This essay is an edited excerpt from chapter 2 of the author’s book, PaGaian Cosmology: Re-inventing Earth-based Goddess Religion.
Hallie Iglehart Austen,
The Heart of the Goddess
The Female Metaphor/Goddess is often stated as (given the status of) “cult”, as opposed to “religion”; that is, as opposed to having the status of any other “World Religion”, which is how all the current patriarchal, “historical” religions are known and understood. Goddess “religion” has for the past few millennia generally been referred to as “fertility cult”, and this has been understood to mean a more lowly status, because matter itself had been reduced to insignificance or backdrop. The reproduction of matter has been considered a trivial thing by most patriarchal religions themselves, and certainly by most Western philosophy (and we may note here that the word “trivial” itself is a term whose original meaning has been diminished: that is, once a “tri-via” was a common meeting place, a Goddess thing in my opinion, a 3 way possibility.
It has been characteristic of the patriarchal mind to divorce itself from its embeddness in material reality. “Fertility” itself is a term that needs to be re-valued. There is no reason to assume that the ancients did not comprehend the multivalence – the depth dimensions, of “fertility”. It is the Creativity of Earth, of the Cosmos, and it is concerned with the Life in which we are immersed. The modern mind frequently assumes that “primitive fertility rituals” came from an insecurity about survival. This may in fact be a massive projection. Frequently, our ancestors of earliest times partook in the abundance of nature, so perhaps the “fertility rituals” were as much a celebration of regenerative cosmic power, as they were an invoking of it. Heide Göttner-Abendroth, scholar of matriarchal cultures, uses the term “faith of rebirth” rather than “fertility cult” to speak of Goddess centred faith/religiosity[i]. That does express the essence of Goddess religiosity, however I like to stick with a re-valuation of fertility. This re-evaluation may be developed in the restorying of the three faces of the Female Metaphor, such as I have done in PaGaian Cosmology, particularly in the re-storying of the Old One, that is, the post-menopausal elder. If the ancients were simply concerned with physical fertility (of which only a dualistic mind can conceive), why celebrate this “useless” phase? The “fertility cults” seemed to have some understanding of the integrity of life – birth and death; certainly they seem to hold more than the “primitive”, “unconscious” veneer they have been dealt by researchers of recent centuries, and by their conquerors of old.
The word “religion” itself is problematic, as it tends to imply a rigid system of belief. Its roots are in the word religio which may be interpreted as “binding” in a negative sense, or as a connectedness in a positive sense of relatedness and bonding. There is argument for the case that Goddess imagery and language is not another religion, since She underlies and is threaded through all of them; She is a Metaphor, but so is “God”[ii]. It would seem more accurate to speak of “Goddess spirituality”, since that seems to indicate a fluidity and aliveness. Heide Göttner-Abendroth uses “matriarchal spirituality” for this reason[iii]. Göttner-Abendroth re-defines “matriarchal” as meaning “in the beginning was the mothers”, contending that ‘arche’ did not mean ‘dominance’ until later[iv]. However, I am keen to have Her understood with the dignity of an in-depth spiritual practice, a coherent worldview; and the word “religion” does that. There are many different varieties of ritual and form within Goddess religiosity it is true, but so there are in God religions. She does deserve to be listed as a “World Religion”, given that She was the main metaphor for Deity for so long and so pervasively, and still is revered in some form by millions of humans.
Most minds on the planet, at this time in the human story, are so used to reducing the Female Metaphor/Goddess to cult, archetype, consort, wife of, that it seems necessary to dwell for a while on this issue. Most minds are non-plussed as to who else She might be, if not in relationship to, or secondary to, or even a danger to, a male “major player”. Was She ever anything else? At this point in time many scholars, artists and more have addressed who else She might be, both from past evidence and from present experience of cosmological dynamics. In my own work I have not directly addressed the “why” question – that is, if She was once something other than Her present reduced state, why did that change? I have preferred to focus on the present – who She is now, and, on what use that might be. What might be the consequences of changing our minds sufficiently, so that Medusa for instance, can be comprehended as metaphor for Divine Wisdom? Many scholars contend She once was understood this way. What might it mean for our minds to welcome Her back? Would that alter the way we relate to Earth, to Being?
A “Home-ly” Religion
My partner put forward the perception of Goddess religion being a “homely” religion, and he meant that with all the status that “homely” may have. It may be written as “Home-ly” to emphasize that it is connective to Home – as Earth, Self, Cosmos. Such a description as “Home-ly religion”, perhaps as a counter to “World religion”(!), is based on evidence of the ancient practice of every home being a shrine, a sanctuary to Her; when there was no separation between the secular and the sacred, when “religion was life, and life was religion”. This is described by Riane Eisler in The Chalice and the Blade[v], referring to the archeological work of Marija Gimbutas. A “home-ly” religion then is a “domestic” religion – one that may be known in the familiarity of one’s dwelling – bodymind, home, backyard, region, “country”, Earth, Solar System, Universe.
NOTES:
[i] Heide Göttner-Abendroth, The Goddess and Her Heros, p.xvi.
[ii] ‘God’ as metaphor is discussed in PaGaian Cosmology, particularly p. 19-20 https://pagaian.org/book/introduction/ and p. 123-124 https://pagaian.org/book/chapter-4/.
[iii] Heide Göttner-Abendroth, The Goddess and Her Heros, p.xiv.
[iv] Heide Göttner-Abendroth, The Goddess and Her Heros, p.xviii.
[v] Riane Eisler, The Chalice and the Blade, p.23.
REFERENCES:
Eisler, Riane. The Chalice and the Blade. San Fransisco: Harper and Row, 1987.
Göttner-Abendroth, Heide. The Goddess and Her Heros. (trans. Lilian Friedberg), Massachusetts: Anthony Publishing Company, 1995.
Livingstone, Glenys. PaGaian Cosmology: Re-inventing Earth-based Goddess Religion. NE: iUniverse, 2005.