Prayer

Oryx

Do you pray, in the conventional sense? I used to, but it no longer seems right for me to pray to a god figure, now it has changed to more of a meditative approach. Only when things get really bad do I send out pleas to heaven. I wondered how others pray, or connect to the spiritual.

Elessar

Hi KatieK,

I'm not much of a praying person. Having read some of your posts, your beliefs are much like mine. I was wondering if you can tell me about meditation, I'd like to give that a shot. Also what is it about it that you like? I've heard you can experience different things with it.

CathyMoran

Yes, I would pray - both in the formal sense (in terms of saying a prayer) and in the informal sense in that of going for a walk and thinking about spiritual issues, thinking about God. Sometimes when I am saying a formal prayer I will let my mind mull over God at the same time and let those thoughts lead me. I do occasionally go into church and light candles (even though I am scared of fire) and soak up the atmosphere - some of the masses where there is a lot of singing can be very moving too. Closing your eyes, concentrating on your hands then goingf inwards to your breathing then thinking about God is also very moving.

solas

I've spent quite some time among spiritual circles be it as facilitating healing or mediumship and prayer has always been a huge part of it. Even as meditating, clearing your space is really opening up to a higher source of inspiration..or prayer.
I remember someone saying once that prayer is asking and meditation is listening.

Every circle/gathering opens with a prayer, a request for protection, blessing or divine inspiration.
Would be no harm to request a blessing for this forum, something along the lines of Rath Dè oraibh..

so be it

CathyMoran

solas wrote:

Every circle/gathering opens with a prayer, a request for protection, blessing or divine inspiration.
Would be no harm to request a blessing for this forum, something along the lines of "an it harm none, do what you will"..

so be it

That seems like a really lovely idea Good luck to the new forum. Sometimes I feel that prayer is like swiming - you have to place your faith in something greater than you to carry you.

solas

I like that analogy. I would much prefer to swim in clear fresh water than polluted murky stuff.

Nevyn

solas wrote:

Would be no harm to request a blessing for this forum, something along the lines of "an it harm none, do what you will"..

Sorry dont mean to be picky but...

'an it harm none, do what you will' is not a blessing but the Wiccan Rede.
This the guide by which wiccans live thier lives and judge their actions.
'An it harm none' refers to do now harm by action or inaction to ourselfs,
others, the enviroment, nature, animals, the bio sphere and where ever
we find ourselfs on this plane or on others.
Keeps you constants assesing what you are doing.

I pray everyday, how I choose to live my life is in it's self an act of devotion
to my Gods. This can go from lighting a candle, spending time in mediation,
attending circle to even on very busy days simply saying 'Oi you two, thanks'

If I was to ask for a blessing for this place, I would say
' May our Gods, guides and ancesters watch over us here as we work towards
understanding.'

Or Like Granny WeatherWax ' Blessing be on this place and all here in it.'

solas

I am aware that it is the wiccan rede, I felt it was appropriate under the circumstances.

do you not think it would be a blessing if all those who came here would treat each other with respect?
the thought and intention matter, especially where prayer is concerned.

Nevyn

solas wrote:

I am aware that it is the wiccan rede, I felt it was appropriate under the circumstances.

I know it is the Rede and you know it is the Rede but a lot of people who read here may not and I just wanted to clarify that that is the Rede and not a wiccan or pagan prayer. Just trying to advoid any confusion.

solas

y'know I didnt think saying a prayer was going to be such an issue, I thhought the words "an it harm none, do what you will".. speak for themselves. and if it harms none, do what you will. I didnt feel like it needed an interpretation, but I will change my original prayer to something which suits everybody.

stevenmu

Mind you don't trip over each others good intentions

I think the sentiment of the Rede is about right, but if it's to be used as a slogan it should probably be indentified as such or else someone (and there's always at least one) will think they're being subverted into paganism without their knowledge.

As for the original topic, I think prayer can be a good way to focus your thoughts and get yourself in the right frame of mind. I'm not big into deity worship or structured prayer, I think a prayer can even be just thinking things over in your mind and maybe setting goals for yourself. I suppose it depends on how you want to define "prayer".

Talliesin

A blessing suitable for a forum that by it's very nature is populated by people of mixed spiritual and religious leanings.

"Blessings upon this forum".

Not even sure if that does it.

Oryx

Elessar wrote:

Hi KatieK,

I'm not much of a praying person. Having read some of your posts, your beliefs are much like mine. I was wondering if you can tell me about meditation, I'd like to give that a shot. Also what is it about it that you like? I've heard you can experience different things with it.

I dont feel qualified to advise you how to begin, I kinda picked it up as I went along, perhaps others can give you nuts and bolts on how to begin. I like it because it helps to stop the whirlwind of thoughts most of us have in our heads all the time, and its very relaxing. I base it on breathing exercises and being aware but unconcerned about my surroundings. It also helps me to become aware of the energy surrounding us that is referred to as chi/light/divine presence, etc. Hope this makes sense!

solas

I think the sentiment of the Rede is about right, but if it's to be used as a slogan it should probably be indentified as such or else someone (and there's always at least one) will think they're being subverted into paganism without their knowledge.

I'm not a wiccan.
I learned those words a long time ago and not as any part of wiccan ritual. If I said I found them in an angel card book would that make it different?
I gestured them for the intent of the words.
Religions are like languages, just because I can speak spanish does not mean I am from spain.
Should I wear a label now to discern which belief I am?
I have prayed with people of other faiths for such a long time, I never considered that I was being connverted when doing so, just listening to someone speaking a different language. The intent usually rises above the words.

stevenmu

When I first read through the thread I thought you were proposing an 'official prayer' for the forum, in that case it seems reasonably to include what it actually is. Reading back now it seems more like something you just wanted to post, sorry for the misunderstanding .

transperson

im not great for praying, more just reflecting and contemplating.
like the OP i feel the meditative approach is better, im not really sure what to pray to and prayer kinda has associations of forced hail mary's and Glory be's in primary school. what thead said was right you can live your whole life as an act of devotion, that is the coolest idea, no need for those forced prayer sessions of old ireland.

Religions are like languages, just because I can speak spanish does not mean I am from spain

that is brilliant!

-you grow up learning a language.
-most people never learn a new one and cannot understand other languages.
-new languages can always be learned.
-new languages are always learned through the understanding of the last.
-you can speak many languages.
-all language describes the same thing[reality], but in different ways.
-each languages vocabulary is different,some have many words for somethings and others have none for those very same things.
-the language you learn affects how you percieve the world.

feel free to interchange the words language and religion in the above sentences.

Nevyn

<sigh> Sorry the rede again.

What you ment but it and where you came across it does not change what it is.

The first recorded mention of the Wiccan Rede in the eight-word form popular today, was in a speech by Doreen Valiente on October 3, 1964 at what may have been the first witches' dinner organized in modern history. The event was sponsored by Pentagram, a quarterly newsletter and "witchcraft review" started and published by Gerard Noel in 1964

http://www.waningmoon.com/ethics/rede3.shtml


For me it was a bit like having someone say I'm going to say a pray and then
reciting the 12 commandment, or love thy neighbour as yourself, a bit odd and a bit jarring.
I do see the the heart felt sentiment behind it Solas
and I am not having a go but disscussing it, which is pretty much the idea behind this forum.

solas

what if i had said..
Every circle/gathering opens with a prayer, a request for protection, blessing or divine inspiration.
Would be no harm to request a blessing for this forum, something along the lines of "love thy neighbour as thyself"

would you say..thats not a prayer thats a commandment?

It seems that you consider my prayer inappropriate, I apologise, but I still feel the intent behind my message should be noted and not the beurocracy of the religion is stems from.

Talliesin

solas wrote:

what if i had said..
Every circle/gathering opens with a prayer, a request for protection, blessing or divine inspiration.
Would be no harm to request a blessing for this forum, something along the lines of "love thy neighbour as thyself"

would you say..thats not a prayer thats a commandment?

Yes I would have, though only because this is a forum where discussing the difference between the two is on topic.

Okay, I admit it, on other forums I would have said it too just to be an argumentative bugger, indeed I'm such an argumentative bugger that I'd say that it is a prayer, but you are praying to the members of the forum rather than any divine figure (from the Latin, precaria, to entreaty, the word "pray" is still found in this more general sense in some English dialects).

In any case I don't feel any need to love my neighbour as myself if they mess with me or mine. Just what I do to a neighbour that treatens my family is much more a matter of tactics than ethics. Similarly, if someone feels they shouldn't eat meat on a Friday because while harmless in itself (assuming they have no ethical issues with eating meat at all) it is displeasing to their God to do so, the Rede may not go down so well (though at least it is a rede, that is to say counsel or advice, rather than a commandment - the Rede doesn't say "Don't do harm", it says "If you do harm, you'd better be damn well ready for the consequesnces").

solas

but you are praying to the members of the forum rather than any divine figure

I disagree. I considered it a prayer for the members of this forum. I ask (request=prayer) that all will respect each other.

Similarly, if someone feels they shouldn't eat meat on a Friday because while harmless in itself (assuming they have no ethical issues with eating meat at all) it is displeasing to their God to do so, the Rede may not go down so well

I tought this forum was about learning and understanding and respecting our own and others faiths.
I would find it difficult to participate if any particular faith was being curtailed or prohibited.

the Rede doesn't say "Don't do harm", it says "If you do harm, you'd better be damn well ready for the consequesnces").

From what Ive read of the information provided in the paganism forum the statement is teh equivelent to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", and thats a statement I am already very familiar with.

In any case I don't feel any need to love my neighbour as myself if they mess with me or mine.

I respect your request.

Talliesin

solas wrote:

From what Ive read of the information provided in the paganism forum the statement is teh equivelent to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", and thats a statement I am already very familiar with.

Equivalent yes, exact equivalent no. Comparing the two is very interesting, not least because people honestly living their lives according to either will tend to be decent people, and that both the Rede and the Golden Rule are honoured by people whose attitudes range from complete pacifism through to support for first-strike military actions with a guarantee of civilian casaulties (myself being somewhere in the middle).

solas

From the sticky in paganism re wicca..

The rede fulfills the same function as does the "Golden Rule" for Jews and Christians;

The Golden Rule (do unto others as you would have them do to you/do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you) and the Wiccan Rede (If no harm is done, do as you will) are forms of the Ethic of Reciprocity. Greek philosophers in the fourth centurybce derived it from logic as the most basic moral code. It is the most basic relativistic-logic ethic, and on account of it's simplicity it is the most universal moral code known; appearing in nearly all cultures, being derived from multiple teachers, religions and philosophies at different times in different ways.
(including the New Testament, Talmud, Koran, and the Analects of Confucius).
The oldest appearance of it in an organized system dates to at least 1500bce.

Talliesin

solas wrote:

From the sticky in paganism re wicca..

The rede fulfills the same function as does the "Golden Rule" for Jews and Christians;

I'd agree with the statement you quote (though I'm sure I'd find something in the stickies I disagree with):
The Rede provides the core ethical guideline from which the ethical decisions of Wiccans in particular, and many other Pagans and some others that have adopted it follow.
The Golden Rule provides the core ethical guidline from which the ethical decisions of Jews and Christians and some others that have adopted it follow.
In this similarity the Rede and the Golden Rule do indeed fulfil the same function.

However, Wiccan ethics are different to Judeo-Christian ethics. Wiccan ethics are situational (any Wiccan law either follows from the Rede or is a matter of how a coven or tradition chooses to operate [that is, bureaucracy rather than ethics], ultimately you have to work out what you should do yourself), where Judeo-Christian ethics are legal (that is there is a set of commandments and laws to follow). Where a Christian might say (in a phrasing popular amongst some American Protestants) "What would Jesus do?" a Wiccan would just say "what should I do?".

At the root of this is a different concept of our relationship with the divine, the Judeo-Christian view of God is as a law-giver (though they differ as to just what laws and why one should follow them) which in turn relates to the Judeochristian view of their God as all-powerful. The Wiccan view of the Gods is not entirely identified with the source of the laws or ethical behaviour (though ones relationship with the divine will still impact on ones ethical decisions), after all the Gods don't always agree amongst themselves, and you really don't want to spend too much time around someone who thinks "What would Loki do?". Further there is a difference in the reasons for behaving ethically. Judaism would say "because that is what G*d wants you to do, so do it", Christianity would say "because that is what God wants you to do, also He'll punish you if you don't - however he is also a merciful God who will forgive you if seek his forgiveness" (different denominations differing as to how that forgiveness is sought and received), the Wicca, with different degrees of emphasis on the concept of Karma and/or the Threefold Law, essentially say "whatever you do, you're going to have to live with the consequences". (There is a further matter of a High Priest or High Priestess sharing the karma of those they initiate, not to mention that people of poor ethics are more likely to be oathbreakers, and in general we can't fob off the unethical behaviour of those we associate with as only impacting on them, it doesn't).

Nevyn

"What would Jesus do?"

That is a statement I find personally pretty funny for I really could not see myself using it in reguards to the Goddess I am devoted too.
Following the logical conclusion of "What would The Morrigan do?" could be
kind of messy.

Talliesin

Thaed wrote:

Following the logical conclusion of "What would The Morrigan do?" could be
kind of messy.

Yes, I imagine "What would Scathach do?" would in short time lead to my being shot in the neck by a police marksman.

Stabshauptmann

I often get asked do I practice any religion. And I think, yes - that is to say I have one, but do it practice it. How does one define practice? For most religions an important part is prayer.

For me to pray means to communicate with divine power. Whether you are asking for forgiveness, protection, inspiration or something else. I dont actually kneel and say "I want X". Its usually something burning away in the back of my mind. I try to justify it - why I either should or shouldnt get it and as far as I can tell, when I deserve good luck I get it and when Ive been a prick lately I dont. My prayers are more a case of me deciding how much I need something, do I deserve it and subconsciously deciding on some sort of sacrifice in payment.
When I consciously decide I'll do X if Y happens, Y never happens. But sometimes when I genuinly need something and I just really hope and pray it happens and then an oppurtunity occurs very close after it to pay for it and I do so willingly. Thats part of why I have such a strong belief in Karma.

"What would Loki do?".

For many religions an important part of prayer is to acknowledge this divine power, to worship it and devote yourself to its will.

Im not such the divine power, whatever it is, has a will or master plan. The be more correct, Ive absolutly no idea what the plan is if it exists.
So, when I pray, its not really for that reason though I often ask myself why are we here.

solas wrote:

The Golden Rule (do unto others as you would have them do to you/do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you) and the Wiccan Rede (If no harm is done, do as you will) are forms of the Ethic of Reciprocity. Greek philosophers in the fourth centurybce derived it from logic as the most basic moral code. It is the most basic relativistic-logic ethic, and on account of it's simplicity it is the most universal moral code known; appearing in nearly all cultures, being derived from multiple teachers, religions and philosophies at different times in different ways.
(including the New Testament, Talmud, Koran, and the Analects of Confucius).
The oldest appearance of it in an organized system dates to at least 1500bce.

The forum is a success!!
This is the kindof discussion we need, but should this be split from the origional thread about prayer? We're now discussing the rede and the commandments??

solas

This is the kindof discussion we need, but should this be split from the origional thread about prayer? We're now discussing the rede and the commandments??

I know the thread has moved on a bit, but i think it is appropriate under prayer. The OP sortof asked about how and why, if you do pray and who you pray to and I think commandments and the rede are both "requests" and I think of prayer as a request, also they are very much at the core of the system of belief from where the "ethics" of prayer are derived.

(There is a further matter of a High Priest or High Priestess sharing the karma of those they initiate, not to mention that people of poor ethics are more likely to be oathbreakers, and in general we can't fob off the unethical behaviour of those we associate with as only impacting on them, it doesn't).

I find that idea similar to the idea of "jesus dying for our sins".

what would Jesus do...That is a statement I find personally pretty funny for I really could not see myself using it in reguards to the Goddess I am devoted too.
Following the logical conclusion of "What would The Morrigan do?" could be
kind of messy.

The morrigan is a triple Goddess no? could be rather confusing, should you curse and spite your enemies until they do what you want...should you bless them so that they may win the battle..as long as its in your name..or should you just confuse them with lust so they don't know what they are doing?
Can understand why you might be confused.

When I was googling the golden rule last night I came across this

"Spiritual Acts of Mercy

The Spiritual Acts of Mercy are Christian acts that are to keep the two greatest commandments; "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind.' This is the greatest and the first commandment. And the second is like it, 'Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.'"

The seven Spiritual Acts of Mercy are:

* To admonish the sinner.
* To instruct the ignorant.
* To counsel the doubtful.
* To comfort the sorrowful.
* To bear wrongs patiently.
* To forgive all injuries.
* To pray for the living and the dead."

apparantly this is how Christians would do as Jesus would.

Talliesin

Kaptain Redeye wrote:

For many religions an important part of prayer is to acknowledge this divine power, to worship it and devote yourself to its will.

Loki's will is to unlease utter chaos and carnage upon the world. Without anything else in the mix, I don't want to meet people devoted to that will. But again, this comes from a view of divinity where there isn't a single authoritative, infallible deity who is the source of all morality.

If we look at the story of Abraham and Isaac, there G*d commands Abraham to kill Isaac. Abraham does so because it is G*d's will, and G*d has an angel intervene at the last moment and blesses Abraham for his faith.

If a God or Goddess told me to to kill my son I'd tell them to stick it up their sacred rectum.

I did come across an interesting article by a Rabbi who argued that Abraham similarly should have disobeyed G*d's commandment in this case and that he had actually failed a test of ethics set by G*d rather than a passed a test of faith, I doubt this has any degree of orthodoxy, and alas can't recall the name of the Rabbi to go looking for it.

Stabshauptmann

I thought ppl who believed in many gods either followed the collective wills of the gods or chose one god (for certain situations) and followed them??

How exactly does it work?

stevenmu

I know that historically it would be common for a particular village or area to worship a particular god (or somtimes subset of gods) out of the group of gods that they believed in, almost like them having a 'patron' god. This would often be based on what the village did for it's main source of living, for e.g. a farming community may specifically worship a weather/rain/sun god whereas a fishing community may worship a sea god. Villages or comunities would sometimes war with each other over their gods but it would be more a case of them believing that their god was angry with the others god, as opposed to the more modern idea of warring to convert the enemy to your own faith (of course they probably had their own alterior motives just like in modern times).

This doesn't really apply much in todays global village though. I'd guess nowadays (in western society at least) people would choose to worship whichever deity appeals to them the most, with occasional prayers to others if their area of 'exprtise' is related to whatever's desired.

who007

Thaed wrote:

Sorry dont mean to be picky but...

'an it harm none, do what you will' is not a blessing but the Wiccan Rede.
This the guide by which wiccans live thier lives and judge their actions.
'

AND just change that to "do what thou wilt, shall be the whole of the law" and you have the one and only commandment of Satanism ( a widely misunderstood spiritual expression, by the way) :cool:

Nevyn

"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law." -- Liber AL, I:40

"Love is the law, love under will." -- Liber AL, I:57

It is taken from Crowley's Book of the Law.
It is the golden rule for Thelma and those who are in O.T.O.

http://www.hermetic.com/heidrick/salutes.html

Stabshauptmann

who007 wrote:

AND just change that to "do what thou wilt, shall be the whole of the law" and you have the one and only commandment of Satanism ( a widely misunderstood spiritual expression, by the way) :cool:

And change that to "do what I wish shall be the whole of the law and you've got some mad cult. I think the important part of the wiccan rede is "'an it harm none".
Correct me if Im wrong but Satanism preaches that you should take care of yourself first and feel no guilt for harm caused to others?

Talliesin

who007 wrote:

AND just change that to "do what thou wilt, shall be the whole of the law" and you have the one and only commandment of Satanism ( a widely misunderstood spiritual expression, by the way) :cool:

The Law of Thelema has a quite different meaning to "wilt" than the Wiccan Rede. In Thelema there is the concept of one's "true will", so the magician would engage in the Coversation of the Holy Guardian Angel and other workings to understand his or her true will and act upon it. This bi-passes the need for an ethic of reciprocity, of legality, or most other ethics as people living their true will would naturally be in harmony with each other, "Every man and every woman is a star" there is a harmonious path for everyone to follow. To add "an it harm none" to this is hence nonsense.

Will in the sense of the Rede is will in the normal meaning of the word, and hence it simply advises that as long as you aren't doing any harm you should do whatever you please.

While they are quite different it certainly seems most likely that the wording of the Law of Thelema has influenced the most common wordings found today. Prior to that we find in Gardner:

[Witches] are inclined to the morality of the legendary Good King Pausol[e], "Do what you like so long as you harm no one". But they believe a certain law to be important, "You must not use magic for anything which will cause harm to anyone, and if, to prevent a greater wrong being done, you must discommode someone, you must do it only in a way which will abate the harm.

- Gerald Gardner, The Meaning of Witchcraft

The morality of the (fictional) Good King Pausole is in turn

1. Do no wrong to thy neighbor.
2. Observing this, do as thou pleasest.

- Pierre Louÿs, The Adventures of King Pausole

Gardnerian Craft Laws contain the expression "harm none", but not the rest of the Rede (and after all, it's a rede not a law and besides, there's no reason for a law to tell you to do what you will). The only explanation for the law is not addressed in terms of ethics but of self-preservation:

But when one of our oppressors die, or even be sick, ever is the cry, "This be Witches Malice," and the hunt is up again. And though they slay ten of their people to one of ours, still they care not; they have many thousands, while we are few indeed. So it is Ardane that none shall use the Art in any way to do ill to any, howevermuch they have injured us. And for long we have obeyed this law, "Harm none" and nowtimes many believe we exist not. So it be Ardane that this law shall still continue to help us in our plight. No one, however great an injury or injustice they receive, may use the Art in any to do ill or harm any.

- Public Contents of Gardnerian Book of Shadows (if you believe Aidan Kelly, he's regarded as an oathbreaker and a liar so it's a matter of whether he was oathbreaking or lying when he published that ).

So we have "harm none" expressed as both an ethic and a tactical decision (though the tactic enforced as a law, but there the ethical consideration is the safety of the coven and other Witches, not those you may harm), later being worded in terms mirroring Crowley's in their poetry but not in their meaning. Just when this wording happened is debatable, but the smart money is on the Doreen Valiente speech Thaed quotes above (not least because she was familiar with Crowley's work and had a talent for re-wording already existing material with great poetry and beauty, indeed it is Valiente who composed the better known poetic form of the Charge).

Certainly, while the two are different, they can be found to be compatible, and there are people who honour both.

Satanism (quite different to Thelema - Crowley worked through his Satanic period long before then by entering Anglican churches, hardly a Satanic act to most eyes but he knew it would have shocked his Plymouth Brethren mother) on the other hand covers a large number of religious, spiritual and decadent viewpoints. The most significant is probably Church of Satan which has the Nine Satanic Statements and Nine Satanic Sins, of which the most significant in a discussion of ethics of reciprocity are the 4th, 5th and 6th statements, which specifically refuses such an ethic:

4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it instead of love wasted on ingrates!
5. Satan represents vengeance instead of turning the other cheek!
6. Satan represents responsibility to the responsible instead of concern for psychic vampires!

- Anton Szandor LaVey, "The Nine Satanic Statements" in The Satanic Bible

And the 3rd sin, which attacks much of the reasoning behind such ethics:

3. Solipsism—Can be very dangerous for Satanists. Projecting your reactions, responses and sensibilities onto someone who is probably far less attuned than you are. It is the mistake of expecting people to give you the same consideration, courtesy and respect that you naturally give them. They won’t. Instead, Satanists must strive to apply the dictum of “Do unto others as they do unto you.” It’s work for most of us and requires constant vigilance lest you slip into a comfortable illusion of everyone being like you. As has been said, certain utopias would be ideal in a nation of philosophers, but unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately, from a Machiavellian standpoint) we are far from that point.

- Anton Szandor LaVey, "The Nine Satanic Statements" in The Satanic Bible

Talliesin

Kaptain Redeye wrote:

I thought ppl who believed in many gods either followed the collective wills of the gods or chose one god (for certain situations) and followed them??

How exactly does it work?

Well, there are plenty of different polytheist religions and beliefs, and most of them I am quite ignorant of and can't really talk about.

In Pagan Witchcraft the view of the relationship we have with the Gods is perhaps less one-sided than with some monotheistic faiths, which makes sense given the difference from the belief in a single all-powerful deity who must be obeyed, because He/She/It is the head guy in charge. Indeed many Witches do believe in a all-powerful Divine being behind everything, but It doesn't seem to have much direct dealings with us, so we don't with It.

Now, the choosing of one God or Goddess or a small number, most often a God and a Goddess (or rather being chosen by one God or Goddess and feeling you have a calling to work with them, quite often not the one you wanted to work with) is indeed how it works for most. In addition covens, groups and partnerships may work with particular deities, and despite stevenmu's doubts about how it may work in modern Western society there are still places associated with particular Gods or Goddesses and people who honour them there and act as guardians to those places. Further one may work with a particular God or Goddess to a particular end.

In this though one does not undertake to follow their will blindly, nor would doing so be an ethical way of living. I have a devotion to Scáthach. Now what Scáthach really likes is for people to become very skilled at warfare, go out and find plenty of opportunities to use those skills, and eventually die in combat, preferably being killed by someone who themself dispatches you in a skilled manner. If you look at the myths of her students, most famously Cú Chulainn, but also some of those he was later to slay, that's exactly the sort of thing she likes to see happen.

So does this mean I should go out looking for fisticuffs and offering outside to anyone who spills my pint? I should hope not. Now, I'm not a pacifist and if a situation arises where such physical intervention is appropriate I would hope I wouldn't chicken out (I did chicken out of such a confrontation once, and still regret the greater harm done) on the other hand one should pick ones battles and chose ones tactics wisely (as I'm not a pacifist I don't believe in the ethics of Gandhi or King, but I do think their non-violent resistance was a wise tactic for them to use none the less). Besides which, I'm not particularly skilled in this regard anyway (though I should work on that, if only because I need to get fitter and martial arts would be a lot less boring to me than joining a gym).

So, I don't literally follow in the footsteps of Scáthach's students, nor adopt "What Would Scáthach Do?" as a motto. What do I do? Well, I try to work with her in a way that is of benefit to both of us, a matter that I am still exploring in its meaning and implications. I learn what I need to learn, I become competent at what I should become competent in and I bring my efforts to where they are needed with honour and courage.

Or at least I try to.

The very concept of "working with" deities rather than following or obeying them says a lot about this view of divinity. For analogy, I try to fulfil the will of my business clients, but that doesn't mean I would do anything they asked, nor that they would ask me to do anything that they want done, the relationship is not one of someone who orders and someone who follows but much more reciprocal than that. If a business client wants me to crack a rivals system, or (and this isn't unheard of) steal copyright material from elsewhere then the legal and ethical implications are there for me to deal with, there is no "just following orders". Now if a client wants me to do this and I refuse that may damage my relationship with that client, they might even cause me hassle in some way, but I'm not going to hell for it. Intelligent clients for there part don't ask people they are hiring to do outlandishly unethical things, that'd just be stupid. On the other hand, if I just ignore a client's reasonable requests, or for that matter if I mess up in trying to execute them, that also has negative consequences for our relationship, and they are right to feel agrieved. A closer analogy still (but still just an analogy) is to people with whom I have both a friendship and a business relationship at the same time.