held religions, but part of a game of "let's pretend." An activity where the attraction wasn't the espoused core beliefs, but the novelty of it all, a novelty that necessarily was at odds with more main stream religious beliefs and practices. That were it not for this novelty, and its unconventional, abnormal?, trappings, these religions would never have reemerged in today's world.

Thoughts?

I think this goes for any religion when it's one other than what they were indoctrinated into during childhood.

 

[Skwim]

On a personal level, I find that kind of ignorant judgment quite offensive. My Druidry has nothing to do with Wicca, and should not be lumped in with it, for one thing. I also find it offensive as a general rule for people to judge the motives and thoughts of entire groups of other people without any actual knowledge. I am a Druid, and your friends apparently made sweeping judgments regarding my decision as to my faith without ever knowing me or anything about what I believe.

I am not a Druid because it is novel, exciting, or unconventional. I am a Druid because my people are Druids and have been for a long time, and because I have experienced profound beauty and strength connected with my gods, my ritual, and my practice. My Gran brought her Druidry with her from Wales when she came over to the US, and taught me without brainwashing me (in stark contrast with the brainwashing my fundie Christian parents tried giving me). She taught me to observe closely what went on around me in nature; human nature as well as the wider natural world. I learned that art and story as well as all living things are sacred; that all life deserves my respect. And many other things.

I'm a Druid in the 21st century. I don't dress up in robes and carry a sickle into the woods with me in search of mistletoe. I don't indulge in farcical activity you might see on network television involving pentagrams and candlelight. I apply my Druidry to every aspect of my life always; as a mother, a lover, a student, a nurse, a friend, and so forth. My faith complements my work in medicine; I never sacrifice scientific knowledge to obscure ritual practice.

My gran taught me this: Druidry is ancient, yes; but it is also still alive. The only way an ancient thing can survive is that it learns to adapt, to change with its environment. So no, I am not a Druid priestess like the black-robed banshees on the Isle of Mona who tried in vain to repel the Roman army. But I am a Druid who values life, who sees no division between sacred and profane, who applies science every day and equally applies my spirituality every day.

I object to the insult offered to my dignity in the characterization unjustly made by your friends. This kind of prejudice continues to eat away at the world, and when it touches me, I admit freely that it wounds.

Thanks for the perspective. I don't know how well acquainted they are with any of the religions, but they they did seem to be knowledgeable about each, at least more than I am. As for being insulted and wounded by their conclusion, that didn't seem to be their intent, and I would chalk up their inclusion of Druidry with the others as ignorance. People often hold opinions about our beliefs that are diametrically opposed to our own, so I wouldn't take it personally. And, of course, if one doesn't fit their description then naturally it doesn't apply.

 

[Smoke]

An activity where the attraction wasn't the espoused core beliefs, but the novelty of it all, a novelty that necessarily was at odds with more main stream religious beliefs and practices. That were it not for this novelty, and its unconventional, abnormal?, trappings, these religions would never have reemerged in today's world.

Novelty wears off after a while, and it really doesn't take that long. That's part of the reason all religions see converts come and go. But novelty can't explain those who stay. People don't spend 25 or 30 or more years practicing a religion because they're attracted to "the novelty of it all."

But I wonder why "the espoused core beliefs" should be the most important thing about any religion, anyway. Christians have made their religion largely a matter of belief, but there's no reason everybody else should follow suit. Liturgy, ritual, mystical experiences, morals and ways of life, and sense of community are arguably as important as beliefs, or even more so.

 

[Skwim]

Novelty wears off after a while, and it really doesn't take that long. That's part of the reason all religions see converts come and go. But novelty can't explain those who stay. People don't spend 25 or 30 or more years practicing a religion because they're attracted to "the novelty of it all."

But I wonder why "the espoused core beliefs" should be the most important thing about any religion, anyway. Christians have made their religion largely a matter of belief, but there's no reason everybody else should follow suit. Liturgy, ritual, mystical experiences, morals and ways of life, and sense of community are arguably as important as beliefs, or even more so.

Although some people may be attracted to a religion because of its ancillary aspects such as its outer trappings or the community of fellowship it offers, my impression is that most people make their choice based on core propositions. In the case of Christianity it would be the promise of survival after death in the loving embrace of heaven. Now, what Christians may do while waiting for heaven is another thing.

Then there's the long time believers who may be holding on because they've risen to the position of power, influence, and perhaps monetary gain, all aspects we've seen in the main stream religions.

 

[bain-druie]

Thanks for the perspective. I don't know how well acquainted they are with any of the religions, but they they did seem to be knowledgeable about each, at least more than I am. As for being insulted and wounded by their conclusion, that didn't seem to be their intent, and I would chalk up their inclusion of Druidry with the others as ignorance. People often hold opinions about our beliefs that are diametrically opposed to our own, so I wouldn't take it personally. And, of course, if one doesn't fit their description then naturally it doesn't apply.

I can easily believe that ignorance played a part here, and I don't doubt their intentions were not to wound or insult anyone. That was why I made a point of mentioning it - I think that people tend to make these sweeping characterizations without considering their effect on the actual human beings involved in their broad statement. When I say it wounds and insults me, I don't mean that I'm sulking in a corner; I've had to grow a thick skin and get used to wounds and insults just like the rest of us. But I would like to believe it doesn't have to be that way; I think that people really do mean well most of the time, so if they know their words or actions are harmful, they will probably try to find a better way of expressing themselves.

I hope that makes sense.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

In a lively discussion of religions the other day a couple of people were of the opinion that today Druidism, Wicca, Witchcraft, and the like were not honest, sincerely held religions, but part of a game of "let's pretend." An activity where the attraction wasn't the espoused core beliefs, but the novelty of it all, a novelty that necessarily was at odds with more main stream religious beliefs and practices. That were it not for this novelty, and its unconventional, abnormal?, trappings, these religions would never have reemerged in today's world.

Thoughts?

Um I won't make myself sound too offended, but if your friends think people practice the old religions for novelty then they obviously don't have the relationship with these deities that would qualify them to make that statement.

 

[Smoke]

Although some people may be attracted to a religion because of its ancillary aspects such as its outer trappings or the community of fellowship it offers, my impression is that most people make their choice based on core propositions.

What I'm saying is that the practice of a religion has at least as much claim to being its core as its attendant beliefs have. I think it's a rather grave mistake to describe the practice of a religion as "its outer trappings."

 

[bain-druie]

What I'm saying is that the practice of a religion has at least as much claim to being its core as its attendant beliefs have. I think it's a rather grave mistake to describe the practice of a religion as "its outer trappings."

I agree with that; revealed religions tend to elevate beliefs rather than practice, while nature religions are opposite. We tend to concern ourselves with the practice and not worry so much about beliefs. The two are not totally separate, of course; practice flows from belief, and sometimes vice versa, and they interweave quite a bit. But if it is possible to put one ahead of the other, this is how I'd describe it, I think.

 

[Scarlett Wampus]

I think there is a certain amount of religious role-playing going on in Neo-Pagan religions, some a lot more than others. I also think its a healthy thing, that there couldn't be growth & change without it and that it can be a response to as genuine a spiritual calling as anything else. Where it gets tiresome is how pretentious a few individuals are, but then, I see that everywhere.

 

[Skwim]

Eclectic Neo-pagans certainly see the world differently (but maybe not so much) than those who stick to core beliefs and dogmatic structure, and if those people you refer to wish to clothe their opinions of this worldview in wrappings of childish make-believe, then they need to unmask their own characters and look in the mirror.

Didn't see any of their opinions clothed in any wrappings of childish make-believe, but that their opinions saw the practitioners of these religions as indulging themselves in make believe.

I think this goes for any religion when it's one other than what they were indoctrinated into during childhood.

Well, they're essentially "non-believers" and didn't included any of the main stream religions in their observation.

Um I won't make myself sound too offended, but if your friends think people practice the old religions for novelty then they obviously don't have the relationship with these deities that would qualify them to make that statement.

Not to defend their conclusion, but everyone is entitled to their opinion, and if they had the kind of relationship you deem necessary then they wouldn't make the statement they did, which is pretty obvious. So, in effect you're saying no one is ever in a position to make such a statement whether it turns out to be true or not. Your criterion here is handcuffs that effectively prevent the criticism of anything, so I have to reject it as valid.

What I'm saying is that the practice of a religion has at least as much claim to being its core as its attendant beliefs have. I think it's a rather grave mistake to describe the practice of a religion as "its outer trappings."

As I indicated, they were speaking of the attraction of these particular religions. What religions in general consist of is obviously different. And it isn't the practice per se of any religion that makes up its trappings, but all the attendant accouterments.

 

[Revoltingest]

On a personal level, I find that kind of ignorant judgment quite offensive. My Druidry has nothing to do with Wicca, and should not be lumped in with it, for one thing. I also find it offensive as a general rule for people to judge the motives and thoughts of entire groups of other people without any actual knowledge. I am a Druid, and your friends apparently made sweeping judgments regarding my decision as to my faith without ever knowing me or anything about what I believe.

I am not a Druid because it is novel, exciting, or unconventional. I am a Druid because my people are Druids and have been for a long time, and because I have experienced profound beauty and strength connected with my gods, my ritual, and my practice. My Gran brought her Druidry with her from Wales when she came over to the US, and taught me without brainwashing me (in stark contrast with the brainwashing my fundie Christian parents tried giving me). She taught me to observe closely what went on around me in nature; human nature as well as the wider natural world. I learned that art and story as well as all living things are sacred; that all life deserves my respect. And many other things.

I'm a Druid in the 21st century. I don't dress up in robes and carry a sickle into the woods with me in search of mistletoe. I don't indulge in farcical activity you might see on network television involving pentagrams and candlelight. I apply my Druidry to every aspect of my life always; as a mother, a lover, a student, a nurse, a friend, and so forth. My faith complements my work in medicine; I never sacrifice scientific knowledge to obscure ritual practice.

My gran taught me this: Druidry is ancient, yes; but it is also still alive. The only way an ancient thing can survive is that it learns to adapt, to change with its environment. So no, I am not a Druid priestess like the black-robed banshees on the Isle of Mona who tried in vain to repel the Roman army. But I am a Druid who values life, who sees no division between sacred and profane, who applies science every day and equally applies my spirituality every day.

I object to the insult offered to my dignity in the characterization unjustly made by your friends. This kind of prejudice continues to eat away at the world, and when it touches me, I admit freely that it wounds.

Very interesting post! It reminds me how some folk will tell me that we atheists 'believe', but we just hate God. Some are so accustomed
to their own way of seeing things (weltanshauung), they have a hard time accepting that very different beliefs can be sincerely held.
Still, with a host of parody religions floating around out their, leaving noodles & unicorn manure everywhere, it could be tough to discern
who is sincere & who is just making mirth. This is why I like your clarifying & declarative post.

So...to all you doubting Thomases, I really am as loony as you observe.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Didn't see any of their opinions clothed in any wrappings of childish make-believe, but that their opinions saw the practitioners of these religions as indulging themselves in make believe.

Forgive my attempts at flowery language.

What I meant was that by saying the practitioners are indulging in "make believe," they are insinuating childish intentions. They are saying they are just playing around.

I'm suggesting that even in those cases where practitioners are, that's fine. We all do everyday in some way. Spirituality is about investing meaning in life, and what's more meaningful than being at play?

From Eduardo Galeano:

The church says: The body is a sin.
Science says: The body is a machine.
Advertising says: The body is a business.
The body says: I am a fiesta.

 

[Skwim]

What I meant was that by saying the practitioners are indulging in "make believe," they are insinuating childish intentions. They are saying they are just playing around.

That's pretty much how I interpreted it.

 

[Klaufi_Wodensson]

People who follow Asatru are certainly not in it for the novelty, I can tell you that. A very few may only be in it for novelty, but that's they same with almost every other religion. There are always a few in it with the "let's pretend" attitude, but for the most part, the people are serious. Asatru isn't just a religion, it's a way to live your life. So if someone was in it for novelty, they wouldn't be living the life that a follower of Asatru should be, which makes them not a follower.

 

[Kodanshi]

The thing is, at one stage Christianity was seen as a let’s pretend type of religion in that it was simply a splinter sect of the Jews. As it made its way into the world it subsumed other religions and pagan practices, festivals, etc, turning gods into saints, co–opting celebrations like Eostre, Yule and Saturnalia in order to advance the cause of Christianity. And just so Christians here don’t think I speak solely ‘against’ their religion, Islâm did the same with Zoroastrian beliefs and practices.

In other words, what is now mainstream in the established religions was a part of the spiritual customs of others long long ago.