03.11.07
Pagan Charity
We went ot Cedar Ridge Community Church today, and as usual, the sermon was fantastic. Talking about the second half of the book of Amos, the pastor focused on the Bible’s call to social justice.
It made me think.
Right now I am seriously considering Paganism and specifically Druidry. But it doesn’t seem like Paganism has much to say about charity, about divine love and selfless service. Of course, generousity is a pagan virtue, but there’s surely nothing as explicit in Paganism as, say, the Sermon on the Mount.
I’m sure a pagan would tell me that selfless service and love-thy-neighbor are implicit in paganism, but I wonder if implicit is enough? Jesus certainly beckons us to come out of our comfort zone, to give of ourselves much more than we naturally would be inclined to. The Bhagavad Gita likewise has Krishna exhort us to ultimate selflessness. In both cases, there’s a powerful invitation to take a walk on the wild side of love, to give of ourselves in ways that would seem make us vulnerable.
An implicit understanding of neighborly love, by contrast, doesn’t seem like it would really impel the believer to do more than he or she already would have done.
I thought further that Neo-Paganism in all it’s variations seems to be a very self-centered, inward-focused path. It’s all about finding spiritual fulfillment, not about loving others. In Christianity you devote yourself to God and to your neighbor, and you find fulfillment on the way. In the Bhagavad Gita, you become selfless in everything you do, and you discover that you didn’t need to be fulfilled in the first place. But in Paganism you specifically seek spiritual fulfillment for the sake of being fulfilled.
Sure, there’s an ecological bent to mose Neo-paganism, and since most Pagans tend to be more on the liberal side anyway, there’s probably a general attirude of sharing and giving, but nothing as strong and as life-changing as the words of Jesus and Krishna.
It bothers me.
Erik said,
March 12, 2007 at 9:44 am
Bit of a broad brush there… especially since “paganism” is not a religion per se, but a religious perspective and/or a collection of diverse religions. It’s true that the focus is generally somewhat different, though, and that the social gospel is one of Christianity’s truly valuable contributions to the world.
On the other hand, most of the neo-pagan movement is only a few decades old, and only now beginning to reach sufficient critical mass to be able to support pagan-specific charitable groups and activities - but they are coming. Here’s a couple I know of:
http://www.avaloncares.org/
Avalon Cares has been doing good work in areas affected by Katrina; it’s an outreach of Officers of Avalon, an organization of pagan service personnel (police, fire and other emergency response folks)
http://www.thorthebarbarian.com/ourkingdom/id2.html
Don’t be put off by the outward quirkiness of the site - some folks that I know and respect online are involved in this, and they are acting locally to make life better for people right where they are.
Kullervo said,
March 12, 2007 at 9:58 am
I was afraid of this- I meant “charity” actually in the Christian sense- the divine mandate to love your neighbor as yourself. i didn;t mean chrity in the popular contemporary sense, i.e., the act of donating to good causes.
My problem is not with Pagans not doing enough good works. My problem is with Paganism not including a mandate to love beyond what you’re normally inclined to do anyway.
Erik said,
March 12, 2007 at 12:08 pm
Gotcha. Of course, from my perspective that sort of thing has to come from within anyway…
Kullervo said,
March 12, 2007 at 12:14 pm
Yeah, but that’s kind of what i was getting at.
I’m not sure”coming from within”does the trick. in the end, it means you’re just going to do what you were going to do anyway.
Jesus and Krishna, on the other hand, beckon us to step outside of our confort zone in the way that we love our neighbors and fellow-humans. That’s a big deal, in my opinion.
Molly said,
March 13, 2007 at 10:05 am
Perhaps that is always going to be an issue with any heterodox religion/belief system, and especially with any one lacking in written texts (I’m speaking of ancient pagan belief systems, not the neo-pagan ones). You mention Hinduism, but there are as many ways to be a Hindu as there are Hindus. Of course, Hinduism does provide an ethical basis for a society…
You have been asking a lot of questions–which I think is great. Maybe you should examine which questions you have been asking and which you have not?
You seem to be wondering “What should I believe?” and “Why should I believe in (some specific aspect of some specific belief)?”
Why should you believe?
What is it that you want from a belief system?
Does a belief system have to fulfill every need of its believers to be valid?
Just some thoughts…
Erik said,
March 13, 2007 at 12:34 pm
Oh, and there is one other thing I meant to mention, but forgot to earlier… you said, …Neo-Paganism in all it’s variations seems to be a very self-centered, inward-focused path. It’s all about finding spiritual fulfillment, not about loving others.
Just wanted to point out that this is not the case in most of the Reconstructionist/Revivalist religions (Hellenismos, Asatru, etc). We (broadly speaking) believe that the most important thing is to serve and honor the Gods, and to live as moral and honorable a life as possible according to your best understanding (the writings of our spiritual ancestors offer guidance along that way, of course, we in the Hellenic and Roman movements being particularly blessed in this regard!); personal spiritual fulfillment is *not* the aim and end.
“Loving” others is not a particular commandment in my religion, but xenia (hospitality) is; “hospitality” in Hellenismos is an extremely wide-ranging concept, which entails (among other things) treating all persons with courtesy and basic consideration unless their actions dictate they be treated otherwise. It is a significant difference.
Calixto said,
March 23, 2007 at 8:58 am
Hello, I came here via Erik’s blog. I read this post and wanted to share something.
As Erik pointed out, there are various “Pagan” religions. Like Erik, I am a Hellenist. In Hellenismos, Xenia or hospitalitality is very important. Traditionally one could not spur a suppliant for any reason. If a traveller or a beggar asked for hospitality they could not be refused, and one was to give them bed and board for at least a night or several nights.
Suppliants are protected, whether POWs, beggars or guests.
A major message in both the Iliad and the Odyssey is the importance of Hospitality. Agamemnon rejects xenia towards Chryses at the start of the Iliad, and sparks the plague, and the disasters that befall the Acheans. Achilles grants xenia to his enemy, Priam, and gains honor.
In the Odyssey, Odysseus is mistreated by his host, Polyphemus, while the Suitors of Penelope abuse the hospitality of Penelope, and both bad host and bad guest meet bad ends.
Zeus is the protector of suppliants, and brings Divine retribution on those who abuse or ignore them. He is also recorded in myth as travelling the world as a beggar to test people’s hospitality and charity, as in the story of Philemon and Baucis.
The importance of upright living and hospitality/charity also figures in Hesiod’s _The Works and Days_.
Calixto said,
March 23, 2007 at 8:58 am
Also, and interesting title of a blog, what is the significance?
Kullervo said,
March 23, 2007 at 11:21 am
Not to be offensive, but do you guys really not see the difference between the “don’t act like a jerk, take care of your guests, and give money to beggars” you’re espousing and the total selfless love of the Sermon on the Mount?
Anyway, the significance of the blog title is explained in my “About” pages: they’re the top two links on my sidebar.