21 comments

  1. Being against tradition means you are an antisemite! Spread the word!!!

    You know, I often joke that it is too early in our history for a Polytheist version of Fiddler on the Roof to be relevant. We don’t even have proper traditions and yet people want to be against tradition.

    News Flash, guys! Being against tradition isn’t radical if literally everyone else is doing it. Being traditional is the REAL counterculture today!!!

    Liked by 1 person

    • I do as well. Talks to him as a friend but with respect. I remember the lines… “As the Good Book says…” and he stops himself and says, “…who am I to tell you what the Good Book says?”

      Like

  2. It does beg some questions…When can and when can’t we change our Traditions and what are the consequences of each?

    Like

      • Especially when cowards will then change everything that causes them the least inconvenience. Our traditions were given to us to nourish and protect, not shit on and cast out to the masses.

        Like

        • Not everything that has entered the stream of tradition is laudable or worth preserving however. I think great care needs to be taken, avoiding both the excesses of “tradition is always good” and “tradition is always bad.” I think we need to evaluate where the tradition came from, why it came into existence, how it fits in with the rest, what statement is being made by maintaining or discarding it, and what the seen and unforeseen consequences of this will be. This process should never be undertaken lightly, or without consulting the appropriate members of the community (elders, religious specialists, leaders, etc) and divination.

          Liked by 1 person

          • As an example – let’s take the secular American tradition of circumcising baby boys. This is distinct from Jewish religious circumcision, as it tends to be done automatically, clinically, and supposedly for reasons of hygiene and cosmetics. I am definitely not okay keeping that tradition going just because generations of our countrymen had it done to them.

            Liked by 1 person

          • I agree with you, but i have a knee jerk reaction to people who want to update or change a tradition because it’s hard for them, or they can’t stay committed, or it might be inconvenient. fuck those people. There is a way to make licit changes within a tradition that involves divination, prayer, engaging with the Gods and ancestors of that tradition….a way that i no way prioritizes US.

            Like

            • Agreed. And I’d never support change for the sake of change; if there is to be change, it should be change that leads the person and community into a deeper relationship with tradition, that enhances rather than takes away. So, for instance, I would usually advise replacing one custom or practice with another, ideally something better suited to their nature or circumstances. Nature abhors a vacuum.

              Liked by 1 person

    • We should NEVER change our traditions unless the Gods Themselves direct us to. We certainly shouldn’t do so for our own convenience.

      Like

        • true, but we need to be wary of deciding that something isn’t handed down from the Gods just because it’s difficult for us.

          Like

          • Unquestionably. If people don’t want to shape their lives around tradition they are free to go off and do whatever the fuck they please, preferably as far away from us as possible. Of course as soon as they leave they are functionally a non-entity and should be treated accordingly until they’ve proven themselves worthy of re-admittance, something only possible through extraordinary effort.

            Liked by 1 person

  3. As with so much else, I think we need to look back at how our polytheist ancestors dealt with things, particularly radically altered environments and circumstances. When we examine the Greek colonies that spread through areas like Southern Italy, North Africa and the Black Sea what we discover is that the ones who thrived were able to strike a fine balance between rigidity and elasticity with regard to their cultural institutions and sacred traditions, whereas the others couldn’t and usually collapsed within a couple generations because they refused to deviate at all from how things were done in the homeland or they were absorbed and replaced because they were too permeable and inclusive. Of course, the middle course isn’t always best; some times and places call for extremism.

    Liked by 1 person


Comments are closed.