Is religion natural for humans?

I read a March 5th post on Facebook by a Jim Palmer pretty much trashing “what the misguided religious establishment doesn’t want you to know”, based on his experiences as an evangelical megachurch pastor”. Among the 15 things he cited was this one, with which I felt a need to argue on points if not in essence:

“Nobody is born into the world with a religious belief system imprinted on their soul. People are born human and are slowly conditioned by narratives of culture, race, religion, gender, nationality, which often divide us from one another and masks what makes us one.”

I’ll grant that people aren’t born with a religious system imprinted, and there are some that do more damage to the psyche than others. However, humans ARE born with the ability to sense otherworldly presences. When these are local entities, with whom humans can interact, there aren’t any huge problems, even if they are referred to as gods.
Within monotheism, given its too common ‘ours is the only right way, therefore all others are wrong’ attitude, people who agree on their version of “God” can feel justified in doing all sorts of horrible things. When religion is based on people interacting with local spirits, and accepting that things are different elsewhere, there is less justification for using religion as an excuse to attack others.
The important point is that it is natural for humans to perceive spirits, have trances, have near death experiences, see ghosts, talk to plants and animals and have them respond, etc. It doesn’t take much more than that for a religion to form. “Why is your luck better than mine, and how do I improve it?” is not that far from “why does your beer or cheese come out better than mine?”. We copy what other people do even when we don’t understand the underlying reasons their results are better. We simply want the results. When a spirit has told you “do this” and it works, that’s a personal experience. When others copy that without having an interaction with the ‘Unknown’, that’s where Faith and ritual can creep in.

I see religion, generically, as a way a culture explains how the world works to itself. That explanation must include all the normal experiences, from birth, death, gender, love, evil (why people do horrible things), ghosts, memories (of past lives), psychic phenomena, spontaneous healing, etc. people all over the world have. Our culture is currently handicapped by having decided to ask science to explain everything, when some things are not amenable to measurement. Many religions are based on the idea that if you do what the gods like, they’ll be happy with you, and help you. But what one entity may want may be different than what another wants, just as one person wants honesty, and another wants kindness.

I’m not sure that religion helps make people behave better, and certainly the older a religion is, the farther from those initial interactions with the spirits in a place, the more chance there is that those passing the ideas along will misinterpret what was intended. The more people it has reached, the more opportunities for change, just as a virus has a chance to morph each time it’s passed along to a new host. I agree with Palmer’s assertion that the way we experience a religion must come through the filter of the culture that practices it.

When I was younger I read that the two words “sacred” and “holy” are not synonymous, although they are often treated so. Sacred means set apart, special, not mundane, where as Holy means part of everything. It is an expression of oneness with all creation. It’s a more mystical view of the world. Sacred refers to places, times, artifacts, or activities that are reserved for religious use, like Church, Sunday, relics, or religious rituals. I’ve since read that Holy means set apart, but I still think the distinction needs to be made. One of the most common mystical experience, whether in shamanic trance or using hallucinogenic drugs or deep meditation is a sense of one-ness so pervasive that it is impossible to remember perfectly when one comes out, much less explain to others. But whether a mystical union with Creation or a Near Death Experience, people who experience the sense of Unity seek to recapture that feeling of love, and their perspective of what is important in life changes.

I am pagan, because I interact with various beings generally described as pagan or heathen gods. I’m also agnostic, because I’m pretty darned sure that I can’t possibly know everything, I’ve been wrong too often. But people who direct their behavior whether in life or death out of fear of punishment are missing out on the possibility of that wonderful Oneness, that merging with the Divine that those with direct experience feel. Having a goal to become part of Love rather than avoid pain seems more positive motivation to me. Not to mention, what you think on you become or manifest. Far better to think on love than talk about fear.

The World Ends not with a Bang, but with a Whimper (TS Eliot)

Back in about 1970 I started writing my own “Post Apocalyptic” SF book. I had loved Alas Babylon, the Earth Abides, and I am Legend, and I thought it would be nice to have one where it wasn’t one huge apocalypse, but rather a disaster here, a disaster there creating cumulative destruction of the infrastructure. I noticed that there was something awful going on all the time, and planned to have a chapter for each year between then and 2000 (it seemed a good year to end everything from my perspective at the time). One year I’d write a story about people dealing with flooding (Bangladesh ’74), another year drought (USA ’99), another year earthquake (California ’94), mudslides (New Guinea ’98), Wildfires (Oakland ’91), epidemic (smallpox in India ’74), hurricanes (Agnes ’72), tidal wave (Indonesia ’04), volcanoes (Mount Pinatubo ’91), just make the point that the end would be a slow crumbling, not a big “meteor hits the earth” thing.
Of course, I didn’t predict the examples I have inserted here, only meant to apply experiences from previous occurrences to modern times, occasionally mentioning a character from a previous disaster when it worked within the story. I use the example of the Boxing Day Tsunami because nothing in my 30 year intended time frame comes close, but I noticed when looking for the dates, that in lists of the ‘deadliest fill-in-the-disaster’ how many of them are in the last 25 years. We talked about “Greenhouse gases”, but I’m not sure “climate change” had hit the popular literature (although I do remember a book about the earth’s poles changing).
I recently read a post by Selina Rifkin about Fear of the Future, and how she was traumatized the anti-pollution propaganda ‘force fed’ her by her teachers, and anti-nuclear stories like The day After. We can overestimate threats. Of course we can. Look at the risks of being a victim of terrorism vs the risk of suffering a heart attack. We rarely have a solid perception of how great any given risk is, and often the rewards of the things that might increase the risk cause us to play down the risks in our heads.
My generation felt we had a special monopoly on the worry we had about nuclear war. But there’s always a disaster looming. For us baby-boomers: Nuclear anihilation, for 8th c. Anglo-Saxons, it was Vikings coming up the beach. No generation has a monopoly on trauma from the stories we were fed.
Rifkin’s essay pointed out that we can terrify kids who haven’t got the resources to deal with the dangers we want them to be aware of. But maybe the reason air pollution went down was because people were appropriately afraid of what it could do to us. Others have pointed out PSA campaigns graphically showing the dangers of plastic can rings to wildlife have led to a lifetime habit of clipping the rings before they dispose of them. Each of us has his or her own triggering moments from movies or books or conversations that led to permanent changes in how we deal with the world. Is that trauma, or simply good teaching? Could we not also argue that Halloween “Haunted Houses” could lead to trauma. They do their best to scare their customers!
I also note that the genre I enjoyed was POST-apocalyptic fiction. I would argue that I loved Swiss Family Robinson before I discovered Speculative Fiction. They were stranded alone on an island (with nearly infinite resources, and the supplies intended for an entire colony), so they did pretty well. I think that’s the “self-insertion” fantasy of most of the folks who like the zombie apocalypse and other PA stories, whether on TV, movies or in books. Whatever their particular skill set or preparations are, that will be the golden ticket that’s going to let them sail through any disaster takes out their neighbors.
I also think that I still think that “the modern world” falls, as so many civilizations have done before, it will happen, not by a single catastrophe, but by many different problems resulting in the gradual exhaustion of our infrastructure, and maybe empathy fatigue. The more we cultivate the attitude that we’re all in this together, and helping others is how we survive best, (and that little gem:”an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”) the better off we will be.
I want to finish by saying that parents (teachers, writers) are always warning kids of dangers, but it’s generally paired with advice for dealing with it: “Look both ways before crossing the street”, “Cut away from you”, “don’t mess around with fire”, or “Be polite to elders and kind to strangers, and they may save you some time in the future” which is the moral of most fairy tales. I find this far superior to stories whose point seems to be “Life sucks, and then you die.” which I don’t think helps anyone. Warnings are OK, especially when paired with instruction of something you can do that reduces the risk. Empowers your kids.
A study back in the 80’s asked thousands of school kids if they were afraid of nuclear war. The vast majority of students said yes, but when they asked the follow up question, the minority who weren’t scared were not ignorant of the possibility, but rather told the researchers “It’s not going to happen, because my parents are working against it”. We soothe children’s fears by empowering, not dis-empowering them.

Colonialism and Religion

Did you ever notice how when you think about something, you get many more prompts to keep thinking about it? Today (January 14th) was Take a Missionary to Lunch Day. When I came downstairs, John was watching African Queen (one of my favorite movies). As Mr Allnut comments to Rose that her brother had been killed by the tribesmen who were pressing their villiage into service for the Germans, was there any thought that these were Africans killing Africans because Europeans were forcing them to do so?

Then I started reading Sara Mastros book the Sorcery of Solomon, and read of the visit of the queen of Sheba to Solomon, that mentioned how the Hebrews may well have used the term “Sheba” for any civilization in Africa south of Egypt (as they seem to have used “40” to indicate most big numbers). Even in the past, humans do not much discriminate between people like us, and people not like us. The movies made by our culture show the Queen (and indeed, Solomon) as white as Hollywood. Since they usually show Jesus as a white European, I am not surprised, simply annoyed.

I am seriously ambivalent about missionaries, although I know little of them except through fiction. As a 20th century person, I am aware that people have a generally positive view of Missionaries. They leave their homes to go and help the little black babies, to ‘save their souls’, and teach them to speak, dress, and worship, as Europeans (or Americans). The colossal egotism that “our religion” (or our culture) is better for other people than their own ways is revolting. I know that it’s a normal human reaction. Even I am guilty of urging people to try a food that I love, certain that if they do they will enjoy it as much as I do. We push the foods we enjoy, and activities on others. “Try it!” “What’s in it?” “First try it then I’ll tell you.” is an exchange I’ve heard far too often, as people with food sensitivities attempt to defend themselves from the zeal of ‘well meaning’ friends. I don’t deny that those who go to force their preferences on others may have “the best of intentions”. Many of the things our culture provides such as education, or roads, or police are seen as positive things that contribute to “the greater good”. But then, so do the requirements of housing associations that regulate how you maintain your personal property to enhance the property values, or simply the image they prefer of their world. It is a small step from regulating your decorating style to deciding that your lifestyle (gender, race) are not “what we want around here”.

How often do stories about white missionaries and explorers to Africa or the New World or even the American West ignore the fact that the “Christianization” is generally combined with stealing the land, enslaving, and generally exploiting, if not outright pillaging everything the Europeans wanted, and couldn’t get by talking them out of it. We lean into the concept of cannibalism because “everyone” can agree that that’s horrible, to side step the question of What the Hell were those foreigners thinking when they came to change the religion of the natives? Who told them that was OK? There’s nothing wrong with liking what you have, and thinking it’s good for you. But when you try to force it on everyone else, you’re not only bullying, you are missing the obvious truth that everyone doesn’t need or want the same thing. How often do we see that the people fighting back against the missionaries are doing so because they see them as the scouts or front men who will be followed by the guys with guns. (How often did the trade groups send missionaries in as point people, then turn around and demand troops to ‘protect’ the poor innocent missionaries, and settlers, and traders, who were in fact, invading?)

Even the “Golden Rule” of Do unto others as you would have them do unto you fails when some people want total honesty, and some people would rather be allowed their comfortable fantasies. Some want help, others want to do things themselves; and it’s not rare that the same person might want something different in different situations.

My husband’s family was going to go to be missionaries in the South Pacific somewhere in the 60s. His mother was going to teach English, his brother teach math, he was going to teach science. They felt that this was offering something wonderful to the poor people who couldn’t get it from their own government. Did they want it? Or maybe did someone already there want them to have it? Luckily, they didn’t get sent over, but it’s still going on. People are still being encouraged to become missionaries today. Heck, even within the country you can get people knocking on your door to try to explain why their religion is better for you than yours is.

I am not surprised that the fastest growing religious demographic is “Nones”, the people who often describe themselves as spiritual but not religious. People who believe deeply in the Divine but don’t get along with churches. Others see church groups as a wonderful social resource. I’m sure it may be, when it’s helping the home-bound, or keeping people in touch with others socially (without challenging them to think), but if the church encourages them to be hostile to those who are different, if it takes their time and money but doesn’t give benefit for it, it’s hardly surprising that people leave churches. Admittedly, I come from a pagan model, where you only give people as much access to your religion as they request. I recognize that it’s easy to want others to enjoy what you love, but I’m still left feeling you should only share with those who want it. 

Magick is real, what’s the big deal?

People put so much energy into trying to prove that they don’t believe in anything irrational. Sigh. Do they really think we, as a species or they as individuals know everything when that is demonstrably untrue? The first thing we need to start being kinder to is anyone who believes that more is possible than they can explain!

“So here’s a picture of a kitten”

I am going to vent here because I am not sure to whom I could safely rant. I suppose that’s why people get therapists these days. A therapist is paid to listen to you, so there is little hesitation about griping to her or him. With friends (perhaps especially on social media, but also in person) if you talk about what a great time you had somewhere, how much you love your family, or how good you feel, the response is frequently “My life stinks, my family sucks, and your bragging about your good life just makes me (us) feel worse!” On the other hand, when someone is sharing the challenges in their lives, if you try to show solidarity by mentioning something that seems similar to what they’ve been describing, they often respond “You clearly don’t understand at all! It’s nothing like that!” or “Stop trying to one-up my pain and make it about you!”
It can seem that all we are allowed to talk about is the weather, or maybe our last meal (although some people don’t like that either), and on social media the only really safe interaction is “So here’s a picture of a kitten”. (I suppose stories about history and science are usually safe too.)

We know what we are doing, and the little aggravations and distractions that make things take longer than expected, but how do we know what wretched things are happening to everyone else? So we try to not grumble.
But communication requires honest disclosure, doesn’t it? How are others to know what help or accommodations we need if we never mention them? How are things like emotional health problems going to become accepted if we don’t talk openly about them as honestly as we do other health problems? (Wait, we are not really great at talking openly about physical issues either. Oh well.) We are left wondering whether disclosure will lead to better communication or more frustration as everything each of us says is filtered through our personal experiences.
Aside from misunderstanding innocent remarks in conversations, far too many of us have a little “you-suck-o-lator” ticking in our heads, telling us that nothing we do is appreciated or worth appreciating. “Everyone else’s problems are worse than ours. Our efforts are not worth doing much less pointing out.” We’re told to trust ourselves, but we also know that the inner-critic phenomenon is real, so how are we to know which one is informing us at any given moment?

No one wants to be The Whiner who assumes they are the only one pulling their weight, (even when it feels like it’s true). If you’re so tired by what you’ve done that you’re ready to collapse, you’re sure that you’ve tried your utmost, and maybe pushed yourself even farther than is smart, it’s easy to wonder if everyone else is pushing themselves as hard. Social media, if no one else, constantly reminds us to be gentle with ourselves (ok, they also tell us to just push through the resistance, at the same time as suggesting self care). (I’m not sure that social media doesn’t need to go away, and we should all go back to face-to-face social interactions again.)

The ability to talk to others and have them provide sympathy and support (not solutions to the problems, because that frequently runs into the “I already tried that and it didn’t work!” issue.) Sometimes all you want to know is that someone else recognizes that you are tired, frustrated, (and) or hurting, and that you are doing your best. They wish you weren’t and love (or like) you anyway. I like to think I’m good at that; some people thing so. Other’s don’t. The last thing any of us wants to do is ADD to your loved one’s frustration or feeling that no one understands or cares.

This is all without dealing with the whole AGING BS package! I see other people reporting (or not mentioning) operations, diseases, disabilities, and the general indignities of aging. Every year I get uglier and meaner, probably because I get more frustrated as I grow weaker and slower, my eyes, ears, and teeth are giving out. I’m going to point out again that calories in- calories-out is a myth, your weight is determined by your metabolism, which has a lot to do with your endocrine system, which can be (and is) thrown off by environmental toxins as well as common medications (and the mind-body connection Depression changes your brain chemistry, and your brain chemistry changes how you feel emotionally. It’s a recursive cycle.) So when people say “just lose weight”, I want to stifle them! (or worse, wish a learning experience on them!) “You think I haven’t spent the last 50 years trying? Do you have any idea how much and what I do, and don’t consume? Just put a cork in it!” I’m sure so many things would be easier if I weighed a hundred pounds (eight stone) less. Meanwhile, I am physically not able to do what I still expect I should be able to do, and that leaves me very grumpy (and I’ll be honest, sometimes I cry). But you have to be careful about crying, it’s upsetting for those who love you, so most of us probably go off into a closet or bedroom and stuff a pillow over our faces to avoid upsetting anyone, (without even getting into the greater horrors of clinical depression, even treated). I think and read more slowly too, and THAT is very frustrating!

Foxes seem to be OK too.

Sadly, I’ve got no conclusions to this string of issues that probably face most of us, not just me. I prefer to have a conclusion to a post. My only kernel of wisdom is that I remind myself that humans encompass great diversity. No one is the same, and even one person doesn’t need the same thing from one day to the next, so there is no ‘right way’ to deal with it. That’s really hard when you’d like to help, or when you need help. My best suggestion is ask for help when you need it, and be specific about what it is you need, whether a hug, an ear to listen, or help with a ride, the computer or reading small print. Say (and ask) whether you want the other person to make “I’m listening” noises, or to simply listen quietly. Speaking and listening styles are SO different, and we can’t even try to describe them as ‘masculine or feminine” traits, Northern or Southern cultural habits, “emotional or rational” personalities. But it’s helpful (if very difficult) to adapt to the other person’s style when you’re trying to help them.
So…
Ask. Listen,
and let them know they’ve been heard and that you wish you could help.

The Poor are Revolting

“When the people shall have nothing more to eat, they will eat the rich.” Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Recently (since the deaths of the Titanic tourists), a lot of people have been talking about “Eat the rich” mentality, and suggesting that it’s not very enlightened.
But it is not surprising that with the current level of economic disparity, people who are having a hard time making enough to afford housing and medical care will be angry at people who can afford to waste enough money that would save lives of hundreds of people like them and those they know.
Sadly, the rich hang out with others of a similar income level, and it’s entirely possible that they have no idea how life works for most people. We keep hearing examples of ignorance in the privileged classes. As an example when the House Republicans issued a fact sheet about their new tax cut plan (in 2017) that referred to Americans earning $450,000 a year as “low- and middle-income”. I guess they feel that they are “low” at $174,000 (the average salary of congress member), unaware that the medium US income is $31/k, or about less than a fifth of that. Shouldn’t they know that? We aren’t as surprised when we hear about ignorance in a sports or film star, but it’s painful when you hear a politician who is supposed to be crafting laws that will protect our rights be so totally clueless.

it’s natural for people to be upset when they see unfair distribution of wealth (and inequity in pay, and law, etc.) But because people get their ideas about what’s normal from what they encounter in their lives, which would be mostly people in a similar income group, and what they see on the media, which I imagine is what they feel their lives “should be like” (unless it’s an intentionally designed ‘low income’ family. When you can barely make ends meet and can’t deal with an emergency expense, too many people judge: “you should have had insurance.” With what money?

It’s natural for the poor to be angry and the rich to be oblivious, but whenever the masses can see how much the 1% have, the anger builds up to extreme pressure.Something’s going to blow. I keep remembering the line from “The Importance of Being Ernest” (by Oscar Wilde) when Aunt Augusta displays her perfect obliviousness by remarking that Jack’s having been found in a handbag, despite his wealth, culture and other admirable qualities “seems to me to display a contempt for the ordinary decencies of family life which reminds one of the worst excesses of the French revolution, and I presume you know what that unfortunate movement led to?” What the heck did she think it lead to? An influx of poor French Noblemen? The poor killing the rich? She is aware that there was a revolution, in which the poor attacked the rich, but perhaps not that there was a Reign of Terror. Or maybe she does, but considers it vulgar to contemplate.

But contemplate they must, because every strained system has a breaking point. They may consider their lifestyles ‘normal’, or even modest, since their buddies from Harvard and Yale, are richer, but when people have lost their homes, lost their jobs, and their loved one’s lives to have rich people (in charge of government) respond by trying to make sure they don’t have to see the problems of the poor, the pressure will be too much. They don’t want to be forced to see what exploiting their workers really costs in human lives. They want to avoid thinking about the poor, it disgusts them, as well it should. They should feel guilty. Wilful ignorance is a choice, and we know it- no matter what level of economics we are in. Pushed to desperation, there may be attacks. This should be avoided. If successful, history shows that poor people don’t have the skills to administrate a large system, and opportunists who have the ability to do so will take over, as happened after the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, Reconstruction, and the Peasants Revolt (after the Black Death). The alternative is to simply reduce the excess at the top and distribute it across the bottom. Forbes says that “the top 1 percent of U.S households hold 15 times more wealth than the bottom 50 percent combined.” (Harvard Crimson) The only thing really hurt by taking a portion of the wealth at the top would be their sense of control, which they have amply demonstrated that they do not use for anything but accumulating “more”.

Rousseau said ‘Man is born free, and he is everywhere in chains’, and argued that people could only experience true freedom if they lived in a society that ensured the rights and well-being of its citizens. To accomplish this, the rich will not be deprived of anything but the power to gain more control over the poor, but they will fight it. They will fight by fooling the poor to turn on each other. Or, the poor can band together, and require a fair share of the wealth their work has created,

RIP Pat Robertson

I expect I may revisit this when Trump and other people whose actions have hurt many people die. It’s too easy to do when you are in a position of great power.

While searching for images of hell to illustrate this essay, I tripped over the Gustave Dore images of Dante’s Inferno. It is an excellent example of how cultural attitudes shape our expectations of the afterlife. I picked the one of ‘evil councilors burining’ since that was Robertson’s problem in my mind, urging his followers away from compassion. My favorite image is the one where Dante is showing compassion for the damned, although in the actual poem he is taught that the punishments are well deserved, which I find sad.

I don’t believe in “Heaven and Hell”, but another dimension or plane to which our living spirits go when we have to give up on our physical bodies; in this world of energy, our individual consciousnesses exist, and can communicate with each other. We meet our ‘dead’ loved ones, and there, according to mediums, the dead can watch us while we’re still alive. That’s where previously embodied souls can learn, and look back over and assess the lives we’ve lived. it’s weird to see so many people responding within the narrow Christian mythos that teaches that when we die we go to heaven (a nice place) if we were good, and hell (a place of punishment) if we were bad. I see that as far too binary for the complexities of life.

First of all, I don’t believe in “re-incarnation”, I believe in multiple, often simultaneous, incarnations (taken as needed), because time is a useful construct for this reality, and probably doesn’t exist there, wherever ‘there’ is. Also, I don’t say ‘between lives’ because how is what we’re doing ‘there’ not living? May our over-souls not ‘call us to the principle’s office’ while we’re still involved in our lives, to offer guidance? It would seem frustrating for them, and possibly cruel to us to only be able to offer us commentary after we’ve completely screwed everything up in a given life. Many people have been saying Robertson’s gone to Hell, overlaying their perceptions of him as a ‘despicable, manipulative, spiritual vampire and hypocrite’*, with the result that they see him waking up dead and being astounded to discover that his beliefs had been mistaken. This may not be surprising among Christians who don’t subscribe to his branch of Christianity, but it’s strange to see many pagans expressing the same thing. I’d think they’d expect him to find a version of whatever ‘afterlife’ they expect for themselves.

As I see it, based on writings about religion, mediums, near death experiences, and my personal experiences, at least initially we all experience what we expected to find when we die, based on cultural teachings. Within that context we reconnect with our dead friends, and look back over our lives. Then our various spiritual mentors will come to help us make sense of what we’ve experienced. As I tend to see those mentors (Higher Self, Oversoul⁺, Guardian Angel, Spirit Guide) as full of love, compassion, and wisdom, I expect they’ll be trying to help him see what he’s done, and come to terms with it. Aren’t the teachers who went over your tests and worksheets to help you see where you made mistakes, and how to avoid them in the future, better than the ones who just gave you grades and expected you to figure out your mistakes on your own? That’s teaching. That’s helping. Frankly, I feel that experiencing awareness of all the harm that we have inadvertently caused during our lives all at once is a good description of hell. I don’t expect that it comes all at once, because that would be less useful to a soul’s development, as well as more painful. I suppose if the mentor thought he needed a ‘wake up’ call they might try it. I expect to find out more when I have to deal with it personally.

Why do we expect ‘retribution’? Humans tend to long for fairness. Small children and even animals naturally object when one gets more than others. When we see cheats and bullies prosper, we say “That’s not fair!”, and usually enjoy a bit of schadenfreude seeing them getting some of what they’d dished out. We can accept, if not welcome, getting what we deserve, but it really bothers us when we work hard to do good and don’t see any benefit from it. Christianity promises the weak: the slaves, the women, the foreigners, the disabled, (the people who always ‘get the sticky end of the popsicle stick’ through no fault of their own)[, that eventually, when they die, they will get their reward. (The western interpretation of Karma seems to promise that too.) The doctrine of Hell promises not just reward, but punishment for transgressions. This neither makes sense from the concept of a loving god, nor from the concept of multiple lives where we learn from our mistakes, grow, and get better. The promise of punishment is the promise of revenge, of indulging the frustration of those who want to see fairness as an immediate return for suffering caused. Moreover, we tend not to want retribution for the experience of the victim, not the intent of the person who did it; retribution not the pain of a carelessly dropped word, but for the years of self recrimination that the recipient was pummeled with after the person who said it has long forgotten. It’s like wanting to blame the entire buried village in the valley for the dislodging of the small rock on the mountaintop that started the avalanche. How important is intent? How important is the outcome?

While I see most NDEs (near death experience) as intrinsically filtered through the individual’s personal expectations, I think we can learn from what the thousands of reports have in common. This meme came across my FB feed, and while it reminds all of us that our reactions need to take perspectives into account, we can’t forget mother of the toddler still has to spend a lot of effort cleaning green paint, or poop off everything. I, personally, was that toddler once. Mother often told the story of how I rubbed poo on all the carved bars in my spool crib, and it took her most of a day to get it out of all the nooks and crannies with a toothbrush (perhaps she was seeking some approval, a delayed reward for the work she’d put in). I think acceptance and forgiveness comes more easily with awareness that the harm wasn’t done to create the amount of grief that it did, that the misery that was caused wasn’t intended, allows some of us to resist taking it personally, even when having to deal with the consequences. Lifes are about learning what the unintended consequences of our actions were, and how to take responsibility for them. It’s a life-long (lives-long) process. We must recognize this in others as well as ourselves. It’s harder to forgive when someone has no regret for the harm they caused.

Where is ‘fairness’? As we progress we try to learn not to drop that first rock, or first ill-chosen word. We try to learn the possibilities of unintended consequences, and we try to learn not to grasp a hurtful interpretation of a remark, so that we don’t enhance the harm it does. This is our path to progress and spiritual development. We don’t need Hell, or any form of revenge. Punishment does not teach people to do anything except try to avoid triggering that punishment. Christianity, when at it’s best, teaches people the joy of helping and being compassionate. We don’t need Hell. We can toss that away with misogyny and xenophobia. We can move forward with hope not of fairness, but of love and compassion.
To return to the analogy of the landslide, we should foster root systems that will anchor the land together especially at places where the terrain (culture?) changes dramatically, and place some form of blocks across the slope as barriers for to keep those who have lost their ‘footing’ from causing cascade effects. Just rain can causes erosion, cultureal stress can undermine our foundational believes, we need to find and strengthen our foundations. I’m pretty sure that that’s what Robertson and some of the other desperate Christians are trying to do, clinging harder to the most convenient parts beliefs, without really checking what they are built on. I hope they can find the bedrock of love, and stop cutting away at the root systems that could be holding them together. They don’t need Hell, they NEED Heaven. As much harm as he’s done, I hope he finds it.

I’ll share one last belief though, if Pat ever had dogs, I’m sure that those embodied wells of unconditional love, will be waiting when he gets to heaven.

*description from Lon Milo DuQuette
+ Education of Oversoul 7 by Jane Roberts

Guy Fawkes Day

I love holidays. All people know this.

I have loved Guy Fawkes Day since I was a little girl when my mother read me Mary Poppins Comes Back. The children were out shooting off fireworks for Guy Fawkes Day, and Mary Poppins returned from the sky falling like a spark from the last rocket.

Guy Fawkes Day in Britain is about Bonfires, and fireworks, and toffee. It comes as the Halloween festivities are winding down, and is linked to them in the history of holidays. But historically, it is about a failed plot to blow up the houses of Parliament, something that is far to close to the January 6th attempt to take over the US Capitol by a mob fired up by the rhetoric of Trump and his allies in an attempt to stop the peaceful transition of power.

Admittedly, as with Mary Poppins introducing me to the Bonfire Night holiday, in recent years there has been a much stronger association with the comic and movie V for Vendetta, (graphic novel in the 80s, movie in 2005) which uses the symbolism of Guy Fawkes as a vehicle for exploring the theme of when the government is corrupt, opposing it is the moral path. In a dystopian future England, a theocracy has come to power, repressing free thought as well as music, literature, and dedicated to the image of “normalcy” as virtue. It shows one extraordinary man who inspires a terrified population to rise up against their abusive, tyrannical government. I still thrill to the sounds of the 1812 overture, and tear up at the final scene where thousands of people in Guy Fawkes masks face off against heavily armed troops, who do not shoot, indicating that while they had not fought back before, freedom once it seemed possible, was worth dying for. Possibly it was the exposure of the corruption in the regime, but I think they always knew it was corrupt, I think that it was hope that there was a chance of success that got them moving.

But since January 6th, I cannot see the attempt to bring down a democratic government, no matter how corrupt (all concentrations of power attract corruption) through the rosy eyes of nostalgia for a history where the ‘good guys won’, as an excuse for candy and bonfires. The Proud Boys and deluded QAnon followers have been carefully brainwashed so that they believe that they are the patriots trying to save the country from those who have cheated. They too are victims, just as Winston Smith was in 1984, taught not to trust the the news, science, education, democracy, but only the stories told them by their Charismatic Leader who told them that it was fine for them to embrace their fear of Others, of those from different countries, of different religions, of those with greater education. He encouraged them to act on their fear and hatred, and they embraced him, as one does anyone who gives them unconditional love.

I don’t think that there are as many as who are truly ready to take up arms against the government, however, when you combine the willingness of those in power to do whatever is to their advantage to the rest of us, it is unsurprising that there are huge numbers of people who are afraid and unhappy, and seek someone to blame, and some can be led to acts of violence. I hope that if support from those in power is withdrawn, that once again they will slink into the shadows and nurse their conspiracy theories only among their bigot-buddies (behind KKK masks? Would the V for Vendetta story have caught on as well in the US if it were set in the US, and V hid behind a white hood?). How many generations will it take for racial bigotry to fade away in the US if it is, as it was before the Trump presidency, and the Right-wing pushback, generally considered stupid and baseless? Not “Politically Correct”, but more importantly, not morally acceptable. It’s not enough to go to the right church, but to treat others with fairness, respect, and kindness. How can we make it not profitable for those in power to rig the system to treat everyone else like commodities?

My personal urge is to make January 6th an American Bonfire Night, with fireworks and food, when we celebrate that the election worked. It was confirmed to have been honestly tallied, and bit by bit those who followed the illegal directives have been found guilty, and generally treated with a mercy that recognizes that they were duped. Unlike Guy Fawkes, no one has been executed, much less tortured to confession, drawn and quartered. (That practice did lead to a conviction and public execution after only three months, but I’m not convinced that that’s a good thing. I remind myself that history is written by the winners, and it’s what the torturers want to hear that comes out in under torture.) I am satisfied that the slow and methodical collection of proof that the commission is generating may not be as emotionally satisfying for the fanatics, but it’s reassuring for the rest of us. But I would be willing to make a bonfire and throw on the image of the Q Anon Shaman or maybe a guy in a polo shirt. I am left wondering if it did become a holiday, what foods and activities will be associated with it a hundred years from now?

Fortune Telling for Halloween

While cramming for tonight’s Otherworldly show, I’ve been tripping over various divinatory methods, (although it’s hard to tell whether they’d have been done in SCA period, that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t share them. Not everyone restricts their interest to pre 17th century stuff!).

So many of the common techniques seem to be trying to figure out who your future husband will be. I can well see the importance- it would define what level of income you’d have, as well as whether it’s the guy you like/love.

There’s the traditional: look in a mirror by candle-light and his image will appear over your shoulder (almost certainly not SCA period, the silvered glass mirrors were only just coming in, and not large). A variation has the girl cut an apple in 9 slices and eat them, offering them over her left shoulder on the tip of the knife, and he may appear to ask for a/the last slice. And she’s supposed to be brushing her hair while doing this.

This is probably related to the tradition of Allan Apples, each member of the family gets one and eats it that night for luck. Allantide is another name for Hallowtide (Hallan is Allan with a dropped H). Sometimes it was celebrated the nearest Saturday to Oct. 31.

Other variants are putting the Allan Apple- or the apple you caught in apple ducking- under your pillow to help you dream of your future mate. Sometimes apples would be marked with initials to indicate who it would be, or names would be written on paper inserted into the apples (I have to assume water-resistant ink). A man (said to be) bobbing for an apple is shown in the Luttrell Psalter, although there’s no tub I can see, just a man with a candle above him.

An alternative to floating the apples was trying to bite them hanging from a string, a more challenging version was suspending a stick with a burning candle on one end, and the apple on the other, and trying to bit it as it spun (although I think this was more a game than divination). Another description has people trying to eat the apples suspended below the candles, with the dripping wax as a hazard (as in the picture).

This reminds me of divination by wax dripped in pans of water. Some variations of this have large scoops of wax and the forms they take are interpreted, a poor man’s version of interpreting lead poured into water. (Lead and wax shapes are read much as those in tea-leaves.) Other wax divination reflects the tendency of the wax I’ve used to break into individual droplets, and the patterns the floating drops take, including the position around the edge of the pan, are read.

Another system includes cutting letters from newspaper and dropping them in bowls of water and seeing which float. You’re allowed to rearrange the letters to create the name (I wonder if scrabble letters float?). I’ve also seen writing the letters on paper and seeing which come up. One specifies that the bowl should be pure white ceramic which has only been touched by the lips of an infant.

Then there are “luggie bowls”, a blindfolded seeker chooses between three bowls, one with water, one with ash, and one empty (or other symbolic contents to predict good fortune or bad), and the bowls could be in the dark, or even under a bed.

There’s also “pulling the kale” (or beet), where you pull up a garden vegetable (blindfolded or in the dark), with the beet the rounder and more perfect, the better your coming year will be. The Kale is interpreted by is it sweet or bitter? withered or healthy looking? I can well imagine this gets a bit suggestive. Clearly Halloween (like Dec.31) is prime time for divination for the coming year, as it was Celtic New Year’s Eve.

Counting Buttons of the first person you meet on Halloween will give you a prediction using a rhyme like “Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Sailor, Rich man, Poor Man, Begger Man, Thief”.

Like the ‘crow counting rhymes’ there were probably many local variations (several given on witchipedia).

The rhyme for apple seed divination was in the Halloween Encyclopedia: Write 12 names on separate slips of paper. Holding 12 apple seeds in the left hand, recite the rhyme , turning over the paper to reveal the friend matched to each line (like the fb pairing of your 12 most frequent posters matched to different roles)

One I love

Two I love

Three I love I say

Four I love with all my heart

Five I cast away

Six he loves

Seven she loves

Eight they both love

Nine he comes

Ten he tarries

Eleven he courts

Twelve he marries

You can also cut an apple and divine by the number of seeds visible. Another system has you put 10-12 seeds in your hand, clapping and counting how many remain. The number is interpreted numerologically: 1 beginning, 2 partnership, 3 results, 4 stability, 5movement, 6 balance, 7 protection, 8 confidence, 9 abundance, 10 completion.
Another version is 2 early marriage, 3 legacy, 4 wealth (or travel),5 health (or sea voyage), 6 wisdom (fame), 7 fame or a gift.

Other forms of apple seed divination included sticking the damp seeds to your forehead, cheeks or eyelids, and naming each for a different suitor. The one that drops off last wins. Another dangling apple technique for predicting love is licking the apple and then bumping into it with your face, and if it sticks, you’re supposed to be lucky‽

One can also divine by throwing apple parings over one’s shoulder, in theory only the ones peeled in one piece. Those were probably more easily read by people use to cursive. You can get yes/no answers by saying yes/no alternately while twisting the stem off an apple, it comes off on the prediction.
And let us not forget the fate cake (I remember from reading Little Colonel’s Holidays.) It was a salty cake that had charms baked into it. A ring for marriage, a button for bachelorhood, a jewel for wealth, and another charm for travel, these were indicators of your future. One was to eat the salty cake without water (there are variations with salty bread, and an egg with the yolk replaced with salt, eaten shell and all!) and go to be backwards without speaking. During the night you’d dream that your future husband would bring you a drink, and whether the cup was expensive or cheap predicted your later economic future.

There are so many divination techniques to be used at this liminal time, but they aren’t really associated with the dead, only with the new year. Also, as one website pointed out, Halloween activities seem to have been gender sorted. Girls stayed inside and wondered about the future, guys were out taking advantage of a time of license to pull pranks. I suppose letting the girls dabble in the occult was also a type of license.

Put it on the List

“Put it on the List” is what we say to each other when we run out of anything, or, preferably, haven’t yet, and don’t want to run out of something. There are times in my life when we can simply put things on the list, and then get them when we go out, so that the inventory of ingredients or supplies around the house are what we expect to be there. One doesn’t want to reach for the rice, or milk or celery and discover that we’re out. When I was growing up it was trained into us that you never used the last pickle or last onion in case it was needed as an ingredient for dinner.

But there are times when putting something on the list is a reminder that it’s something we need to get, not as soon as we go out to the right store, but when we can. Getting the porch lights fixed, and the faucet replaced are “on the list”. Even the phrase “things we need” calls into question the nature of need. We need food, water, air, shelter. In some ways it doesn’t matter whether your shelter is straw, wood, or brick, until the wolf comes knocking at the door. At that point some of the other qualities of the material become something you “need” more. Modern versions have the first two pigs running to their brother’s house. Older versions honestly admit that they have entered the food chain in a way none of us wants.

There’s a common mean that suggests we should excise the word “should” from our thinking. “Should” implies that one option is preferable. Yet it also includes the implication that there’s a choice. If you want not to be eaten, you should choose brick as a building material. I think we can take it as a given that we prefer not to be eaten, but that bricks are available, or that we can afford them is not a given. You “should” diet, then you’ll lose weight and be healthier is a common assumption that ignores the science of metabolism and the millions of people for whom that advice doesn’t work. We “should” go to bed early so we will wake rested in the morning is odious advice to those with insomnia. Rather than “should” I think “if-then” suggestions at least include the possibility that the “IF” being suggested may or may not be possible.
I know that I have had a privileged life. I try to appreciate the lessons I learn about how life is for others when we slide into the less privileged levels of income, health, or other attributes. In this lifetime, I am sure to remain white. I suppose it’s an assumption that that will always be a marker of privilege. If that change happens, I hope I can learn from the example of those who have had to deal with getting the sticky end of the popsicle stick with grace and patience, and follow it.

We say we need something when we want it to make our life the way we would prefer. The unspoken part of that is we need “in order to…” Put it on the list so that we will have it when the occasion to use it comes up. If we keep staple supplies around the house, we won’t have to invest the time to go get it, which when you have chosen to live in a rural area could add an hour to a ten minute task, or five dollars in gas to pick up a two dollar ingredient. Those replacement light bulbs mean we don’t have to wait in the dark until the next errands day. It’s convenience. But there are people who have to choose between a medicine that could reduce the risk of death or disability, or paying rent. That’s closer to a need, but it’s still “if you don’t do this, the situation will be different.” Technically, we don’t need air. We only NEED to keep breathing in order to live. We don’t have to live. Indeed, as little as we consider it, every one of us will stop breathing at some point. I guess my point is that we often don’t finish the full “if-then” when we casually say we need something. People in my income bracket would say that the rich don’t need their expensive clothes, but that ignores the human reality that they do require, emotionally, the approval of those with whom they interact. If they deviate from expectations their lives, emotional, financial, social, and other aspects would suffer. Would they be able to reorganize their lives to live without those clothes, that house, that job, those friends? Possibly, but would they be emotionally scarred by it? Almost certainly. (In no way do I mean to suggest that this justifies a system that allows some people to suffer from lack of adequate medical care simply to prevent others to not have to adapt their expectations, only that social pressures affect the rich as well as the poor.) I would like to think I will remember to be aware of how options are often subject to outside influences, and be kinder to others and myself.