If youāre new to this blog, you might be wondering what exactly it is Iām talking about.Ā āGoddessianā is an umbrella term for those of us that choose to emphasize the Divine Feminine within our religious/spiritual paths without being exclusively Deanic.Ā
Deanism, a faith several of my mutuals follow, is a monotheistic religion in which there is one supreme feminine God, known as Dea (from the Latin word forĀ āGoddessā). Under the Deanic umbrella is a very small but very lovely community known as Filianism, which worships Dea in a Trinity of Mother, Daughter, and Absolute Deity. I am not a Deanist nor a Filianist, although I respect them both greatly and you will likely see me reblogging content from Deanic/Filianic blogs in relation to the Divine Feminine.
As a Christian, I still have a very deep love for and relationship with the Divine Masculine as expressed in the person of Jesus Christ, which is why I am not Deanic; however, I use the labelĀ āGoddessianā to highlight my focus on femininity within my faith. I believe that the Holy Spirit in the traditional Christian Trinity is the manifestation of the Goddess, as described in the writings of St. Hildegard (linked below). I believe that She is Sophia, the Divine Wisdom of God, as well as Caritas, the Love of God/World Soul. I am a devotee of the Blessed Virgin Mary who sees Her as a fundamental Incarnation of God as Our Mother. I believe Mary Magdalene was likely also an image of the Divine Feminine, but do not feel as strong of a connection to Her as I do with Mother Mary.Ā
RESOURCES
https://arthistoryproject.com/artists/hildegard-von-bingen/writings-on-the-holy-spirit/Ā (A brief overview of the Holy Spirit as Divine Wisdom and Love from St. Hildegard of Bingen.)
https://northernway.org/sacredbrides.htmlĀ (Northern Way is a fantastic resource for those exploring esoteric Christianity; if youāre interested in working with Mother Mary, Mary Magdalene, and/or Sophia I would highly recommend this as a starting point for any research.)
https://www.interfaithmary.net/Ā (This site primarily focuses on Mother Mary, and is how I was first introduced to the concept of honoring Her as the feminine face of God. Thereās a lot of great articles here, and I especially love the interfaith rosary meditations.)
http://wheeloftheyear.com/Ā (An interfaith calendar, which also provides a good overview of eco-egalitarian/creation spirituality, the path that I personally follow.)
Anyone who would like to ask questions in good faith is welcome to interact! Anyone who is just here to tell me Iām going to hell... please donāt waste your time. Youāll just get blocked.
being a witch whose deity is the christian god is weird bc like, itās not exactly that youāre UNwelcome in the witch community, itās more likeā¦ youāre just less welcome than other witches with deities. like you donātĀ āqualifyā enough.
like, youāre invited to all the parties and all, but you have to stand in the corner because everyone just kinda gives you that awkward-white-girl-stare like that one meme every time you talk about yourself or your practices (even in the most vague sense)
it reminds me a lot, from personal experience, of being lgbtq+ and religious; on one side you face hate and abandonment, on the other side youāre not outright unwelcome but all the support feelsā¦ cold. ingenuine. lacking. like youāre on thin ice without reason, like everyone is waiting for you to make a mistake or prove youāre just like theĀ āothersā (often the veryĀ āothersā that abandoned you).Ā
listen, iām not blaming anyone - people have committed all sorts of atrocities against witches in the name of the christian god. i understand modern witches wanting nothing to do with anyone who does want something to do with that god. itās awkward, itās hard to wrap heads around, it even probably feels insulting to some of you.
but iām a witch through and through. i was a witch before i realized it was a fitting label, and iāll be a witch even if others disagree itās a fitting label.Ā
all witches have unique paths and callings. some of them involve deities, some of them dont. but all witches and all of their paths are valid, whether they make sense to us or not.Ā
this post started off as just me personally rambling, but actually, i think it might help a lot of witches in similar boats. maybe.Ā
so, can you reblog this post if your blog is safe for witches whose practices involveĀ āmainstreamā (for lack of better word) deities? for christian witches, catholic witches, jewish witches, muslim witches, ALL witches?Ā
i have a feeling i might not be the only witch worrying about being unwelcome.
Aka, Iāve finally come to the end of the spiritual tailspin Iāve been in since last October.
TL;DR (So many of my posts need these because I am a writer at heart, and I donāt want people getting annoyed at my paragraphs clogging up their feeds): Iām kind of obsessed with the way the Holy Spirit and the Christian perception of Divine Feminine has some parallels to the Mother and Daughter in Filianism. So Iām going to talk about it, with a lot of words. A LOT of words... Youāve been warned.
First off, in some Gnostic sects thereās the concept of Sophiaās daughter, Zoe. If Sophia is Divine Wisdom, Zoe is Divine Life. But yet, Zoe and Sophia are also two different ways of looking at the same entity-- a Mother and Daughter, that are also as One. A Gnostic interpretation of the Book of Genesis states that the Holy Mother Pistis Sophia sent forth the emanation of Herself, Her Daughter, Sophia Zoe. Iām going to make a quick clarification here, and that is that Sophia, or Lady Wisdom as spoken of in the Bible, and the Holy Spirit are the same entity. So already we have Sophia/Holy Spirit spoken of in Mother/Daughter terms. However, this is just within Gnosticism, and I personally have a lot of problems with Gnosticism (the amount of patriarchy still in it, but also its demonization of the material world, which I believe God created good). And while Zoe was the catalyst to the research that led me to discovering Filianism, to me the parallels donāt stop there.
Within the Bible, Sophia Herself is often characterized as a Daughter-figure, as She tells us in the book of Proverbs that She was birthed by YHWH before creation. Catholic tradition also equates Sophia with Mother Mary; I believe Valentin Tomberg in particular referred to the Divine Feminine as Maria-Sophia. To me, Maria-Sophia-- or Dea, to use the Filianic name-- is already pretty clearly Mother, so my research focuses primarily on finding Her Daughter aspect.
Sophia is also often equated with Shekinah, the Kabbalistic Jewish title for the Presence of God. According to the Northern Way website, where I first learned of Shekinah, She is the Mother, but I think it makes far more sense to see Her as the Daughter-- the immanence of God as opposed to the transcendence. Shekinah is also seen by some as the Bride of the male God, who was lost in the wilderness as a result of humanityās fall from grace. However, there is an implication that this was actually voluntary on Her part, as she chose to remain with humanity and share in our sufferings-- much like the Holy Daughter. In fact, Iām almost positive the Janite website used to refer to Shekinah as a way of looking at the Holy Daughter, but Iām unable to find it after crawling through the Wayback Machine for a while... they do, however, call the Holy Daughter Zoe Sophia among other names!Ā
There is a very clear parallel between Shekinah and the Holy Spirit-- both of them are said to have descended down to us and given themselves to us. They are both said to be the Soul of the World, the spark of divinity present within creation.
St. Hildegard writes of two aspects of the Holy Spirit-- Sapientia and Caritas, Wisdom and Love. To make these names easier to pronounce, I translate them as Sophia and Charis. It is my belief that these two aspects of the Holy Spirit are the Celestial Mother and Holy Daughter aspects of Dea, the way She was seen by Hildegard and now by me. Sophia is the Creatrix, and Charis is the World Soul. Charis also means Life, not just Love-- I believe that Charis and Zoe are different names for this Daughter Holy Spirit, but I personally prefer Charis. St. Hildegard tells us that the Holy Spirit is both the sun and the moon. She is transcendent and immanent-- in Filianic terms, She is Mother and Daughter.
In the article I reblogged recently from the Chapel of Our Mother God, on Maryās Immaculate Heart, Mary is equated to the Solar Mother. However, I believe that the Immaculate Heart shows Mary as both Mother and Daughter-- something the Chapel acknowledges when it discusses the Heart shown pierced by swords. Mary is also referred to as Queen of Heaven, which in Filianism is a title of the Daughter.
The Immaculate Heart is paralleled to the sun with its two fundamental qualities-- Warmth and Light. These two qualities correspond to the Divine Love and the Divine Wisdom, respectively, and are shown as the Immaculate Heart is both aflame with love and shining with wisdom. The Filianic Creed states that the Celestial Mother is Pure Light, and the Holy Daughter is Perfect Love. That is why, to me, Mary is the Holy Mother God, as well as the Daughter who suffered for us, intercedes for us, and brings us with Her to ascension as the Queen of Heaven, and parallels neatly with St. Hildegardās writings of the Holy Spirit as Wisdom/Sophia and Love/Charis, my names for the Mother and Daughter Holy Spirit. Catholics are fond of saying that Mary is the Daughter of the Father and the Mother of the Son, and I like that (although I ultimately see theĀ āFatherā as genderless). However, they also call Her the Spouse of the Holy Spirit. To me, Mary is the Holy Spirit. St. Maximilian Kolbe basically says this as well, and that this is what the Immaculate Conception means.Ā
Finally: St. Therese, the saint I credit with sending me on this crazy crisis of faith last year? She once said of herself:Ā āMy call is love... In the heart of the church, my mother, I will be love, and thus I will be all things.ā Is it a coincidence that she eventually led me to finding Charis, Holy Love, Holy Spirit, Holy Daughter? Maybe. But I really donāt think so.
The idea that God is the man and the church is the woman in Song of Songs never resonated with me. While reading Rabbi Rami Shapiroās Embracing the Divine Feminine, I discovered the interpretation that God (in the form of Wisdom - Sophia in Greek) is actually the woman in Song of Solomon.
This just feels right, especially considering the woman does the majority of the talking in the book and she offers the definition of love (in other words, sheās the one who imparts knowledge about God). Lady Wisdom is also called Solomonās bride in Wisdom of Solomon. Furthermore, Proverbs 7:4 says to call Wisdom your sister, which is used as a term for endearment for the woman in Song of Songs.
Here are my reflections as I read through the book with that interpretation.
Yall wanna be gnc and androgynous but hate intersex people and the idea of being intersex so much, I remember reading about PCOS potentially being considered an intersex disorder and having 100s of people dismiss it because "we can't just be calling 1 in 10 women intersex" or being in transmasc spaces and constantly being told that bottom growth and T dicks are undesirable and that people find non standard genetalia gross, in a GENDER INCLUSIVE SPACE.
The lgbt Community seriously needs to grapple with its hatred of intersex features and stop seeing androgyny that isn't pretty waify white person. You all love femme presenting androgyny but hate when people are androgynous in a broad or hairy way.
TL;DR: Iām moving blogs because the email address this one is on will be invalid by this time next year. I will link the new one once I have it set up.
Iām currently in the process of applying to several different universities for 2023! This is great, and Iām really excited to move on to this new chapter of my life.
However.
I donāt know why it took me as long as it did for me to realize this, but I finally did earlier today. This blog was created off of my school email account, which means that when I transfer away from my current community college to a university, I will no longer have access to it, or to this blog. With that in mind, I have decided to move blogs. I already have an account on my personal email address, but I literally *never* use it for anything besides lurking, and some really weird shit I posted like, three years ago? So, thatās getting deleted, and a new blog created on that account, since that email isnāt going anywhere.
I will link the new blog here once Iāve gotten it set up, and I will also reblog most of my important/favorite posts from this account onto the new one. Iāll leave this up for a little while, but I think Iāll probably delete it eventually so that the usernameās available for me to use on my new blog.
In addition, Iāll be managing the new blog from my mobile phone rather than my PC. Iāve hesitated to take this step for a while due to worries about mental health, but this blog is actually very stress-relieving for me. That also means Iāll be able to be more consistent with my activity, as I wonāt need to wait to have a window of time at home available to get on my PC. I might take that decision back if it does turn out to be detrimental to me in some way, but Iām hoping to have much more consistency on the new blog rather than randomly disappearing for months at a time because Iām too busy to dedicate time on the computer.
Iāve been studying Catholic social teaching/Christian democracy a bit lately, and decided to do a read-through of Pope Leo XIIIās encyclical on capital and labor; the title is Latin forĀ āOf Revolutionary Change.ā Some bullet points as a sort of TL;DR, except it also gets fairly long. Iāve decided to split this analysis into multiple parts-- this post goes through Nos. 1-15.
- Rerum Novarum condemns laissez-faire capitalism in no uncertain terms, calling itĀ āthe greed of unchecked competition" andĀ ārapacious usury.ā
-Ā āA small number of very rich men have been able to lay upon the teeming masses of the laboring poor a yoke little better than that of slavery itself.ā Pope Leo called out the top 1% all the way back in 1891, which I think is pretty neat.
- The one thing I wish Rerum Novarum addressed was the community of Christians in Acts-- the Bibleās pretty dang clear that the early churchĀ āhad all things in common,ā andĀ āno one said that anything that belonged to him was his ownā i.e., they were proto-socialists. (Acts 2:44, 4:32) Pope Leo just kinda launches ahead with his belief that the abolition of private property wouldĀ ārob the lawful possessor, distort the functions of the State, and create utter confusion in the community.ā Which, to be fair, the Bible is also pretty clear that stealing and coveting is wrong, and itās easy to logically infer an affirmation of private property from that: you canāt steal or covet something that already belongs to everyone, including you.Ā
EDIT: I should clarify again that Iāve only just started reading Rerum Novarum, and for all I know it does go back later and discuss the socialism in Acts-- however, from a rhetorical standpoint it had a perfect point to do so in Nos. 5-15 when it argues against socialism, as those two Bible verses can essentially unravel any arguments on the topic the Pope might have and Iād like to see his attempts at refuting them.
- Also thereās some gross patriarchal BS about male headship, but itās 1891 and the Catholic Church, so I wasnāt really expecting anything else. However, I do technically agree with his statement that government shouldnāt intrude in and control the family unit, which is sort of libertarianism, I guess? Itās libertarianism but with the perception as the family as the unit of society rather than the individual. Even then, Pope Leo concedes that a family in dire need that cannot be provided for in any other way may have no other option than relying on public aid, and the government may also have to step in if family members are depriving each other of natural rights.
Thereās still some interesting arguments against socialism, though:
-Ā āThey [socialists] would deprive him [the wage-earner] of the liberty of disposing of his wages, and thereby of all hope and possibility of increasing his resources and bettering his life.ā In other words, capitalism allows people to be rewarded for their hard work, while socialism provides no motivation for people to work at all (since theyād all get the same resources/quality of life regardless of their work). Thus, why should people work at all under socialism?
- I donāt really follow his logic on this one as much, but Pope Leo also talks about how humans and animals are fundamentally different (which I agree with), and from there concludes that while all living creatures can possess things temporarily, it is a uniquely human right to possess things permanently. This raises some interesting questions for me: How do animals possess things, if they do so at all? Does my dog (who, interestingly enough, is named Leo) possess his own food and toys, or are they possessed by the humans that care for him and allotted for him to use? Perhaps this is the distinction between wild and domestic animals-- wild animals are able toĀ āownā their things without having humans control them. Surely there must be some example of an animal in the wild that keeps something for years/its entire lifespan-- perhaps a nest or other type of habitat. Does a bear own the cave that it sleeps in? Would the community of animals that live in the Amazon rainforest own the forest, thus making human exploitation of it theft? Why would Pope Leo say that only humans can possess things permanently?
-Ā āMan proceeds the State, and possesses, prior to the formation of any State, the right of providing for the substance of his body.ā I like this one-- I personally believe in inherent human rights that are given to us by God, and even many atheists would likely agree with the principle of ācertain unalienable rights,ā as the American Declaration of Independence phrases it, even if they donāt necessarily believe they come from a Creator. These rights are guaranteed by a well-functioning and ethical state, but they are not PROVIDED by the state. However, one could easily make a counter-argument that a socialist state would be necessary in order to truly guarantee these rights.
-Ā āIs it just that the fruit of a manās own sweat and labor should be possessed and enjoyed by anyone else?ā On the surface level, Iād say no. But the thing about capitalism in our modern society is that, as Pope Leo mentions earlier, theseĀ āfruits of laborā ARE being enjoyed by the megarich. You could argue that this is actually another way of saying that the workers should own, maybe not the means of production, but certainly the results of production.
All of this is even more interesting in light of the fact that 1891 and 2022 are very different times, and Pope Francis has been pretty critical of capitalism for several years now as far as Iām aware-- whether or not heās actually socialist is up for debate. People have a lot of arguments for one or the other, but unless Pope Francis actually comes out and says straight-up that heās a socialist I would be careful in labeling him as one. You can be highly critical of capitalism and still not necessarily socialist, which is how I would describe my current economic leanings.
Iād actually be super interested in hearing some commentary and POLITE discourse from both capitalists and socialists on this post, so long as itās kept civil.
5 You must have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had.
6 Though he was God,
Ā Ā he did not think of equality with God
Ā Ā as something to cling to.
7 Instead, he gave up his divine privileges;
Ā Ā he took the humble position of a slave
Ā Ā and was born as a human being.
When he appeared in human form,
8 Ā Ā he humbled himself in obedience to God
Ā Ā and died a criminalās death on a cross.
9 Therefore, God elevated him to the place of highest honor
Ā Ā and gave him the name above all other names,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
Ā Ā in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue declare that Jesus Christ is Lord,
Ā Ā to the glory of God the Father.
Itās okay for Christians to engage in politics. In fact, I think itās important that we do at times.
But it should never happen at the cost of our commands for charity or love. It should never come with self righteous cries of āI told you soā and name calling. We must remain humble. We mustnāt engage in political tribalism. We serve God, not a political party. We are defined by Christ, not by red or blue. We get Truth from the Bible, not from the party pamphlet.
Many professing Christians have gotten this mixed up. Politics comes before Christianity for them. Political games are an idol. Be mindful. Search your heart, tread lightly, repent if youāve fallen from truth, and be wary of others who act this way.
Iām back, the past couple of weeks Iāve barely been home and havenāt had time to get online at all. But Iām home now, and Iāve got the spoons to tackle the hordes of notifications now :-)
Aahhh I really would love to read She Who Is, When Mary Becomes Cosmic, and The Path of a Christian Witch but Iām not currently in an environment where itās safe to be seen reading books on Our Mother. I still live in fear that this blog could get discovered by my family, which would be... not good. Especially once they figured out Iām queer from it.
But I love Her so much! I want to read books about Her! I wish so so badly I could have an actual, physical set of rosary beads to pray to Her with even though my fingers work just as well. I want to be able to put up an Immaculate Heart image and a pride flag next to each other on my wall. I want to keep an altar with little figurines of Her and Jesus and a bottle of holy water from Lourdes... At least all of St. Hildegardās writings on the Divine Feminine are public domain, and I can study them and my PDFs of the Clear Recital and the Psalter of the Blessed Virgin Mary as much as I need to until I live in a more accepting environment.
A question: Would it be considered disrespectful to work with/worship the seven Janyati as a Goddessian, but not necessarily a Deanist/Filianist? I really connect with the image of the seven goddesses as the rainbow that combine to form the white Light of Dea. I also think I may be receiving a call from Sai Sushuri, as Iāve been very strongly attracted to the archetype of a love goddess for over a year now, not to mention various synchronicities/signs from a Venus/Aphrodite-like figure that seems to match Sai Sushuri pretty closely. Iād love to worship the Janyati as the seven streams of the Holy Sophia and the planetary archangels, but I really donāt want to come across as appropriative as I am not a Filianist.
Thank you all for the answers! I was already probably not going to address Her as Sai Sushuri due to these exact reasons-- I would call Her as Lady Venus, Lady Grace, possibly Aphrodite, and now Caritas/Minne; maybe Charity as well.
A question: Would it be considered disrespectful to work with/worship the seven Janyati as a Goddessian, but not necessarily a Deanist/Filianist? I really connect with the image of the seven goddesses as the rainbow that combine to form the white Light of Dea. I also think I may be receiving a call from Sai Sushuri, as Iāve been very strongly attracted to the archetype of a love goddess for over a year now, not to mention various synchronicities/signs from a Venus/Aphrodite-like figure that seems to match Sai Sushuri pretty closely. Iād love to worship the Janyati as the seven streams of the Holy Sophia and the planetary archangels, but I really donāt want to come across as appropriative as I am not a Filianist.
