a Prayer to Brighid

Brighid, Lady of healing
May we find wholeness in troubled times
Brighid, Lady of the smith's flame
May we forge a brighter future from uncertainty
Brighid, Lady of sweet speech
May we raise our voices in eloquence and strength
Brighid of the Hospitalers,
May we support those in need around us
Brighid of the Judgments,
May we act fairly to all, friend or foe
Brighid of the Cowless,
May we protect the helpless among us
Brighid of the Tuatha De Danann
May we find courage to endure every challenge
By the endless sea
By the ever-changing sky
By the firm earth
Let it be so

- M. Daimler, 2016

statue of Saint Brigit, Kildare, Ireland, image copyright M Daimler 2016

Goblins

 One of the more well-known types of Fey, by name at least, are goblins but many people are vague on what exactly goblins are. So today lets take a look at goblins, what they are, and some folklore surrounding them.

The word goblin itself dates back to about the 14th century and is believed to possibly come from the Latin Gobelinus, and to be related to the German Kobold; the meaning is given as an ugly fairy or devil (Goblin, 2016). Originally the word goblin was not applied to a specific type of fairy being but rather was used as a generic term, in line with the older uses of fairy and elf, to indicate a more general type of being. In Scots, for example, we can see more than a half dozen kinds of fairies which are described as goblins, from Gunnies to Whaups (SLD, 2016). The name goblin was used in earlier periods as a synonym for other negative types of fairies, such as thurs and shuck, both of which had connotations of maliciousness and evil (Williams, 1991). The prefix 'hob' was added in front of the word goblin, giving us hobgoblin, to indicate a goblin type spirit which was less negative and more benevolent; hobgoblins were inclined to mischief but also known to be helpful to people where goblins were not (Briggs, 1976). MacKillop posits that the word as well as the being were borrowed into Celtic belief from outsiders, likely from Germanic folk belief probably of the Kobold (MacKillop, 1998). The Irish Púca is sometimes described as a goblin, and goblins are often seen as equivalent to bogies. An array of subgruops of fairies are considered goblins or hobgoblins including the aforementioned Púca (and more general Puck), Bogies, the Fuath - themselves a general term inclusive of specific types - Boggarts* and Bogles, who are usually considered the more evil sort of goblins, the Welsh Coblynau, and Irish Clauricaun and Dullahan (Briggs, 1976; MacKillop, 1998). Even the usualy benevolent Brownie is sometimes considered a goblin, or perhaps more properly a hobgoblin (SLD, 2016; Briggs, 1976).

When they appear in folklore goblins are generally described as wizened or smaller than the average human and unattractive in their features, ranging from grotesque to animalistic. In Rossetti's poem 'The Goblin Market' the depiction of the goblins directly relates them to animals describing them with whiskers, tails, and with fur (Rossetti, 1862). Dickens described them as small, with long arms and legs, and rounded bodies (Silver, 1999). These descriptions are typical of those found in older folklore as well where goblins are usually referred to as grotesque and ugly. Generally goblins are male and their physical descriptions reflect ideas closer to imps or devils than the usual fairies who appear fair on the outside no matter how dangerous they may be on the inside. This may reflect a belief that goblins, although a type or kind of fairy, were closer to or on the border of being demonic; this is muddy water at best as there was often a fine line between the Fey and demons in the medieval period particularly among the literati. Briggs suggests that it was particularly the influence of Protestant belief which edged the goblins into the category of the demonic as they directly equated them to 'imps from Hell' (Briggs, 1967). In fact imp is often given as a synonym for goblin, further confusing the issue. Specific types of goblins, such as the bogies, were known as shapeshifters as well and could alter their appearance at will in order to more easily decieve people. Because of their fearsome reputation many people were afraid of goblins, and even the generally more benevolent hobgoblins (Evans-Wentz, 1911).

Goblins were known to favor specific locations and might set up residence in a home; in one story a bogey takes over a farmer's field and had to be tricked into leaving (Evans-Wentz, 1911; Briggs, 1976). In Rossetti's poem they have their own market and a well worn path which is taken to and from it each dawn and dusk. Like many Fey goblins are usually considered nocturnal and are most likely to be encountered at night (Evans-Wentz, 1911). Goblins of various sorts might also be associated with wilder locations and with the ruins of former human habitations and were known to lead people astray, either as part of a frustrating but ultimately harmless joke or to the person's eventual death (Briggs, 1967). By modern reckoning goblins fall under the dominion of the Unseelie court and may be either solitary or trooping fairies, depending on what kind of goblin is being discussed (Briggs, 1976). Hobgoblins, however, are harder to be certain of as they are usually seen as more benign and can be associated with helpful spirits like Brownies.

There is at least one well known piece of more modern literature which refers to goblins, Rossetti's poem 'The Goblin Market' which I have written about previously. In the poem the goblins appear in a fairly typical form being deceptive, malicious, and grotesque in appearance. They play the usual role of a group of fairies trying to trick mortals, in this case by getting them to eat dangerous fruit. In the poem when the person the goblins are seeking to trick resists they become violent, which is also inline with the general temperament normally seen with them. Goblins play a prominent role in the film 'Labyrinth' where they are depicted more as hobgoblins, being somewhat dangerous and set against the story's heroine but overall more mischeivious than actually malicious. Goblins also feature in the Harry Potter novels and movies, and while they physical resemble the goblins of folklore in those fictious depictions they are very different in character from the traditional, being more similiar to traditional depictions of dwarves with their focus on money and metalsmithing than folkloric goblins.

Ultimately goblins are a difficult group of fairies to define, being both a specific type of being and also a class of being. The word itself is just as ambiguous, the etymology uncertain beyond the 12th century, and the ultimate root unknown. The term goblin can be used to indicate a specific being which is small, grotesque and malicious or a broader category of beings that were generally described as 'imps' and ran a gamut from devilish to mischeivious. When the prefix hob is added it indicates a more benign nature to the creature being discussed; Shakespeare's Puck is referred to as a hobgoblin in the play A Midsummer Night's Dream. However Protestant influence did add a darker reputation even to the hobgoblin who were considered out-right demonic in some places. The only way to be certain of the usage of goblin or hobgoblin to look at the context of the reference, however one can safely say that goblins were generally viewed as dangrous and to be feared, whatever sort of goblin was being discussed.

*boggarts may also be angered brownies and there is a somewhat fine semantic line at times between a hobgoblin and a brownie.

References:
Goblin (2016) Online Etymology Dictionary
SLD (2016) Dictionary of the Scots Langauge: Goblins
Williams, N., (1991). The Semantics of the Word Fairy: Making meaning out of thin air
Briggs, K., (1976). A Dictionary of Fairies
Silver, C., (1999) The Strange and Secret Peoples: fairies and the Victorian consciousness
Rossetti, C., (1862) The Goblin Market
Evans-Wentz, W., (1911) The Fairy Faith in Celtic Countries
MacKillop, J., (1998). Dictionary of Celtic Mythology
Briggs, K., (1967) The Fairies in Tradition and Literature

Racism is Not Part of CR - Or My Heathenry

So its late summer and once again there's a flare up in the Heathen social media sphere relating to racism. Sadly this is nothing new. In fact three years ago, also in August, I wrote a previous blog partially about my opinion of racism. This is not a new issue.

This particular iteration came up when the Asatru Folk Assembly, a large US Heathen organization, made a public statement which has widely been interpreted as being both racist and homophobic/transphobic. When questioned about it they clarified that yes, in fact, they consider Asatru to be for straight 'European' people. I found myself yesterday morning being asked by several different people what my opinion was about the situation, as someone who identifies as Heathen and is also both mixed race and lgbtq. My opinion from that perspective is that its crap.

I am part of a Heathen kindred which includes people of non-European ancestry and I would far, far rather stand in solidarity and worship with my Kindred sister, who is one of the best, most honorable people I know - and a devoted Thor's woman - than I would ever want to claim any kinship to some stranger who shares nothing with me but an illusory relation based on coincidental melanin similarity. My Kindred sister is part of my innagard, and her ancestry or ethnicity is a complete non-issue. And I am lucky to have her in my life and in my Kindred. Those nidthings who judge her as less or say she has no place in her religion do nothing but show their own lack of value in doing so. My own ancestry, such as it is which includes both European and Native American, doesn't make me a better or worse Heathen, and the idea that I should be a 'feminine woman' or a 'masculine man' to properly honor the Gods shows a lack of knowledge of historic Heathenry in my opinion and a lack of understanding of gender and sexuality in general.

So there was that to start, but beyond that the other half of my spirituality got dragged into this growing debacle when someone publicly commented that Celtic Reconstruction shared the same values - racist, homophobic, transphobic values - that had started the drama to begin with. Then I was seeing people in multiple places talking about how racist CR is, and that causes me pain. Not because there aren't any racists in CR, lets be honest racists are a plague upon all religions and spiritualities, but because CR in general has always been something that was vocally anti-racist and many people who have been active in the community for years, like myself, have worked hard to emphasize that CR (and in my case Irish Recon) is not only anti-racist but also widely inclusive.

I want to be crystal clear here - CR does not support any stance, statement, or organization that is racist.

I can say this with confidence not because I myself am some sort of spokesperson for CR, but because we have a book called the CR FAQs which is as close to an accepted guidebook of CR as exists and it says in plain black and white text that CR rejects racism.
to quote: "CR is firmly anti-racist. This has been unanimously agreed upon by representatives of the established CR sub-traditions, CR elders and other long-term members of the community, including the founders of the tradition.... No matter where your ancestors were from, or what your ethnic background, you are welcome to practice CR with us." 

Is that clear enough?
Anyone - anyone - who says different is wrong. Period. 

And as far as I am personally concerned the Irish Reconstructionism I practice, based on my research into the history and mythology of the pagan culture, is profoundly anti-racist, and anti-homophobic. You are welcome to honor the Gods with me no matter what your ethnic background, no matter who your ancestors were, and no matter what your sexual orientation or gender identity is. 

Beannachtai na tri Morrignae duit.

Gods and Fairies - Excerpt from Fairycraft

Gods and Fairies - Excerpt from Fairycraft

In Christian myth it is said that the fairies exist as beings that are between the nature of angels and demons; many people dismiss this as later propaganda but I believe it represents a reflection of genuine older belief. In pagan times the fairies were seen as being of the same nature as the Gods, but on a lower level, existing somewhere between the Gods and humans. Within modern Fairy Faiths the fairies - as well as the old Gods - have been greatly diminished and reduced to beings that are often seen as less than human, but this is not true to the older view.

  In Grimm's Teutonic Mythology we are told: "On the nature of Elves I resort for advice to the ON. [old Norse] authorities, before all others…..the Elder Edda several times couples œsir and âlfar together, as though they were a compendium of all higher beings, and that the AS. [Anglo-Saxon] ês and ylfe stand together in exactly the same way. This apparently concedes more of a divinity to elves than to men." (Grimm, 1882). From this we can understand that in both Norse and Germanic as well as Anglo-Saxon belief the Alfar, who were roughly equivalent to the Irish Sí, were seen as a semi-divine race of beings that were often placed alongside the Gods.

   Robert Kirk's book Secret Commonwealth, based on his 17th century experiences with fairies, says: "These Siths, or fairies... are said to be of a middle Nature betwixt Man and Angel, as were Dæmons[i] thought to be of old." (Kirk, 2007). This also shows the idea of the fairies as beings that exist above humans but below Gods in the universal hierarchy.

    Evans Wentz, writing 200 years later says: "In the Book of Leinster the poem of Eochaid records that the Tuatha De Danann, the conquerors of the Fir-Bolgs, were hosts of siabra; and siabra is an Old Irish word meaning fairies, sprites, or ghosts." (Evans Wentz, 1911) This connects the Irish Tuatha de Danann, often seen as the old pagan Gods, with the fairies. Wentz goes on to say: "In the two chief Irish MSS., [manuscripts] the Book of the Dun Cow and the Book of Leinster, the Tuatha De Danann are described as 'gods and not-gods'; and Sir John Rhys considers this an ancient formula comparable with the Sanskrit deva and adeva, but not with 'poets (dée) and husbandmen (an dée)' as the author of Cóir Anmann learnedly guessed." (Evans Wentz, 1911). Some modern authors do indeed see the reference to "Gods and not-Gods" as referring to the division between the people of skill and the common laborers, however I agree with Rhys that it more likely refers to the separation of the Gods and the fairies, in the same way that we see the Aesir and Alfar referred to in the Norse/Germanic material. There are many additional references in Irish myth to the sí, particularly the riders of the sí, acting with or at the request or direction of the Gods. It can be difficult to discern if these references are meant to indicate that the riders of the sí are the Tuatha Dé Danann or if they represent a separate force under the command of the Tuatha Dé, but I tend to favor seeing them as the "not-gods" who are allied with the Gods. If this is accepted along with the references to the fairies existing between men and Gods, then it becomes clear that the fairies exist as beings part of but separate from the Gods, and would likely have arrived in Ireland before the Gods and have been in the mounds before the Gods were driven into them.

  Are the fairies the "not-Gods" of Irish myth? It is impossible to know with certainty, but it is a possibility, and one I embrace. Whether they are or not, it can be said that they have long been viewed as powerful beings that are less than Gods but more than humans and should be given our respect. Using the framework of the old Fairy Faith provides an excellent way to do this.

Within the loose category of the term ‘fairy’ there are a huge array of different beings and it is far beyond the scope of this book to discuss them all, however it’s important for us to look at several specific types...

       It’s also always best to keep in mind that although we are seeking these beings out as allies and even friends, they must be treated with respect and caution. As Terry Pratchett said:

“Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder.

Elves are marvelous. They cause marvels.

Elves are fantastic. They create fantasies.

Elves are glamorous. They project glamour.

Elves are enchanting. They weave enchantment.

Elves are terrific. They beget terror.

The thing about words is that meanings can twist just like a snake, and if you want to find snakes look for them behind words that have changed their meaning.

No one ever said elves are nice.”

---

[i] Daemon - "(in ancient Greek belief) A divinity or supernatural being of a nature between gods and humans." https://www.google.com/search?q=definition+daemon&oq=definition+daemon&aqs=chrome.0.69i57j0l3j69i62l2.6419j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

The Seelie and Unseelie Courts

   By many accounts the beings of Fairy are divided into two courts, the Seelie and Unseelie. This is often simplified as the 'good' and 'bad' fairies, or as F. Marian McNeill says the 'gude wichts'* and the 'wicked wichts' and was initially a Lowland Scottish belief that later spread (McNeill, 1956). I think we lose the nuances between the two when we try to reduce them into such blunt terms as good and bad (or worse good and evil) and also that many modern people may not fully understand the concepts of seelie and unseelie. So let's look at what exactly seelie and unseelie mean, and how the two courts were traditionally understood, as well as the likely original roots of both as a single entity. 

two beeches, one red, one green

The words seelie and unseelie come to us from Scots, itself an amalgam of a variety of languages found in the Lowland areas of Scotland. Although its most often seen today as 'Seelie' it also appears in older texts in a variety of forms including seely, seily, sealy, with seely being the most common (DSL, 2016). It is often a term in Scots dictionaries associated with the fairies and given as an adjective to describe both a fairy court and the disposition of individual fairies themselves. Meanings for seelie are given ranging from happy, blessed, lucky, fortunate, and good natured, as well as having connotations of bringing good luck (DSL, 2016; Jamieson, 1808). In contrast unseelie - also spelled oonseely, onseely, unsealy, or unseely - means dangerous, unlucky, unfavorable, unhappy, unholy, and ungodly (DSL, 2016). The word unseelie, in the form of unsely, can be found as far back as the 16th century meaning unlucky or miserable but has generally been applied to times, places, and animals (DSL, 2016). I have been unable to find any older references to unseelie being applied to fairies. 

The Seelie court is described in relation to the fairies specifically as the "pleasant or happy court, or court of the pleasant and happy people" and is also given as a general term for all fairies (Jamieson, 1808). In folklore the Seelie court can act benevolently at times for no reason other the sake of kindness, as we see in the 1783 ballad of Allison Gross, where the eponymous witch of the story punishes a man who refused her sexual advances by bespelling him into the shape of a worm. The unfortunate man is cursed to circle around a tree every day in this form, until one Halloween "when the seely court was riding by" and the queen stops, picks up the worm, and uses her magic to restore his original shape to him (Child, 1882). They are also know to be extremely generous to those whom they favor and to be kind to the poor, giving bread and grain as gifts (Briggs, 1976). It was believed that members of the Seelie court would help those who propitiated them and that this help took various forms including the fairy doing work for the human around their home or farm (McNeill, 1956).  Despite its reputation as generally kindly the Seelie court was known to readily revenge any wrongs or slights against themselves, and even a fairy who would be considered Seelie, such as a Brownie, could be dangerous when offended or harmed. The Seelie court is not known to harm people without reason though and generally will warn people at least once before retaliating against offenses (Briggs, 1976). 

The Seelie court can also act in ways that go against what we would consider goodness, or at least in ways that bring harm to humans, without a clear reason. We see this in the Ballad of Lady Mary O' Craignethan where the Lord's daughter is quite deviously kidnapped by a man of the sidhe to be his bride; the Lord then curses the fairy folk, wishing that the Devil may take three of them instead of one as his tithe, and swearing to cut down every oak, beech, and ash in the country to which the priest begs him "dinnae curse the Seelie Court" (Sand, Brymer, Murray, & Cochran, 1819). This illustrates that it was in fact the Seelie court that was believed to be behind the kidnapping, although as we shall see later the term Seelie court itself may have served as a euphemism for all fairies, rather than a specific term only for the benevolent ones.

The Unseelie court is for all intents and purposes the antithesis of the Seelie court, as implied by the name. The Unseelie court is described as always unfavorable to humans and is closely linked to the Sluagh sidhe, the malicious Host who torment people and cause illness and death where they visit (Briggs, 1976). The Sluagh itself is strongly tied to the dead and is known to kidnap hapless mortals and force them to help with the Host's entertainment, usually harming other humans, before dropping them in a location far from where they were grabbed. The Unseelie court is comprised of many solitary fairies of a malicious nature, those who feed on or enjoy hurting mortals for sport, although not all Unseelie fairies are solitary (Briggs, 1976). The Unseelie court was seen as constantly ready to cause harm or injury to mortals and were avoided as much as possible, and many different protections existed against them (McNeill, 1956; Briggs, 1976). 

However just as the Seelie court could cause harm if motivated to, and sometimes without having any clear reason at all, so too the Unseelie court's denizens may occasionally  act kindly towards humans without any obvious rhyme or reason. For example Kelpies are usually considered Unseelie by most reckonings, as they trick people into riding them only to kill and eat the person once they have gotten back to their watery homes, however in several stories a Kelpie will fall in love with a mortal girl and put aside his own bloodthirsty nature for her sake. In one such story the Kelpie even put up with being tricked by the girl, captured himself and forced to work in his horse form on her father's farm for a year, and still loved her enough in the end to choose to marry her (McNeill, 2001). So while it may be convenient and often expedient to divide the Other Crowd up into the two courts based on how they relate to us, we should be very cautious about seeing the division as a hard line or seeing a perceived placement in one court or another as a non-negotiable indicator of behavior.   

As mentioned above the term seelie may not have been as specific in the past as it is today and when we look at its usage in older ballads and stories seelie often appears as a euphemism (DSL, 2016). That means that just like calling Themselves 'Good Neighbors', 'Mother's Blessing', or 'Fair Folk' it isn't done because they are those things but because we want them to be those things towards us. In other words we are using a euphemism - a nicer term for something generally considered not nice at all - to try to invoke the nicer aspects of them. To remind them that they can be nice. There is long standing and deep belief that what we choose to call the Fey directly relates to how they will respond to us and interact with us. As this 1842 rhyme illustrates:
"Gin ye ca' me imp or elf
I rede ye look weel to yourself;
Gin ye call me fairy
I'll work ye muckle tarrie;
Gind guid neibour ye ca' me
Then guid neibour I will be;
But gin ye ca' me seelie wicht
I'll be your freend baith day and nicht."
(Chambers, 1842)
[If you call me imp or elf
I counsel you, look well to yourself;
If you call me fairy
I'll work you great misery;
If good neighbor you call me
Then good neighbor I will be;
But if you call me seelie wight*
I'll be your friend both day and night]
It should also be noted that the term unseelie referring to fairies is newer than the term seelie and does not appear in the Scots dictionary at all with this connotation, while seelie clearly does. The oldest reference I could find to seelie for fairies is from a story dated to the late 1500's referenced in a book from 1801; in the 'Legend of the Bishop of St Androis' it says:
"Ane Carling of the Quene of Phareis
that ewill win gair to elphyne careis;
Through all Braid Albane scho hes bene
On horsbak on Hallow ewin;
and ay in seiking certayne nyghtis
As scho sayis, with sur sillie wychtis"
[one woman of the Queen of Fairies
that will take goods to Fairyland
through all broad Scotland she has been
on horseback on Halloween
and always in seeking certain nights
as she says, with our Seelie wights]
This reference uses the term Seelie as a generic for fairy with no obvious distinction as to benevolence or malevolence, as do the other ballad references, supporting the idea that at some point there was likely only the concept of the single Seelie Court, used as a euphemism for all fairies. We see much the same in a 1564 lecture by William Hays discussing woman labeled witches who dealt with fairies where he refers to 'celly vychtis' [seelie wichts] and in a 1572 witchcraft trial account where a woman talks of an infant stolen by the 'sillyie wichts'. In both examples seelie wicht is being used as a general term for fairies, almost certainly in a euphemstic sense, especially in the second case where they were not actung at all benevolently. Much like the Welsh calling their fairies Tylwyth Teg [Fair Family] or the Irish use of the term Daoine Maithe [Good People] the Scottish Seelie Court [Blessed court or Happy court] may initially have been a way to speak of the fairies so that should their attention be drawn they would be more likely to be well disposed towards the speaker. This concept, at some later point was divided into seelie and unseelie to better define those beings who either meant humans well, generally, or meant humans harm, generally. While it may seem strange to us now, it is entirely logical that in the past people would have used the euphemistic Seelie Court when referring to the fairies, but not had an inverse negative concept as it would have been seen as impossibly dangerous to even speak of such a group and risk drawing their attention and facing their wrath for it. This could also explain why the idea of the courts as such is unique to Lowland Scots lore and more generally Scottish folklore. It is not found in Welsh or Irish fairylore** where euphemisms like 'Mother's Blessing' and 'People of Peace' are still used by preference. 


*wicht or wight is a general term in Scots that means both any living being as well as any supernatural being

**although I believe in recent decades the idea of the two courts has spread to Ireland, it isn't found in older material to my knowledge and I was unable to find a single reference to the two courts in any of my Irish folklore books. The Irish system is based on a multitude of sidhe (fairy hills) ruled by different kings and queens, with each being its own kingdom in a way. All the Irish Fair Folk, it seems, are ambivalent in nature and cannot easily be placed into a grouping of 'good' or 'wicked'.

References:

DSL (2016) Dictionary of the Scots Language
Briggs, K., (1976). A Dictionaryof Fairies
McNeill, F., (1956) The Silver Bough
Child, F., (1882) The English and Scottish Popular Ballads
Jamieson, J., (1808) An Etymological Dictionary of the Scottish Language
Chambers, R., (1842) Popular Rhymes, Fireside Stories, and Amusements of Scotland
Sands, Brymer, Murray, and Cochran, (1819) The Edinburgh Magazine and Literary Miscellany, vol. 83
Dalyell, J., (1801) Scottish Poems of the Sixteenth Century
McNeil, H., (2001). The Celtic Breeze

Why I'll Always Talk About My Mistakes

Hickory Tussock Moth caterpillar - touching them is a mistake. Their hair causes allergic reactions and their barbs can cause serious injuries to the eyes. They are pretty though. 

  I suppose its fair to say that I'm more than a tad bit cynical. This isn't so much a matter of age as personality, I think - cynical is my natural default setting and always has been. Chalk it up to some very well ingrained early life lessons that taught me not to trust things that appeared too good to be true, because not only were they never as good as they appeared they often concealed hidden dangers. In all my life I have never found this approach to be a bad one to live by - I am either already prepared when the truth comes out or pleasantly surprised when things actually are as good as they seemed.

I have noticed a trend - in culture, in paganism and polytheism, in general - for people, especially people who are in the public eye, to only ever focus on the positives. In metaphysical books and classes I often listen to teachers telling cute anecdotes about how successfully they have done things, or how well they have handled difficult situations. And make no mistake there's nothing wrong with telling stories of success; success has its place and we need to hear about the times things go right. But too often there is no balance, there is no matching story of failure, or struggle, or personal error to go with the stories of flawless success. I mistrust on a deep instinctual level people who never, ever talk about making mistakes, who present their magical and spiritual lives as smooth, error-free adventures. When I see that sort of perfection being touted I smell a trap (hey I told you at the beginning I was cynical - but that doesn't mean I'm wrong). 

I don't think anyone who actually does anything lacks stories of screwing up, and that's true of spirituality and magic as much as it is of skateboarding or painting. If experienced people aren't sharing their stories of messing up they either don't want to admit they make mistakes or they don't have any to share because they don't actually do anything. In the first case I think its both foolish and dangerous to act like an experienced person doesn't make any mistakes, because it gives less experienced people the impression that perfection is an attainable goal in magical work and spirituality. Its certainly what we want to aim for, and I make far fewer mistakes now than I did a quarter century ago, but I do still make mistakes. And in the second case, well, if you aren't actually doing anything then of course there's no chance of making a mistake. I've got nothing really to say about the people who don't actively do, except that I can't see much reason to learn from them unless what they are teaching is meant to be purely academic anyway. As to the ones who won't admit they mess up, as I said I think its a dangerous and foolish attitude. I would rather have a teacher who seems like a real person that I can relate to than one who is trying to impersonate a state of impossible perfection that I know is beyond me. I also worry that it is easy to fall into complacency, or worse arrogance, where we forget that there is an element of risk and danger to what we do, particularly with magic. When we start to assume everything we do will go exactly as we plan or every situation is in our control and something we can handle, that is when people get hurt. 

I'm not sure why this fear of acknowledging mistakes is so pervasive. To err is human as they say, and mistakes are universal. If they fear criticism, well we will all be criticized anyway and as Teddy Roosevelt said: "It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcomings..."

I will always talk about my mistakes, no great challenge because they have been numerous. In almost any spiritual or magical context I can think of a situation where I mishandled, misconcieved, misunderstood, or generally made the wrong choice in how to react to something in a way that had negative consequences. There was the time I accidentally got my friend possessed by an angry ghost because I thought I knew how to handle a situation that I didn't have the experience (at the time) for. Or the time in a ritual at a friend's house that we set her parent's carpet on fire because we used the wrong kind of candles and they burned too fast. There was the time I underestimated the amount of Fey energy in a place and let my guard down, and had my ankle grabbed walking across a flat lawn resulting in a painfully sprained foot (if you've never sprained the muscles in your foot, trust me its even less fun than it sounds like it would be). There was the time I decided not to banish a negative ghost in a place we were living and my husband was almost shoved off a second story deck. There was the time I did a poorly worded money spell and promptly was in a car accident, which meant receiving money in a very undesirable way. I could go on, but hopefully you get the idea. I have made mistakes; I make mistakes. We all do and that's okay because making mistakes and struggling to fix them - or even having to live with the consequences of them - is how we learn. And learning is absolutely vital in magic and spirituality. This isn't a game, this is - for those of us who really believe in it anyway - a system that has actual and sometimes profound repercussions. Like life itself, magic and spirituality can be messy, can be dangerous, and can go sideways when we least expect it; and we have to know how to handle whatever gets thrown our way. Examples of perfection and stories about everything going exactly to plan have their place but they don't and can't teach us these things. Mistakes can.

We only learn from our mistakes if we acknowledge that we made them - and if we never forget the experience and what it taught us. I have erred hugely in my spiritual and magical life and have often and repeatedly paid for it, and those lessons, hard won and painful, have been invaluable. I share those stories with my students and with people who take my workshops or read my books partially so that they won't necessarily need to make the same mistakes (go forth and make your own, as it were) and partially so that they will see that we all make mistakes. I don't believe in perfection, and I think that anyone who is living is capable of error. What matters isn't that we don't make any mistakes, but that we own the mistakes we make, do what we can to fix them, and learn as much as possible from them.

Because when we don't learn from our mistakes, as the old saying goes, we are doomed to repeat them. 
Ignis aurum probat

The result of pissing of the Good People, circa 2014

Spirituality, Community, and Diversity

Anyone who's been in the modern pagan or polytheist community for more than, say, 5 minutes will probably have noticed that we're a pretty contentious bunch. We are, in point of fact, usually much better at splitting hairs than at building bridges, something that I've written about more than once. You see I'm of the opinion that we should worry less about whether or not the person next to us folds their altar cloth left to right or vice versa*, and more about whether we share the same Gods and the same general goals and outlooks.

If you go by some people its impossible to interact with or associate with people who don't follow the same spiritual path you do, who don't believe what you believe, or do things the same way you do. Others are a bit more lenient, willing to associate with people who are similar enough in the most important theology. Why is this impossible? Well the reasons vary, from concern that it will offend the Gods to be around people who don't believe in them correctly to the idea that it just personally offends the individual to have to put up with someone so different in philosophy.

I was never that person by the way, with my liminal ways and my friends all over everywhere. Even before the great Pagan-Polytheist Divide I was that person with friends who were Christian, Jewish, Atheist, Wiccan, Thelemic, Satanists, trad witches, Recons - that person who would gladly get into conversations with almost anyone. Of course I myself am someone who straddles worlds, identifying as more than one distinct thing. As to whether that's a strength or a weakness, well that depends on who you ask. Some people praise me for it, others...not so much. I'd argue though that whether its a strength or a weakness, its a flexibility that is important in a world that is constantly growing more complex.

I'm getting ready for the 3rd annual Morrigan's Call Retreat, coming up in less than two weeks. As part of this Retreat I'll be acting as a priest/ess in several rituals for a diverse group of people with a diverse group of co-facilitators. In the past my co-priestesses have included people on many different paths whose views agree and disagree with my own to varying degrees - and yet our ability to work together has always been good and the rituals themselves have touched people in meaningful ways. We come together to offer a conduit for the Morrigan, both to be honored and to reach out to those honoring Her. And it has always worked, and she always seems to appreciate it. I would argue that our diversity is an undeniable strength and that our ability to serve our community comes directly from it.

Spirituality is ultimately a solitary thing, even when we practice it in a group because it is something that lives in our heart. Our spirituality may be expressed around others or in a group setting some small amount of the time but we are always within ourselves contemplating and doing whatever it is we do in our daily lives. This 24/7 spirituality is far more important, I think, than what we may do in the small amount of time we spend religiously with others. No two people then are exactly identical in their spirituality, although they may be very, very similiar.

Our community is diverse, whether we want it to be or not, because no matter how much we try to surround ourselves with people just like us, people who believe like us and act like us, we will always fail. Its not human nature to have that much sameness, nor looking at history has it ever been. At the height of the Norse pagan period there were atheists among the Norse. There is an open, unanswerable question about whether the Tuatha De Danann are the aos sí or part of but distinct from them, and each person has to decide for themselves how the Irish Gods fit into the beliefs about the Good Folk. In spirituality there are always going to be more open questions than answered ones, and more than we'd like to admit the answers we do have are less certainty than faith. We believe what we choose to believe based on our own experiences and knowledge. And so each person has slightly different views and opinions. We are diverse.

And there is beauty in that.

*that's just a snarky example to illustrate how extreme the divisions can get. As far as I know altar cloth folding isn't an actual source of contention between anyone