So what exactly do I believe? To answer that question, I have to go back to basics. And in going back to basics, I have to face my fear of being forever shrugged off as a newbie fluff bunny who can't be taken seriously. It's easy to say, "So what? What do you care if people take you seriously?" But as a member of a scattered, small community, a minority religion in a predominantly Christian culture, it can feel pretty devastating to be shrugged off or shuffled aside even by those you thought would welcome you with open arms. But that's the risk you have to face if you want to cultivate an open and free relationship with spirit and the sacred world. The world is far stranger and wilder than the books and experts would have you believe.

Read more…

John, If only there were such a thing as a degree in polytheology! ;)

In all seriousness, though, I know what you mean about finding the balance in expressing UPG and theological ideas for readers who might not be theological scholars nor shared those same personal experiences. Much of my frustration with the concept of UPG is that I'm very unclear about what exactly its place is in the Pagan community (or communities, rather), though I feel more comfortable with how I've integrated it into my own spiritual life. This is a conversation that I think is worth having more in-depth. Personally, I don't even like the term "UPG" itself very much, as I think it's a somewhat misleading or inaccurate term for something that all religious traditions have to some extent and integrate into religious community experience in a wide variety of ways, something the name "UPG" kind of glosses over by treating it as a single, fairly simple concept. I explained it a little better in a forum discussion a few weeks ago (in response to someone explaining their understanding of UPG, and one of its failings, as being private and solitary in nature, as opposed to scholarly research as a community effort):

I prefer to refer to a person's "interpretive and experiential engagement" instead of using "UPG." Why? Because there is really no such thing as an entirely individualized, private "UPG." All interpretations and experiences are interpretations or experiences of something – and they are always influenced in one way or another by the socio-cultural contexts of the people having the experience or making the interpretation. That is why it is an interpretive or experiential engagement – a person is engaging with something else, either a deity, a landscape, a human community, a cultural symbol, or some combination of these things or any number of others. An experience or interpretation might be more or less unique to that individual, but it is never entirely and purely solitary.

So the distinction between UPG as private or solitary, and academic/scholarly work as the primary corroborative approach to developing a shared community understanding is, I think, a false one. There are many, many ways in which communities can build a shared spiritual tradition that does not rely on or borrow from the methods and processes of academia. I bristle a bit when Recons/CRs talk about UPG as though it were entirely private and solitary in distinction from the community approach of academic scholarship. To me, this seems to ignore the fact that an individual's interpretive framework of their experiences is always going to be shaped by their membership in one or more communities, and so the way they integrate and understand these moments of personal "gnosis," inspiration or imagination cannot be entirely separated from the cultural or communal contexts they belong to.

Rather, I think it's more likely that those moments designated as "UPG" by modern reconstructionist polytheists just tend to be more deeply influenced by modern culture than by the ancient pre-Christian cultures that the Recons/CRs are striving to reconstruct. So UPG is, or can be used as, a value statement about the conclusion a person comes to, just as much as a description of how a person came to a particular understanding, experience or belief. For instance: When a person has a sudden inspiration about how modern physics and Jungian psychology might work together to explain a dream they had recently, it's called UPG. When a person has a sudden insight into how the connection between decorative patterns on archeological artifacts and ethical codes recorded in ancient law texts help to explain the meaning of some pre-Christian text in which a long-dead priest relates a dream he had, it's called research. The difference is in the relative value that the Recon/CR community places on the cultural artifacts and perspectives involved.

That's probably simplifying it a fair bit, and being kind of tongue-in-cheek about it, but in general, I still find the concept of "UPG" to be something that needs to be expanded on and explored a bit more. Like you mentioned, UPG experiences of the hedgewitch or the godspouse are not merely personal experiences, but come from a certain cultural context or perspective – and understanding what that context is could be very valuable. (For me, a really good example of this might be the idea of a "godslave" – a particular relationship to deity that, regardless of a person's UPG, I find to be potentially very problematic, and in that case, deserving of some serious community discernment process to explore what exactly such a relationship or experience means and how it can be integrated into a healthy spiritual life.)

Anyway, I'm rambling! Much of my frustration with this issue probably just stems from me still being relatively young and impatient to know everything and be as wise and "with it" as I think I should be. ;)

–Ali