I was catching up on “Harmony in Diversity” episodes recently, and came across an interfaith panel
discussion for “Harmony Day”, which can be seen here. That, combined with
my recent experience of interfaith closer to home (see here)
has inspired me to look, and there may be an interfaith panel in my immediate
locality: the only websites appear a bit aged, however, so I’m not so sure how
active it is. I’ll contact them and find out, I suppose.
Going back to the panel discussion I watched, I was itching to have
been there to have a chance to add a pagan perspective to the discussion, and
then the thought just popped in to my mind (thank
you, Tyr): why not write a post as if I had been there?
And here it is :)
The first point is that the broadcast missed the first part of the panel
(“for technical reasons”), so I won’t
presume to write an introduction as if I’d been there doing that.
The first question was: is
there one government policy which impacts on your religious beliefs?
I actually consider the responses missed the point of this question,
being aimed at government policies which each represented religion found
offensive, but didn’t necessarily directly impact on that religion. In my case,
I would have replied at local, State and a Commonwealth level:
- at local level, the difficulty of being included in interfaith initiatives, which reflects the bias that religions will all have a certain ‘look’, or level of formality;
- at a State level, the failure to include Paganism in guides and policies – e.g., the Police guide on interacting with members of various faiths; and
- on a Commonwealth level, the failure to make realistic provision for minority faiths in the school chaplains policy.
If I was to reply along the lines of the other panellists, I would agree
with those who nominated policies on refugees as being offensive to those Pagans
who are from the personal and social focus ‘centre of paganism’, and failure to
take credible action on the environment as offensive to those from the
earth-centred forms of Paganism.
The second question was along the lines of: what is your religion’s attitude to entertainment/ the media?
I must confess that nothing sprang to mind immediately on this, so
naturally I would probably have been asked this first! Now, using that
wonderful attribute of hindsight, the negative portrayal of witchcraft in media
(there have been some good posts on The Wild Hunt about this) is what I should
have talked about if asked first, but listening to the others, a few thoughts
about the goodness and naturalness of sex may have been appropriate as well (maybe even including the differing
attitudes and creation myths? [3]). Me being me, I would probably have
gone into how things are portrayed: is it from a position of love and desire to
make things better (even if that is
exposing a problem, as was done for many Australians in the film “Samson
and Delilah”), or is it done to
sensationalise? Also, sometimes seeing sexual variety can be beneficial for
people: some films seek to sensationalise it, others start to realise that
their tastes are perhaps not held by them alone – although anything done without consent is sacrilegious. Whether I
would have said that in an audience with children and probably conservative
people there is another matter … When the host, Norm Currie started talking
about the pornography industry, it probably needed a comment that yes, there
are women – and children and men -, who are exploited by that industry and
there are concerns about what the pornography industry can lead to, but there is
also a case that some women choose that and sex work because they like sex (I know such women), and others for whom
pornography is a good part of their sex life. I’m going to think further on the
Buddhist perspective of ‘mindful consumption’, and the comments about this
issue more broadly (including Norm’s
comments about erosion of parental confidence, and the Kumari project).
The third question was about what each panel member would like
for their faith ‘this year’. In my case, I would like Pagans in Australia to
start discussing issues such as the ‘three centres’ of Paganism (see here,
here and
here).
A secondary issue is that I would like those Pagans who are focused on the
historical discrimination, abuse and the ‘Burning Times’ that we’ve had to see
that not all Christians are as those people were.
The ‘fourth’ question was a double-bunger from the floor: what does the word ‘God’ mean, and could
someone who lived a loving life outside religion be considered spiritual or
religious?
Well, ‘God’ to me means the male Consort of the Goddess :) Simple,
easy, concise, eh? Naturally that would need to be expanded into a discussion
of active and nurturing principles, and my personal views on the third point of
balance. In terms of the second part of the question, such a person could not
be seen as religious unless they identified as such, but they could certainly
be viewed as admirable. I personally would suspect them of being a spiritual
person, but I would absolutely respect their right to self identify on that. (The polytheist response from the Buddhist
was certainly quite interesting, from a Pagan perspective. On that I also found
the Hindu response to a question I asked about attitudes to females at the interfaith
event I recently attended fascinating as well, as it included major male and female Deities,
and a range of male and female demi-Gods ... but then, Hinduism has been
suggested – not by me – as being close to what Paganism would look like if neochristianity
had not happened.)
Norm Currie’s question in response to this issue is along the lines of how does ‘the mind’ sit with the faiths as
something which is between us and God? There is where I would quote again
the view that the world is the cloak that the Goddess puts on so that we may
know her.
The fifth question was a double-bunger from the floor: how do religions resolve the conflict
between science and faith, and is there a risk of homogenising faiths and
losing individuality? I would respond to the second part of this question
first, by pointing out that Paganism has for decades had many people take an
eclectic path, taking a bit here and a bit there, and our experience is that
there is a distinct lack of homogeneity. Furthermore, we find many people actively
seek to be more original or more true to the ‘original’ or the more genuine
forms of expression of pathways – I’m thinking of various reconstructionist
paths here. The overall effect is a great dynamism, not of boring homogeneity. As
far as the conflict between science and faith is concerned, those from the
earth-focused and self-focused centres of paganism (and those focused on society, whichever centre they ‘fit’ into … )
would have none, as belief in literal Deities or creation myths is not a key
part of their belief. Those of us who are Deity-focused could possibly see a
conflict, but the widespread acceptance of things being an allegory helps, in
terms of, for instance, our creation myth: how can an allegory conflict with
science? (And, perhaps fairly obviously,
I am tiring at this point, so my replies are becoming somewhat rushed and losing
their fluency
or eloquence
… ) In terms of Deity, my views personally – since I cannot hope to speak
on behalf of all Pagans, or even a sizeable portion of same – are that the
Goddess created the conditions under which the ‘Big Bang’ and the ‘laws’ of
physics and science happened, so … no conflict :)
The replies of the four panellists to this question were particularly
good, I thought, and illustrates the value in watching the original video.
And now, time to rest.
[3]
Christians and neochristians tend to see the world as something their God
created, and then put aside, whereas we Pagans see the world as a cloak the
Goddess puts on that we may know her – which I think I first came across in
Gavin Andrews’ excellent book "Paganism and Christianity" (pub.
2011, Smashwords - see here). As for creation myths, see the background
notes here.
[2]
Please see here and my post "The
Death of Wikipedia" for the
reasons I now recommend caution when using Wikipedia. I'm also exploring use of
h2g2, although that doesn't appear to be as
extensive (h2g2 is intended - rather
engagingly - to be the Earth edition of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to
the Galaxy").
Love, light, hugs and blessings
Gnwmythr,
Wéofodthegn
(pronounced "new-MYTH-ear"; ... aka Bellatrix
Lux? … Morinehtar?
… Would-be drýicgan
... )
My "blogiography" (list of all posts and guide as to how to best use this site) is here, and my glossary/index is here.
I started this blog to cover karmic regression-rescue (see here and here), and it grew ... See here for my group mind project, here and here for my "Pagans for Peace" project (and join me at 9 PM on Sunday, wherever you are, to meditate for peace), and here for my bindrune kit-bag. I also strongly recommend learning how to flame, ground and shield, do alternate nostril breathing, work with colour, and see also here and be flexible.
- One size does NOT fit all.
- Don't be mediocre - seek to excel.
- Gnwmythr's Stropping Strap: Occam's Razor only works if the simplest solution is actually recognised as being the simplest, rather than the one that best fits one's bigotries being labelled 'simplest'.
- Our entire life experience, with all the many wondrous and varied people, places and events in it, is too small a sample for statistical reliability about Life.
- May the world of commerce and business be recognised to be a servant, not a master, of the lives of people.
- Ban the dream interpretation industry!
- A home is for living in, not feeling, becoming or being rich or a “better” class than others.
- Being accustomed to interacting via certain rules makes those rules neither right nor universal.
- Like fire to the physical, emotions to the soul make a good servant, and a bad master.
- Expertise at intimacy and emotional happiness is generally not the same thing as spiritual growth.
- Any person, male or female, who has neither a serious health issue, dependents nor an agreement about study. yet expects their partner to work to support them, is, spiritually speaking, little more than a parasite.
- The means shape the end.
- BPLF restraint of uncooperatives is NOT an opportunity for revenge or getting even - even unconsciously.
- As words can kill, the right to freedom of speech comes with a DUTY to be as well-informed, objective and balanced as you can be.
- My favourite action movie of all time is "Gandhi", although I've recently come across "Invictus" and might put that one in to that category. However, I loathe the stereotypical action movie - and, for similar reasons, I loathe many dramas, which are often emotionally violent, more so in some cases than many war films.
- All of the above - and this blog - could be wrong, or subject to context, perspective, or state of spiritual evolution ...
Do not pray for easy lives. Pray to be
stronger [people].
John F. Kennedy (who was
quoting 19th Century Episcopal Bishop Phillips Brooks)
Jesus loves you. Odin wants you to grow up.
We make our decisions. And then our decisions turn around and make us.
F.W. Boreham
Females, get over 'cute'. Get competent. Get trained. Get capable. Get over 'cute'. And those of you who are called Patty and Debby and Suzy, get over that. Because we use those names to infantalise females – we keep females in their 'little girl' state by the names we use for them. Get over it. If you want to be taken seriously, get serious.
Jane Elliott
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good [people] to do nothing.
(based on
writing by) Edmund Burke
The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them.
Albert Einstein
We didn't inherit the Earth from our ancestors, we only borrowed it from our children
Antoine De Saint-Exupéry
Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes the personality and eats away its vital unity.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it is not haphazard and superficial. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Too much and too long, we seem to have surrendered community excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things. Our gross national product ... if we should judge America by that -- counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. ... Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages; the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage; neither our wisdom nor our learning; neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country; it measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile."
Robert F. Kennedy 1968
There are risks and costs to a program of action. But they are far less than the long-range risks and costs of comfortable inaction.
John F. Kennedy
If we could change ourselves, the
tendencies in the world would also change. As a man changes his own nature, so
does the attitude of the world change towards him. … We need not wait to see
what others do. (Often degraded to “Be
the change you want to see in the world” – see here)
Gandhi
Tags: attitudes, governance, interfaith, paganism, perceptions, politics, science, society,
First published: Laugardagr, 5th July, 2014
Last edited (excluding fixing typo's and other minor matters): Saturday, 5th July, 2014
