#it’s really hard to reconcile two opposing but true things at the same time

[tanjir0se]

Throwing my hat into the ring here to say I think one of the hardest things about this election is holding both of these equally true things in mind at the same time. I agree we shouldn’t coddle people we disagree with and blame their actions on leftists. They have agency and are adults, and it’s hard for me to accept an ignorance defense from them because at every single moment these people they voted for told them exactly who they were.

But anyone who doesn’t see the detriment to terminally online leftism’s holier-than-thou exclusionary attitude is fooling themselves. The uncomfortable truth of the matter here is that while these people are not owed our time and energy to educate them, if we don’t do it, someone will. And that someone is probably going to be either an Alt-Right Youtube Cryptofascist, or Fox News.

IMO, OP is absolutely right that if you haven’t ever met anyone willing to listen, you’re not looking hard enough. Though some of them, maybe even many of them did just want to “go down that path” to begin with, some of them didn’t. Some of them are just working class white people from small red towns who are more concerned about the economy than queer rights. Maybe they’ve never even met a queer person in their life. Treating them like evil monsters not only won’t get you anywhere, but it’s also just a kinda shitty thing to do. Dehumanization is the tool of the enemy.

Anyone who voted for Trump has some serious introspection to do if they want to be accepted by the left, by their family and friends they hurt. They are adults with agency who did and are doing a shitty, stupid, harmful thing. And they may not be willing to do the work to learn. But at the end of the day, we have a lot more in common with the average Trump supporter than either of us do with Donald Trump. The key is getting them to see that.

I'm going to upset your entire worldview with this but you need to be uncomfortable for a minute: you need to be kind to people who disagree with you. You need to listen to and try to understand people who come from different backgrounds.

A woman I follow on tiktok posted results from a live she did where she invited gen z Trump voters to tell her why they voted for him. Many of these were registered Democrats, who once believed in freedom of choice and environmental regulations and trans rights. They told her they felt unwelcome in leftist circles because of their race, gender, or sexual orientation. They said they felt pushed out and beat down and silenced, and then the right welcomed them with open arms.

I admit to feeling this way sometimes. It feels like shit to be told to shut up because you don't have the exact, perfect resume of oppression to be able to speak on a certain topic. There is occasionally space for exclusivity and "safe spaces", but those things will never convince anyone to vote for your candidate or to change their mind on a key issue. And you actually do need to change their minds. This election is weird, because not every single Trump voter this time around is racist, misogynistic, or homophobic. Some of them definitely are, to be fair, but he really ran a cross section this time.

You guys are becoming reclusive and nasty and WEIRD. You actually need to listen to people when they tell you what they're feeling - find the common thread, and lead them FORWARD. I get that nobody "owes" these people their time and effort, but you also don't need to say that to their face. You don't need to make people feel like they're stupid or worthless because of their race or gender. That's how you lose support. It feels immature of them because it is - but it's also immature to build a treehouse with a "no boys allowed" sign, and to point and laugh as they cry on the ground.

[justiceburst]

Moral Alignment Test

Goro is 18.3% good, tied between chaotic and lawful, making him true neutral.

[duchessofostergotlands]

Weird question: how do you cope with Margaret Thatcher being the first woman becoming prime minister in the UK? Recently Italy has elected a woman as head of the government and she really is bad: in her political agenda there is nothing to help other women, she refuses any connection with her feminine side (I don't mean she doesn't wear pink, I mean she doesn't want people to use the definite article we use for girls in front of her title, she prefers the masculine one as if it goes with the title and not with the person), she talk about parenthood as if it concerns only mothers. She also comes from nothing and she has fought to be where she is today but instead of planning to make it easier for others she brags about how facing struggles builds caractherand proves your worth, which is bs if you ask me. Anyway, everybody in my country is talking about breaking glass and meritocracy and I undestrand their thinking, I can see the logic behind it but I can't just reconcile it with the fact they're trying to make her a symbol of values she recoils from. Now, I think I give you a compliment when I assume you're not a Thatcher fan, so how have you come to peace what what she was and what others tried to make her (and have they succeed, do people really look at Margaret tatcher and think "what a feminist")?

“I think I give you a compliment when I assume you're not a Thatcher fan” haha yes you do and I am very much not a fan!!

So I wasn’t born until two years after Maggie quit so it never really mattered to me that she was our first female PM. But interestingly we’re going through a similar thing now because we’ve just got our first Prime Minister who’s a person of colour, who follows a faith other than Christianity. But it’s also Rishi Sunak, a privately educated billionaire who supports policies that have disproportionate harm on people who are from marginalised groups. It’s different because I’m not a Hindu Asian person so it isn’t personal representation for me in the same way female leaders would be but there’s been a lot of think pieces about people being torn between celebrating representation and being realistic about what Rishi will actually do with the platform and power he has.

Ultimately both can be true. Your President shows that in your country being female is not inherently a barrier to being a leader, and that is notable. But at the same time, if the policies a leader introduces are discriminatory and harmful then it doesn’t matter if it’s a man or a woman delivering them. So you could argue it shows being female isn’t a barrier as long as your policies don’t try to help women or anyone else. And you can recognise that too. It can be hard to recognise two seemingly opposing views but sometimes that’s how things are! Different individuals or newspapers will emphasise one side or the other depending on their own political views and that’s inevitable, but you can just hold firm in believing that reality is more complicated. It might be easier for me because I have just always taken the view that a politician won’t ever be like me. Even if they’re a 30 year old woman who went to the same school as me. They won’t be like me because they’re a politician, they have power I don’t have and I do think that changes you. So I don’t need my politicians to have felt my experiences, I just need them to listen to me sharing my experiences and take action as a result. I guess because of that whenever we get new leadership my reaction is always just “ok and what are you going to do?”

[roselevesque]

Enemies to lovers has such a wide range of meanings depending on who you talk to. And it's kind of fascinating.

I can go around, asking for recommendations on books/shows/movies which contain this trope ( either canonically or as a big fanon thing ) and the answers can range from something like She-ra with Catra ans Adora, where the people actually act as enemies for a duration of the story, to Aziraphale and Crowley from Good Omens who are probably as far away from this concept as you can get.

That is to say, compared to straight best friends to lovers, this trope seems to attract a bigger variety of relationships that would be labelled as enemies to lovers simply from the fact that people have very different definitions of what an enemy is.

Enemy is a heavy term, in my opinion. When you genuinely claim someone is your enemy, it doesn't just mean that you are annoyed by their presence at times or that you simply compete against each other. No.

An enemy is someone you hold much more hostile feelings towards. You don't only dislike them, you hate them or what they stand for. You don't only act against them, you may very well cause them extreme distress as a consequence of your actions, intentionally or not.

I don't know about others, but personally, I wouldn't call most people who get on my nerves or don't like me and express it an enemy.

As such, I personally find it hard to categorize anything as enemies to lovers when: A) whatever conflict they might have had barely lasted ( ex: Rayla and Callum from The Dragon Prince ) and B) the nature of said conflict doesn't put them in a position where they effectively oppose each other and aren't on the same side emotionally, ideologically and/or socially ( ex: Kageyama and Hinata from Haikyuu )

In the second case, I find myself often thinking that what many label enemies to lovers would actually better fit the rivals to lovers trope: two people who compete against and can antagonise each other, but aren't pushing past a certain threshold.

Let's look at Sasuke and Naruto from Naruto for a second to underline the disntiction. Before Sasuke left Konoha, they were clearly rivals, called even in canon as such through the entirety of Part 1. They didn't always get along and threw insults around, but ultimately it was a lot more innocent compared to their Shippuden selves. At that point they were legit enemies. Naruto sure wished they weren't, but their goals aligned in such a way that a serious clash would be inevitable.

Now, let's look at Luz and Amity from The Owl House. They don't start off on great terms, far from it. Their first serious interaction ends with Luz challenging Amity to a duel because of the latter's mean attitude towards her and her friend. Immediately after the duel the two share a quiet and short heart to heart and not much later they are forced to work together and their relationship goes upwards from that point with Amity even developing a crush on Luz.

They had negative moments in the beginning, but they are a small portion of the show and, even then, they don't cross that threshold I mentioned. Heck, Luz herself compares them to The Witch Azura and her rival ( characters from a book series she loves ) and flat out refers to Amity as a rival, although the actual rivalry activities they undertake were concentrated in those first few interactions.

In short, you can have characters who don't necessarily get along most of the time and not fall under the enemies to lover or even the rivals to lovers dynamic. There are plenty of people who have neutral or even bad opinions about another person before they eventually start to be on good terms, this doesn't make them rivals or enemies though.

And sometimes I do wonder if all of these varied views on the enemies to lovers label stem from the fact that an enemy in its purest definition is quite a foreign concept to us all.

Fiction is already an exaggeration tool, because we are hardly likely to ever encounter stuff on the sheer scale they are presented in fantasy, no matter how realistic they might be portrayed. This includes enemies to lovers.

It's hard for us to reconcile this idea and our minds at times. How likely are you to ever hear of a true story about people who started out on completely divergent grounds going from that to loving each other? Especially in an action/battle heavy environment? Or in a world divided by life or death turmoil? Close to none.

As such, so we can digest it easier, we lower the requirements for what can qualify as enemies to lovers and we point at those ships and say: "This is a good enemies to lovers story", when the shoe doesn't really fit.

[pagedelight]

The Distinction Between Light and Rage (With Some Gushers)

One of the things I’ve seen come up in discussion about the aspects is some overlaps between them to varying degrees. One good example of this Light and Rage.  I think it’s pretty much consensus at this point that Rage = Truth or Revelations. But it gets really interesting when talking about Light because Light also presides over the concept of truth. Some people have tried to smooth over the similarities by saying that Rage is “emotional truths” or truths that make you feel bad, but I think it’s a bit more complex than that. I think the distinction between the two is as follows: Ragebounds are “correct” and Lightbounds are “right”. Generally speaking. What do I mean by this?  Well, for the sake of this post, I am defining “correct” as presenting facts or evidence, and being “Right” is possessing an understanding of the facts in such a way that allows one to provide new insights, or form new arguments. Rage is the deconstructive aspect to Hopes conservativeness. As the Extended Zodiac states. 

The “true” objective reality that Ragebounds seek is noted to be covered up by “lies” (something Hope would preside over as Hope is an aspect of illusions, and beliefs). For the rage bound, the truth is something that must already exist and is being covered up, and their primary goal is to rip and tear things to find the irreducibles. The cold hard facts.  The Extended Zodiac paints Lightbounds as the exact opposite in this regard: 

Where Ragebound pursue the facts to destroy faulty arguments, Lightbounds pursue facts to form new arguments. The EZ funnily describes them as “alchemists” linking them to Sburb’s alchemy system, which utilizes a resource called “Grist” (defined as a substance used to back up an argument). 

The limitation of Lightbound’s relationship with Truth and a Ragebound’s is that a Lightbound constructs new perspectives, arguments, and grants themselves more options while eliminating the bad or unwise ones while Ragebounds use their evidence to deconstruct arguments and systems and get to the heart of the matter. Don’t bother asking Ragebounds for solutions to any fallouts or results of their radical behavior. “What the heck are we supposed to believe now?” everyone shouts and riots. Ragebounds trap themselves (and others) in the pursuit of truth. This is the core flaw of the Ragebound. Their pursuit of “truth” is not necessarily the pursuit of the good. It is often impractical, paranoia induced, and self destructive as a result of an inability to reconcile with the opposing aspect “Hope”.  This dynamic may be in part influenced by their neighboring aspects Mind and Doom. Light sits across from Mind on the EZ potentially indicating that some elements of Mind’s options, and lack of bias are carried over. Conversely, Doom is across from Rage indicating the limitation and narrowing down of options that Ragebounds experience as they discover and move towards the truth. Additional Notes: A Lightbound recognizes that some lies are necessary and are even good (afterall belief becomes reality in paradox space), while doing their best to eliminate the bad ones. Ragebounds lack this nuance. If the foundations are false, it’s all bad. No matter what. Yet, at the same time, Rage when cultivated properly and not extreme is the driving force behind all positive and negative social change. The catalyst. While Hope may inspire people to continue fighting, it is Rage that starts the fight to begin with. In a wise system, built on humanitarian principles the Ragebound is at the forefront tearing down evil before it even becomes a threat at best or prompting a sensationalist movement and influencing culture (insert “it’s all the rage” joke here) as trendsetter rebels. TLDR; Ragebounds be like:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VdP9CtdHo0

[solomonish]

Solomon Headcanons

I didn’t like my old headcanons for him and I think I have a slightly better feel for him so I’m posting these bad boys. Maybe at this rate I’ll just post Solomon HCs every month 

Also this turned into more of a “I’m going to talk about Solomon in depth and maybe throw in one headcanon about kissing him” and is no longer “lol what kind of dates do you go on? <3″ so uh. do with that what you will. It’s also SUPER LONG (or feels that way) so make sure you have a hot second to read them

you can find my for real headcanons for him here but I don’t necessarily stand by them anymore? They’re just there for fun now lol

Solomon’s Relationship With Relationships

Solomon has been alive for...a long time, and with that naturally comes a lot of experiences, negative and positive. It’s also natural that it would also have him break out of traditional structures regarding...everything, but especially things regarding relationships and specific other people.

(Not to get sociological or philosophical about society or whatever, but the way we view everything is accented heavily by the end. With exceptions, and this certainly varies from culture to culture, but as a general idea, we view things expecting them to take place over the span of 70-100 years. Certain positions in politics or business or something try to look at things generationally, but how capable of that are we and how far ahead can we truly see?)

(What I mean to say is that immortality naturally shifts the entire context in which you would view things that were expected to be “lifelong.” What once existed to enrich a life is now a tether to a system that doesn’t necessarily suit his existence.)

Psychologically, however.....I don’t think Solomon has tried to (or even can) rewire himself entirely to the point where he doesn’t feel love. He’s already got a fondness for Simeon and Luke (always crying about him calling them “dear friends” in the circus event i don’t know if he says anything in the lessons because i’m only on like 21 LOL) so he’s clearly capable of fondness and affection.

Not that those should equate exactly to romantic feelings (because they shouldn’t), but there’s undeniable similarities between platonic and romantic affection and, for the purposes of speculating about an immortal’s capability to still feel both, I think they can be equated in this regard.

There are a lot of assumptions I’m making about him to make this post, namely the following: that there is still reconciling to be done internally between his immortality and humanity, that Solomon’s composed and confident nature is a bit of a front (only a bit - I’ll explain more later), and, related to these two, that he even cares about humanity and that he still wants to preserve his humanity.

While this might be my perspective as a regular human, I really don’t believe that the desire to be human and fully encompass what that means has left. If anything, I think his intrinsic desire for knowledge and power stems from it, and he’s just suppressed the “mushier” emotional parts of that as a sort of....defense mechanism, if you will.

SO the tl;dr of this is that you know how alloromantic people just like feel in love and they get their romantic crushes and it’s natural and they can’t control it? Solomon gets that! He just isn’t the type to swoon over someone or really make it known.

He also as a person is big on being manipulative shady and in control, so if he were to just be super obvious about having a crush on someone and not being able to do anything about it, that would sort of tarnish his whole image.

So yeah, I think Solomon just has his emotions on a tight leash when they probe to be out of control. Clearly, he doesn’t have every part of him under this sort of watchful eye (whether that’s because he still wants to feel genuine happiness or he knows if he came across as emotionless and calculated people would trust him even less, I haven’t decided), but those that cause trouble stay behind locked doors.

Additionally, I don’t think Solomon is opposed to falling in love. I’d bet he’s had lots of different partners over the years and remembers them fondly (you know, assuming they ended well)

I also think his immortal status makes dating different? I feel like doesn’t really date to find a life partner because. well. (gestures).

That’s not to say that he doesn’t date casually sometimes or something. In the terms of a serious romantic partnership, though, it’s rare that it happens because he knows that it’ll die with them (and stay within him for probably forever, even if/when there comes a day he can no longer remember their name or their face).

Another assumption I’m making that I forgot to mention: I think it’s rare that Solomon’s serious, long-term partners know the true extent of the magic he dabbles in. Maybe he lets them know it’s real magic, or he pretends it’s all show magic and parlor tricks. Sometimes he pretends his pact marks are tattoos, sometimes he tells the truth. If ever these confessions are laughed off, he laughs them off too and creates a cover story.

He doesn’t intend to lie, but it’s very difficult to meet someone and explain........all of THAT. On which date to you mention that you can control 72 demons? Do you send a card explaining how you’ve been alive since Biblical times and you’re not even sure if you birthday is your real birthday anymore, let alone how old you are? And should that card be store bought or homemade?

So while it’s rare for Solomon to have a serious romantic partnership, it’s even more rare for him to be entirely understood or accepted for EVERYTHING that he is because he can’t get into it. Arguably, that hasn’t happened since his “death” in his original timeline.

A crush for Solomon isn’t a hopeless affair, either. Should you choose someone else, he’ll allow himself the disappointment and move on.

With Solomon, romantic love sparks naturally, but genuine true love isn’t some all-powerful, unstoppable force. He falls more in line with the people who believe it’s a choice and a decision, somewhere between “it’s purely a biological impulse we just gave a fancy name” and “it’s the magic that makes life more enjoyable”

With MC

In the case of MC, however, I think he might initially see it as bothersome or a hinderance to whatever his plan is with being down there for the exchange program. Maybe he convinces himself he’s just naturally attracted to you because you’re human like him. Once he comes to terms with his feelings and gets to know MC a bit more, he might even see it as a lost cause seeing as you already have several of the brothers vying for your affections.

For Solomon to act on a crush that he’s already decided is hopeless, it’ll be up to the MC to show that THEY are interested in HIM

He finds no particular pleasure in being someone who is chased after or “playing hard to get,” but he already has a complicated relationship with complicated relationships. He’s gonna need a down payment of affection a sign that there’s anything even there to pursue 

Traditional flirting, while he’ll have his fun with it (and probably enjoy it at least a little - who doesn’t like feeling desirable?), doesn’t really work for him. Lots of people and creatures have used it to try and charm him, plus he has a pact with Asmo, so at this point he really sees it as more casual fun then an indication of true interest.

Honestly, to get him to realize “oh shit I actually have a chance,” you’re going to have to do two main things: 1) make him feel chosen over the others, and 2) respond to his displays of affection

Making Him Feel Chosen

This isn’t really a competition thing, or some selfish hoarding of your time. The thing is, Solomon knows he isn’t the only one in the running and he knows that anything he has to offer, somebody else could give you a portion of it.

(You won’t get the same experience or combination of traits with somebody else obvi, but with 11 suitors and an added chihuahua, there tends to be a little bit of overlap with everyone)

A crush for Solomon is a romantic interest, but if he intends on pursuing a serious relationship (which, I feel, is what he intends to be the final goal of his crushes as opposed to more casual affairs), he needs to see SOME reciprocation

Being with him is an ordeal, maybe a lifelong one for you, so he needs that assurance that it’ll be worth it and there aren’t better avenues

Basically, this means that ✨ quality time ✨ is of the utmost importance

At first, it doesn’t have to be anything big. Sit with him at lunch when you see him in the cafeteria, meet him in the library while you wait for your demon escort to be finished with their extracurriculars, chat him up in the one class you have together (and then ask him to help you study what you missed in class by talking. it’s a required transfer class but you already know everything about it, right, Solomon? 🥺)

As your relationship progresses, that’s when things start to get harder. Invite him out to things that you think he’ll enjoy, and say yes to as many excursions with him as you can. Bonus points for making it clear that you want to go when you’re unable to attend. 

(He finds himself a little embarrassed how happy it makes him when instead of just a “no” or a “sorry, not today” he gets something like “I’m on dinner duty so I have to spend that time preparing :( but we should definitely make a date so you can tell me about it later!” It makes him feel like a priority.)

It isn’t until you find yourself comfortable enough to ask him to accompany you to something you want to do that he starts to realize you’re hanging out with him for him and not because he’s just offering up a bunch of fun new experiences for you to try.

You don’t even have to say “hey, i’m pretty sure you know all about the birds in the Devildom aviary but I haven’t had a chance to go and would really like to spend the day with you. Wanna come with?” If it’s something that he knows you know isn’t in his wheelhouse, he’ll be able to figure out that OH.....you’re inviting him for HIM.....oh

Make him feel like a priority, like he’s the one that you want, even out of all your choices. You can be as enthralled by the birds in that aviary as you want, just as long as you make it clear that your enthusiasm to be with him is on the same level and he’ll finally kick himself into gear.

Responding to His Affections

Now, you don’t have to do anything you don’t like. I hear in his dame card devilgram he’s a consent king, and he stands by that every day of the week

He also isn’t the type to need an exact equal to everything he does. Yes a relationship is a two way street, but this isn’t saying that if he gets you a gift you need to present him something with equal or greater value within the next 24 hours. he’s not mammon haha i’m so FUNNY

Just...let him know that he’s doing things right. His serious relationships are few and far between and people change as often as the times do, so make sure that he knows what he’s doing is landing. He’s not insecure per se, but he would like to know that he isn’t making a fool of himself entirely, you know?

Don’t brush him off in front of the brothers or he’ll think he’s read the situation all wrong and you’re back to square one. If you do it because you don’t like touching and he put an arm around your shoulder or something, that’s fine, but if he thinks you’re uncomfortable being with him in front of the brothers he’ll wonder if you even liked him at all.

To him, a secret relationship isn’t really feasible. First of all, those brothers are ALWAYS in your business so bold of you to think you’ll have ANY secrets by the time the exchange program is done, and secondly, don’t you both have enough on your plate that you shouldn’t make something that makes you happy needlessly complicated?

He is an odd case and knows there’s a lot that comes with him, so if you’re uncomfortable simply showing that you’re in a relationship and reciprocating, he’ll think you aren’t equipped to handle.....All That.

In case you haven’t noticed, he’s weird. He’s a weirdo. He doesn’t fit in. And he doesn’t want to fit in. Have you ever seen him without that stupid cape on? That's weird.

If you respond to his affections in a similar way, such as putting you arm around his waist or a hand on his back when he puts an arm around your shoulder or reaching up to fix his hair when he reaches to mess with yours, it’ll make him happy for sure. He doesn’t have any specific expectations for you but he’ll like to feel like you’re on the same wavelength.

A lot of his affections are morphed into specific and targeted teasing (but not like *gently bullies u* teasing). It’s a lot of inside jokes at your expense (and the more inside jokes he has, the more he probably likes you)

It’s also a lot of messing up your hair, sharp pokes and frustrating games like “guess what?” “i don’t know, what?” “i told you to guess, MC.” “ugh...you won the lottery” “guess better” “please don’t do this to me Solomon”

He probably responds best to Acts of Service and Quality Time (though at any stage in the relationship he’s a flexible man). While he’s trying to woo you to solidify his spot in first place against everyone else, if you continue to make the effort to be around him or like. recognize he’s taking time out of his day to romance you and do something for him in return he’ll cement the fact that oh yeah, this is happening between the two of you

(not to say that romancing you is a chore, because it’s not, but man if it doesn’t make him happy that you’re wanting to make his life easier on him so he can pursue the other things he enjoys, too.)

What a Relationship with Solomon is Like

He isn’t the biggest person on PDA, or at least not on purpose. He won’t see you and immediately be like ‘oh there they are i need to kiss them kiss kiss kiss’ or whatever, but he’s not averse to it?

He doesn’t want physical affection to be a big deal, or at least not in public. unless that’s what you’re into ;) If the two of you are out and about and you kiss his hand, or you’re a generally physically affectionate person he’ll smile and respond and be generally unbothered by it, but don’t expect him to ever really have the desire to like make out in public or something. Really, you probably won’t get much more than a quick kiss because he DOES always have other things on his mind.

You will NOT be able to get out of him messing with you. If you need him to tone it down that’s fine, but the more you let him get away with, the less energy he’ll have to redirect into other troublemaking activities

Has a weird thing with licking too probably? like he’s not gross about it and it’s not like a NSFW fixation but he’ll do that mom thing where he licks his thumb because “you’ve got something on your cheek” and then reveal that he’s a LIAR

or he’ll put his face really close to yours and stick his tongue out when you turn your head so it hits your cheek

it just gets such a DRAMATIC reaction out of you so that’s why he does it? if you ask him genuinely to stop he will but if you comment on it he’ll just give you a small smile and not say anything then continue to do it

when he messes with you, it’s ok if you say he’s doing something weird but don’t make him feel childish. setting boundaries (and making regular observations - he is kinda weird) is more than alright but admonishing him just feels......off and will turn him sour for a bit

VERY appreciative of someone who supports his adventurous side. Also fond of someone who’s happy to tag along but knows that some things he has to do on his own.

Even if you don’t want to go, he’ll appreciate the support or the interest you show in what he does. Ask him where he’s going and what he’s doing there, but ask him because you’re interested and not because you’re overly worried.

Please be there for him when he gets back to talk about it. He really likes feeling important or cool when he tells his tales, even if all he did was go and catch a few magic salamanders or something.

PLEASE be a soundboard for all of his ideas. He knows that sometimes he’ll talk about things that are way over your head that he hasn’t learned yet, but he really does want your undivided attention. It doesn’t matter if you’re encouraging him, debating with him, telling him the idea is stupid (though don’t pull this one too often unless you intend to ask to be let in to the fun) or just watching in confusion. It’s important to him that you value what he has to say, and he hopes one day that he’ll be able to tell you anything and you’ll have a response to it all. (Even if you don’t learn magic to the degree he knows it, he hopes you’ll get to a point where you understand what he wants, even if you don’t know what magical elements he’s talking about or something.)

A relationship with Solomon is one where you’re both independent, but also can’t imagine not going to the other at the end of the day. It’s startling how quickly you become constant in the other’s life despite being in COMPLETELY different stages of magical development and learning about the demon world.

The relationship will be lots of fun, but there will be many serious moments, too. 

They’ll happen randomly. Maybe something from a class or a spell reminds him of something from his past, or maybe he’s reminded that he can’t remember so many things that he knows were important to him.

Sometimes, his Tuesday night blues will feel like a life-changing existential crises for you, but please, do what you can to be there for him in these moments. It worries him how much love and happiness he’s lost, especially when he knows he promised to remember it.

Once you get him to think aloud, he’ll say super heavy stuff life “What if I’ve forgotten who I really am and now I’m just something other people and magic have morphed me into?” or “When will the human race evolve or go extinct and leave me behind?” and it fucks you up, really. It fucks him up too

But please be patient with him, because there’s something important he has to get off his chest eventually. He’s worried already that he’ll forget you the way he’s probably forgotten so many others, but he doesn’t want to offend you and know that saying it would come off as uncaring.

You won’t have an answer for these moments, and he knows it. It’ll be best if you just hold him tight, stroke his hair if you’re laying down, and reassure him that you don’t care.

With how long he’s been alive, you’ll have to get past caring if you’re his “one true love” because he doesn’t have that. He gave up the right to having a one true love in exchange for never-ending life. But he still loves and he does love deeply, it just has a lot to cut through to properly be articulated.

So tell him. Tell him you know he’s had other loves, that you know you might not even be the best partner suited to him that he’s had. Tell him that you know when your time has come, he’ll find someone else eventually.

Tell him that what matters to you is that he loves you now, that he’s making things work with you now, and that he isn’t secretly yearning for some lover that’s come to pass or yet to come when he’s with you.

You can’t control what happened in the past or what happens in the future, but right now he’s yours and you’re his and he needs to learn to take things one lifetime at a time. Right now is YOUR Solomon time, and what happens after is just a consequence of time and you’ve already forgiven him for it.

instead of “mom says it’s my turn on the xbox” it’s “god says it’s MY turn on the Solomon”

send that to him for real and he’ll probably never forget you lol

How to Make a Relationship with Solomon Work

With all this in mind, the key to a good relationship with Solomon is keeping his head on his shoulders.

He’s ambitious, powerful, scary smart, and capable of so much more than you can even guess and he knows it. It’ll be good for him to have somebody to keep him on the ground.

Now, don’t be overbearing. If you try to stop him from going places or try to hinder his pursuit of knowledge out of fear for his safety, that’ll cause unbelievable strain on him. You will have to learn to let him work his things out the way he wants to, and it won’t always be the safest or most responsible way either.

He doesn’t mind a gentle scolding if he gets hurt. He won’t say it, but he kinda likes to be reminded how important he is to you.

Also be down to have fun and be a little reckless. Your safety will always be a priority to him, but nobody ever got anywhere without a little struggle, right? Sometimes adventuring with him and following him into the darkest magical corners of the world will require multiple (sometime literal) leaps of faith, but he’ll always be there to catch you.

Let Solomon work for you and the relationship, and you work to keep him sane and remind him that he can belong somewhere, even when he’s been himself for who knows how long and nowhere ever really stays the same.

You’ll always have to remind Solomon that not everything revolves around magic and power. He’s not been mortal for some time, so he gets caught up in the heady and lofty topics and ideas. 

Remind him about the simple joys of just having fun and goofing off, that not every moment not spent on homework has to be spent on potions. Remind him (in the human world) how cool a sunset is, or convince him to go through a museum and pretend he’s seeing everything for the first time. 

As much as he lives for understanding the grand topics most people can only dream of beginning to grasp, remind him of the little things. Remind him of human indulgences that he’s abandoned. Get him back in touch with that part of himself.

Solomon as a character feels like he’d be really aloof, but he’s honestly extremely devoted to what he invests his time in. He shows this devotion in small ways that feel more like riddles sometimes, in the way he always comes back after a rather dangerous magical excursion, in the way he shortens his time away so he can get back to you, in the way he learns to quiet his mind so he can properly take care of you and what you need and strengthen your relationship.

One thing that I think is a hallmark of a relationship with him is that Solomon loves things that can teach him more about what he doesn’t know. You don’t need to be the smartest person on the planet, or have a specialized and thorough education in some bizarre topic, or come from somewhere entirely different than what he knows to keep his interest.

You are uniquely human, and you help teach him about himself, the one thing that he can never seem to properly grasp and understand the way he wants to.

More importantly, you are you, the one who made pacts with all seven demon lords, the one captured his heart and promised to take care of it when you could throw it away for anybody else.

And you are the only one who could say those words that he believes. Hopefully, you’ll believe him when he says them, too.

[mizuuziz]

Dream of Me Pt 1. - San

Ft: Ex Hongjoong

Tags: Angst, Mentions of Dream Sequences, Mentions of Future, Mentions of Cheating, Mentions of killing, Mentions of Marriage, Strong Language, San x Reader (Gender Neutral)

Time Traveler San Au

2.4k

Smut in the next part

©Sleepyxhan All Rights Reserved

Do not repost on other sites that are not tumblr. Only use the repost button. No translations without permission.

Part 2 - Final

You were walking around the park when a man approached you, he told you his name. San explained your life story. No one else knew what you went through, someone who you barely knew told you all this. He was a stranger who you met mere minutes ago. He even spoke of your plans for a secret marriage to your boyfriend Hongjoong. No one knew, not even Hongjoong's friends. He even spoke of how you met Hongjoong as a kid. You both were in kindergarten, he even spoke of how you and Hongjoong got engaged. You were frightened, yet you felt like you knew San.

"I'll prove that I'm right, I'll show you your future." San looked at you dead in the eye, as he spoke to you.

"I believe you." The words came out of your mouth without hesitation.

"Do you want to know more? I'm warning you, it's all very hard to deal with. Are you sure you would want to know more?" San asked you, as he was sure to speak to you in a secluded area.

"I should, there's a reason as to why I met you. I should have listened to you if by chance I met you in the future." You nodded, as you only spoke the confirmation that San needed.

"If I stand corrected, your parents are opposed to this marriage, they don't believe that Hongjoong should be the one you marry. Well, you marry him, but you're only miserable. You believe that you know all of him, you even trusted him. For proof, I'll leave a detail out of how we met and something else, if you see it then you'll know that you were meant to know. As a result of your marriage, you were condemned." San waited for your response to what he saw you go through.

"What if I make a different choice? Can you see that other path I would choose?" You waited for San to respond to your visibly shaking hands. You started questioning your love really meaning something to Hongjoong.

"I cannot see any other alternatives, I'm a time traveler, I can only see what you went through when I met you. I loved you then, even when you dismissed my opinions on Hongjoong. You said that I was only jealous of him. I never wanted to see you suffer. You never even invited your parents because they opposed it, it was wrong. I am only given a chance to time travel in this time for now to stop you." San sadly glanced at you. You didn't know why your heart was aching for San.

"I'm sorry." You got up to hug San even if it's for a mere moment. You forgot about Hongjoong at the moment.

"I created a time machine, so I'm here. You both married in my presence, we had already met at the time. You also won't be able to wake up until you see your future, it's an effect to seeing your future. Y/n, he even cheated on you before the wedding. That sick in the head dared to." San looked at you in the eye with tears threatening to fall out.

Hongjoong cheated on you, yet San was the most affected. He saw you go through that. You approached San and wiped his eyes.

"Don't, I'm still not over you." San sadly backed away from you. You didn't know how to respond. You couldn't find another way to break the silence.

"San, tell me more." You worried more and more about what situation you got yourself into.

"Y/n, he had a baby. You married him without knowing that he had a son with a woman. You found out and wanted to get divorced. Hongjoong refused to let you go, even when you applied for a divorce. He was controlling. He even had the kid and the woman living with you." San looked down in sadness.

"You one day had enough and decided to kill him for taking away your youth. You told him that you both wouldn't divorce if he came to the apartment building rooftop. Everyone was living in that apartment building, you pushed Hongjoong off the rooftop. You were taken to prison for First-degree murder. Even after his death, you were tormented. My advice for you now, follow him today at night to prove my point." He finally spoke about what he could tell you.

"Thank you, I wish I would've listened to you before. I also hope that I could meet you at this point of my life." You started crying because there was someone who truly cared. You were determined to take the bind off your eyes.

"In two days, at 9 am was the moment we met. I have to go now." San hugged you until he disappeared.

You finally took off to your place while taking a fresh breath of air. The day became sad after San left. You didn't want to believe what you were told, but you shouldn't be fooled any longer. You would finally know who was lying. Hours passed and you finally got in touch with your fiancee. He called you to make sure you were okay.

"By the way babe, my friends are coming over tonight, I can't go see you. I'm sorry, I'll make it up to you." Hongjoong apologized over the phone. He seemed nervous, and you were apprehensive.

"It's fine babe, see you tomorrow." You responded in the usual manner.

You decided to use an excuse to go to his place. There was still light in the sky for you to go observe him. You took your car and waited at a stop that was out of sight to watch Hongjoong. You grew bored, but you needed to know. Good thing you didn't confront Hongjoong without proof when he called you. You waited until it was nighttime. The night stars beamed, you wanted to shine bright like those stars. You hoped to meet San again, you didn't want him to dissipate from your life. Then all of a sudden, you found your answer. Hongjoong ran out of his place to come to get a woman who was as young as you both. You never even met her before. To take away any doubts, Hongjoong even ran to her arms and kissed her on the lips. He was holding hands with her. That was your cue, you got out of your car. You approached both of them from behind and tapped on Hongjoong's shoulder.

"What the fuck, are you doing Hongjoong?" You were now mad that you were betrayed.

"Were you stalking me? Y/n, you're a psycho!!!" Hongjoong screamed even in front of that woman.

"You're a psycho for wanting to marry me even while having an affair, I don't deserve this. Now here's your stupid ring!!!" You finally threw your engagement ring on the street.

"No, you're not doing this to me!!!" Hongjoong gripped onto your wrist so tight.

"I called the police, now let her go!!!" A man came to your rescue and led you out of the situation. You recognized him immediately, it was San. Times changed, you were supposed to meet him in two days. You guessed that events changed since you caught Hongjoong cheating.

"Are you okay? Did he hurt you?" This present time San was just as kind as future time San. You stared at San in awe, he was right.

"I'm okay, thank you." You thanked San and asked for his number just in case Hongjoong came by again.

You drove home and called your parents to apologize. If San was right about this, then it's only right to reconcile with your parents. Now all you needed to do was go to sleep. You snuggled on your bed and slept.

You had dreamt about that future life. You met San at the grocery store when you went to go buy cereal and he was in that same aisle. He helped you reach the cereal you wanted. You both started meeting more and more until he found out you were getting married. He even told you that was walking to his house at night and saw Hongjoong with another woman kissing. Just as you saw them when you confronted them in this time because you changed time, but you dismissed San even when he told you what he saw. You even said that he was jealous and never wanted you to be happy. That same moment, he confessed his love for you, and you told him that you didn't want his worthless love because you loved Hongjoong. You couldn't recognize yourself, you became a monster. You didn't believe San and that led you to your doom at that time. You also saw how San created the time machine and wanted to use it the day of your wedding, but it failed. You committed a crime and were thrown in prison, you would refuse to see San. You also saw every single detail that future time San told you. That was all you could see.

You finally woke up, two days later. It was 6 am when you realized that there would be another encounter. You got ready even if there was still time. You realized the true meaning of love, Hongjoong only made you suffer in the long run. You tried to make things the same to not alter too much. You still dressed in the time you did before when you had to go for groceries. You finally drove to the groceries and went inside and went in just a bit before 9 am. He only said you both saw each other at 9 am. You approached the cereal aisle at exactly 9 am and there he was. He was with another woman, you thought that you should just leave. Then all of a sudden, he called out to you.

"Excuse me, I saw you yesterday. Don't go." San called out to you. You stopped for a moment before turning around.

"Oh hi, thank you for yesterday." You nervously replied as you approached him.

"No worries, but meet my sister Ha Neul." He grinned ear to ear as he introduced his sister and looked at you. You forgot that he didn't tell you his name even when he gave you his number. He only said his name in the future time, but at present time San didn't even have your name.

"I'm Y/n, what's your name?" You grinned as well as you asked San. You forgot that he never told you his name at present time.

"Omg, I'm sorry I didn't tell you my name. My name is San." He was soon told by his sister that he should've introduced himself before. She is pretty just like him.

"I didn't call you because I lost your number. You didn't put a contact name and I accidentally saved it without having your name." You replied. It was indeed true, but you also had been asleep for 2 days. It was all a supernatural experience that you wouldn't forget.

"Y/n, do you have a boyfriend?" Ha Neul asked you and San whispered to his sister to not ask such things.

"No, I got out of a relationship with someone who I realized that I no longer loved because they were bad to me." Both San and Ha Neul apologized.

"I'm over it, San actually saved me. And I took pictures of my arms." You told both of them. You also explained to Ha Neul what happened yesterday.

"Well I have to go now, thank you both." You smiled and said your farewells to the siblings. They both waved and you noticed that San was blushing. It seems like his sister was teasing him about you from the way his sister was looking in your direction.

You decided that you weren't going to break San's heart. As soon as you walked out of the grocery store, you felt like a weight was taken off your shoulders. The sun was shining bright today and you had no regrets. You walked out and embraced the sun rays that blinded your sight at the moment. The fact that San loved you all throughout the future time was comforting, you only wished that you chose him instead of Hongjoong. He loved you enough to save you from your doom, he never intended to make you fall for him. He even respected your decision to not accept his feelings in the alternate future. You planned to change your future.

Everything you saw in the alternate future took place in a span of years, but you fell for San in a span of days. All you needed to do was make him fall for you, he must not love you at the moment. If nothing happens, then it's not meant to happen. You will always be grateful for San since he saved you in both worlds. You refused to go down without trying even once. San said that you hurt him, your heart must have ached for a reason. You must have realized your faults too late and only pushed San away. You refused to make the same mistakes, you were almost involved in a poisonous marriage. There were small details that changed like the first time you both met and you even met his sister when you didn't do so in your alternate future.

You walked to your car as you felt the trees rustle on the shade your car was parked on. You were afraid that San wouldn't love you in this life. If he has no meaning for a time machine, there probably won't be one in the life you changed. All throughout the drive home, you worried that the changes could make it impossible to be with San. It may seem ridiculous, but you were going to go to the end of your newfound love for San. After all, he made so many sacrifices for you and you only hurt him in your alternate future. You finally rolled down your car windows because you felt overwhelmed already. The drive home felt like an eternity, then you noticed that it seemed like you would be getting new neighbors. The moving trucks were parked in the next-door neighbor's driveway.

You felt quite sad these days. You decided to just lounge around your house, you had nothing to do. You were laying down on your couch and were watching a series. Your doorbell rung, you don't have anyone to visit you which only makes you nervous. You look through the peephole and notice Ha Neul and San. Why are they here, could they be the new neighbors? You wondered if what you changed, had an effect on San's life.

[idratherdreamofjune]

@sunheart wrote in her tags on another post:

Genuinely hate being alive ... I completely understand on so many levels why you would hate being a woman. Its horrible. And then as a Christian there's this whole really ugly dynamic- that i know is probably a lie i just haven't worked out how yet- that we're the 2nd best. The afterthought. The mediocre option. Almost everything in life men are better at and it's hard to believe it's just cultural-  math logic leadership writing cooking writing physical activities on and on, and women are good at being Nice :)   Which ok i like being nice   but it's like that's my only option   I feel like any other impact i might wish to have upon the world   will be paltry in comparison to what i could do   if only i was a man.   I feel incompetent. Irrational. Emotional. Obnoxious.   I feel like I'm supposed to be a plaything for the beings that were *actually* created to be in harmony with God   like I'm not supposed to have a connection with God-  only through my husband   which what does that make me as a single childless bitch?   I can't even fulfill the main point of my existence. Jesus interacted with women but did he care about them like he did the men? David and John were named his favorites not Deborah or Hannah. And like i said i'm sure none of that's true but i don't know how and it feels awful. hate it.

   Hopefully others have shared encouragement on this already, but just in case I wanted to give some thoughts. Please know that if I sound riled at all (and I’m going to try to avoid that) I’m not upset at anyone who feels this way but am deeply upset by the enemy’s lies that so many are hurt by. As a younger believer I did struggle with some of these questions myself, and for a long time it was difficult to reconcile these concerns with the promises that God loves me.

   Your instincts are right - it is a lie that women are second best. And before I go any further let me also agree that yes, we are physically weaker than men and have other weaknesses too. But since when has weakness meant that someone is any way “less than” others? Men have weaknesses too, just different ones. That’s the nature of humanity: every person is a mixed bag of strengths and weaknesses. I’ve never heard before that men are better at cooking?? My dad literally struggles to cook a hotdog in the microwave and has never touched a grill in his life. And okay men may (possibly, not sure on this one either) be inherently better at math, but which gender is drastically underrepresented in the nursing field? I suspect there are fewer male teachers, too, though not as huge a disparity. Men are more prone to recklessness and violence - part of the reason married men live longer (gotta get that stable influence). Again yes men are physically stronger but have you watched ballet dancers (oooh i mean ballerinas, sorry there’re so few ballerinos that I forgot to differentiate) or female gymnasts? Nothing “less than” there! The famous Proverbs 31 woman is a good insight into Biblical support of female abilities and value: “strength and dignity are her clothing”, “she opens her mouth with wisdom, and the teaching of kindness is on her tongue.” “Let her works praise her in the gates.” (The gates were essentially the city hall or forum of ancient Israel.)

   Going back to the beginning - women were created second, true. But did God not know His own plan? He was always going to create women. And the really amazing thing that I learned in the last couple of years is that, when God says He’s going to make Adam “a helper” (Hebrew ”ezer”), that’s the same word that is used to describe God’s actions for His people throughout the Old Testament: - Exodus 18:4 “The God of my father was my help.” - 1 Samuel 7:12 “Ebenezer” means “rock of help” and is a memorial of Yaweh’s help. - Psalm 30:10 “Hear, O Lord, and be merciful to me! O Lord, be my helper!” - Psalm 115:11 “You who fear the Lord, trust in the Lord, He is their help and their shield” - Psalm 121:2 “My help comes from the Lord” - Hosea 13:9 “‘You are against Me, against your helper.’“

It is a common word for “help” used in other settings, yes, but the fact that it’s used of God illustrates that this is no poor or second-rate role. Helping - aiding - supporting - incredibly important! In fact this article I just found puts it this way:

In two cases it refers to the first woman, Eve, in Genesis 2. Three times it refers to powerful nations Israel called on for help when besieged. In the sixteen remaining cases the word refers to God as our help. He is the one who comes alongside us in our helplessness. That's the meaning of ezer. Because God is not subordinate to his creatures, any idea that an ezer-helper is inferior is untenable. In his book Man and Woman: One in Christ, Philip Payne puts it this way: "The noun used here [ezer] throughout the Old Testament does not suggest 'helper' as in 'servant,' but help, savior, rescuer, protector.'

   Moving on to the New Testament, and the topic of John, who is known as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”. John is the one who wrote the book which tells us that (under the direction of the Holy Spirit, yes) and he only uses that wording as a title, in place of his name. Nowhere does it say he was the favorite disciple, or even most loved, just that he was loved. To me it seems more as if John is saying “Jesus loved me! Can you believe it?!” It has a feeling of awe and thankfulness as opposed to superiority.

  Getting into marriage specifically, I do believe that a wife should be under the headship of her husband ...mainly in the sense of letting him have the last word on decisions and plans. This is in part due to differing areas of strength, and in part because in some situations it’s better to have a family leader - most groups of humans need a leader, and following an assigned (or picked) leader does not make one inferior. All that being said, a wife should be able to provide input, advice, and feedback to her husband, who should take into strong consideration his wife’s needs, insights, and concerns (Ephesians 5:25-29).

   The lie that women cannot be connected to God outside of their husband is refuted not only by all the vibrantly faithful single or windowed Christian ladies of history (Amy Carmichael, Gladys Aylward, Mary Slessor, and Elisabeth Elliot are some of my favorites) but also Scripture itself. When Christ spoke with the divorced Samaritan woman the disciples were shocked not because she was a Samaritan but because she was a woman (John 4:27; she was shocked on both counts - John 4:9) - I hope they got used to it because Jesus spoke with women a lot. Despite the culture of the time, Jesus clearly had very warm and caring direct relationships with Martha and Mary, Mary Magdalene, and other women. Anna the Prophetess in the temple had been widowed for decades and was serving God alone “night and day” (Luke 2:37). Incredibly, in a culture where women were looked down upon, the Lord chose women to be the first to discover the empty tomb, and Mary Magdalene to be the first to see the risen Christ! I love that passage so much (John 20:11-18).

   Another example is when Jesus stopped on His way to heal Jairus’ daughter (i.e. He put aside a powerful man’s urgent request) to lovingly interact with the woman who’d suffered bleeding for years - a terribly personal and female problem (Mark 5:21-35).

   To try to wrap up, I’ll return to David in the OT, who was a “man after God’s own heart”. But again, it doesn’t say that he was actually a favorite - it does say David was chosen by God though, to lead Israel and establish the family from which Jesus would ultimately come. You know who else was chosen? Esther - “for such a time as this”. Once she realizes the task she must complete, she tells Mordecai how it’s going to go, and “Mordecai then went away and did everything Esther had ordered him.” Esther gets a book named after her and is remembered in the holiday of Purim to this day. Also note that Esther was married to an unbeliever. Likewise Ruth was chosen, as a young foreign widow, to be part of the Messiah’s kingly line. As an aside, my favorite thing about Ruth’s story (besides all the faith and beauty of it) is the simultaneous deep respect and protectiveness Boaz shows towards her (okay enough mush). Anyhow what it comes down to is that God chooses and loves both men and women, and both have a place (singly and married) in His plans and kingdom. See also Galatians 3:28 “ There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

   This post has all over the place, and I probably forgot a bunch of things I wanted to add (if anything else comes to mind I’ll add it later), but I hope it’s been encouraging. Yes I’ve struggled with some aspects of how women are portrayed in the Bible, but what I shared above, plus the love and blessings I’ve known as a single woman are more than enough evidence that we are known and loved. If anything is unclear or anyone has any questions please speak out/send an ask! Anon asks are on too. Also if anyone wants to add or amend anything do so without hesitation!!

[jae-writes-fanfiction]

pwease Mx I need headcannons for your horror ladies with a final girl s/o!!

Tainted Love

Notes: I added a bonus ‘gal for you, to see if I liked writing for her so lmk about that. I wrote these with the intention of queer/wlw (women who love women) relationships, but as per usual kept it pretty GN.

Warnings: Mentions of horror themes and situations- murder, death, and similar things. References to gore/bodies but no descriptions. Enjoy Responisbly ❤️

- - -

Jennifer Check

After tearing through the cheer squad and then prom night you were the last one standing. She never wanted to be a flesh eating vampire, her assault and sacrifice were done to her. You were that last shred of her former self and no matter how angry she was with Needy or that stupid band, she couldn’t kill you.

Of course, she’s isn’t the same Jennifer you knew and fell in love with. As a succubus it’s often hard for her to break out of a merderous rage, especially when she’s hungry. You’ve had a few close calls where she’d come home and backed you against a wall, a hand resting around your throat and fire behind her eyes. You might walk away with a few bruises, that you always walked away.

Her change would complicate your relationship’s dynamic. If you knew the context behind the transformation it would be hard to leave her. But surrounded by the entrails and partially consumed remains of your classmates you’re forced to reconcile that the girl you love has been taken over by something monsterous.

In the end, I can see there being a breaking point. After a slaughter you can’t explain away or rationalize, I think part of you would understand that the Jennifer you love isn’t really coming back. I think there would come a point where you’d put her out of her misery, you’d be one of the final girls who not only walk away but defeat the monster.

- - -

Carrie White

Your survival was an accident. In her blind rage and overwhelming betrayal she didn’t care who was in that room. All that mastered was how she heard their voices mocking her the same way her mother did. Calling her names and slurs, ones she didn’t know before she started dating you.

Of course you hadn’t been able to go as her date, her mother would’ve locked her away forever if she knew. You’d left the room once she was announced Queen, filled with jealously and hurt of your own. The hallway you were in collapsed, but didn’t kill you. A freak accident on Carrie’s part. Her goal had been no survivors in any part of the building.

You could only worry endlessly that the girl you loved so dearly was now facing all of this alone. But you also struggled with the idea that she wanted to kill you. It was no secret her mother was a religious fanatic. Maybe the teasing had been too much, maybe loving you was too much and you were just one more thing in her way.

By the time you were pulled from the rubble, Carrie was gone. Even if you had wanted to save her from herself, or help her- she was too far away. There was nothing you could do.

- - -

Tiffany Valentine (Jennifer Tilly)

You look like a lot of fun, she likes having fun. But in reality unless you serve a purpose on her path to reconnect with Chucky, or you are now the object of all her desires- fun isn’t gonna cut it. Your survival as a final girl hinges entirely on those two things.

She might’ve let you live but that doesn’t mean she hadn’t tried to knock you off before. Twice actually, before she realized your importance. The first time was shortly after you moved into the apartment across from hers. She tried sneaking into your apartment while you were asleep worried you saw something you shouldn’t have. But you just looked too peaceful. The second time was after your first accidental date. And once you kissed and she held your familiar form in her arms it became impossible. For the moment.

You never find out her previous plans to kill you, you never know you’re her final girl- and that’s just the way she likes it. She artfully conceals her darker dealings and if anything ever happens she’ll just have to convince you it was to keep you safe. And she can be very convincing.

You would be under her spell and the thought of escaping/taking her down would never occur to you. You’d never know if she was using you or still planned on hurting you. In your mind she was your love.

- - -

Bonus:

Susie Bannion (2018)

Your undying loyalty to her once she reveals her true form as Mother Suspiriorum, marks you safe. The terror in your heart was outweighed by ambition and desire, she felt that the moment she saw you after the final confrontation with the other dancers. You didn’t beg for your death. You didn’t beg for you life. You begged for her, and that made the difference.

Initially upon her arrival to the school she set about to test the other students including yourself. Your meek demeanor signaled you could be swayed if you were against her and she couldn’t have that. You were sick for days, but that ended once you returned to lessons and refused to join the other girls who were growing jealous. Your meekness had not been a sign of weak will, but rather one of infatuation. She tested you again by choosing you as her partner for parts of the performance. Together felt powerful, she wouldn’t try to harm you ever again.

She is Mother Suspiriorum and you are so into that power play you just want to stay by her side and in her favor. It makes you a chosen one, it makes you something when Madam Blanc/Mother Markos would’ve made you nothing. The only effect the truth has on your relationship is strength it.

The tests she presented to you, the merciful deaths of those mutilated and abused by her predecessor, the slaughter of those who opposed her? While you’re by her side and in her bed those things seem righteous. There’s nothing for you to fight against.

[hanbereviews]

Heartslaybul Main Story Review

We will be taking a short break from the otome review to tap into the joseimuke side of this blog and start by reviewing a new popular mobage named Twisted Wonderland. I shall be using looser criteria than my otome review, as this can be a bit rambly due to it being my sole opinion. Thus we will simply be reviewing each character in regards to the plot. I will also be reviewing with the idea that one has already read the story, or at least tangentially knows of the struggles presented here. 

Heartslaybul suffers from incredibly poor characterization for some, whilst reaching the narrative end of an arc for others. In particular, the big winner of this story is of course Riddle, the main antagonist. The biggest loser? Cater Diamond. 

But before we address either of those characters, let's take a look at the first years! So the twst writers made a decision to primarily include the first years Ace and Deuce as main characters not only in this story, but in each main story beyond. However with their native dorms being Heartslaybul, you are treated to respective backstories. 

Ace Trappola

Ace’s brother used to be a heartslaybul student several years ago, and Ace has a bit of an inferiority complex because of it. Naturally, the main inner conflict with him is the idea of living up to his brother whilst also still remaining himself. It is more than a bit barebones, the only other thing we learn about him being that he had a girlfriend in middle school. However throughout the story he serves as the main combatant to Riddle’s antagonism. A popular suggestion is that he takes the place of Alice’s role when she disputed the Queen’s ridiculous rules. Ace does the same here, being the main source of question when it comes to Riddle’s nonsensical rulebook and the abuse of power he wroughts upon Heartslaybul students. 

Deuce Spade

Deuce in contrast, does not get as much of a shining character moment as his dorm mate ace does. However he makes up for it with a rich backstory that while ultimately simple, gives a pretty fair view of his personality. Being a former delinquent, he cleaned up his act and tried hard to get into Nightraven College for his mother’s sake, and even now he attempts to be a good student. Sometimes this doesn’t end up working out, but it certainly makes for an endearing character trait. He displays that trait a lot throughout the narrative, to some’s annoyance, and other’s glee. 

He’s naturally competitive with Ace, being his rival and bickering with him constantly. However the narrative does not position them as hating each other, and instead makes their exchanges more into playful banter. Deuce and Ace are showcased in Heartslaybul and onward to have an extremely strong bond with each other. 

Now, with that out of the way let’s take a look at the third years, and the Heartslaybul dorm head. 

Riddle Rosehearts

Riddle is once again, the main antagonist of the narrative. As it progresses we learn that his abuse of power and commitment to the rules results from serious parental trauma, raised by a helicopter parent of a mother who refused to let him engage in any childish things. Riddle reacted to this by maturing at a younger age than most of his classmates, but it also severely hurt his ability to simply act like a teenager. 

You see these two opposing ideas come into play here, and I will make the bold suggestion that Ace represents the childish side of him that he so terribly fears coming into contact with once again. Ace frequently shows very little care for the rules, only attempting to follow them when he is forced to. And as the story progresses, you see Riddle go into overblot not only due to Ace turning the dorm against him, but because he resents that Ace and his friends can so brazenly defy authority while Riddle was subject to it all of his life. Even as his overblot is calmed down and the narrative ends, Riddle still shows that he is more than a little uncomfortable indulging in the normalcy of his teenage years. However, the fact that he is even able to shows major character growth and sets him up for future exploration.

Trey Clover 

Next we move to Trey Clover, vice dorm head. Trey is Riddle’s childhood friend, and as such their backstories are intimately connected. Inparticular, Trey feels partly responsible for Riddle’s state due to Riddle frequently sneaking out of his house to play with him and their friend Che’nya. Riddle’s mother caught onto these playdates, and thus Riddle was treated much more harshly as a result. Trey has “corrected” this behavior by essentially letting riddle become a tyrant to his dorm. This aspect of his is heavily criticized within the narrative by others, and presents Trey’s major character flaw. 

Trey does not care about other people. The story is bluntly phrased, Riddle is objectively the bad guy in this situation. Yet as Vice Dorm Head, Trey supposedly cannot do anything to stop his reign of terror. This is blatantly not true, considering the fact a few first years are able to help completely restructure the dorm into a much more tolerable place to be. So with this point in mind, the only way to reconcile Trey’s behavior with what happens in the narrative is that he prioritizes Riddle’s feelings over everyone else’s. 

Trey positions himself as “helping” when Ace’s magic is sealed by Riddle’s unique magic by making more tarts. However this is all he really does, when Riddle expresses annoyance at bringing the “wrong” tarts to the party, Trey throws up his hands and says there’s nothing else he can do. This is due to the fact that to get out of the situation, Trey must challenge Riddle and go against his ideals. This is something he just blatantly does not want to do, Trey has evidently had an easier time adjusting to Riddle’s ideas more than others and thus these issues do not get in the way of his guilt in regards to Riddle’s trauma. Even as the narrative ends, Trey doesn’t exactly learn anything from this whole fiasco. Why is that? Because it worked out without him having to be the one to lead the charge in opposing Riddle!

Cater Diamond

For our last character and one of my personal favorites we take a look at Cater Diamond. Cater actually seems to be a victim of the fact that Heartslaybul is the first dorm to be introduced in the narrative. One can’t help but feel like one character had to be picked to be shafted and he was the natural choice. We learn little about Cater besides small hints here and there. Uniquely despite being a third year, he doesn’t seem to have a particularly strong connection to Riddle. In contrast to Trey’s fake powerlessness, Cater is actually powerless to do anything about Heartslaybul’s situation. Whilst he tries to help as much as he can, the situation quickly slips out of his hands. Cater is thus forced to rely on other people to truly fix the deplorable state Heartslaybul is in. 

Though beyond that, we actually don’t know much about him. We know that he loves social media, that you could perhaps characterize him as a gyaruo type or something similar. But his relationship to his dorm mates and even other characters isn’t exactly anywhere in the vein of complex. And that is not necessarily his fault, because it isn’t like Cater can’t be an interesting character. But once again, with Heartslaybul being the first dorm introduced it’s not like he can interact with others outside of it. And Trey is so wrapped up in Riddle that Cater can’t exactly worm his way into that dynamic until the end of the story. 

Final Thoughts

Overall while being very strong plotwise, Heartslaybul needs to be backed up by character events to really solidify their characters and give themselves a place in the world of Twisted Wonderland outside of the dorm. This makes it a bit of a weak story in terms of characterization, but due to the wonderful nature of mobile games that characterization has tons of potential to be fleshed out in other avenues besides the main story itself!

[fyrapartnersearch]

historical dramas, alternate universes, video game fandoms, nhl & the crown

hello!

I’m going to make this fairly short (or at least try to haaA). I am looking for 1-2 new rp partners! I work two jobs and have a pretty active lifestyle so please understand this is a hobby for me. My posting speed ranges from once every couple of days to once every week or so, but I'll always let you know when I'm busy or hitting roadblocks. Some of my stories have really slowed down so I'm looking to have a rp going that is at a pace of at least 1-2 replies every couple of weeks.

I love detailed plots and stories; crafting good posts is a huge part of why I love rping. I match/mirror my partner’s length and put a high amount of importance on compatibility as writers. Good grammar, punctuation, spelling is A Thing for me. I put 110% in. I write fully lit to novella style rps with my posts ranging from 900-1800 words average. If you want a partner that’s invested in writing together and all the joy that brings, I’m your person!

I am looking for original period piece/historical drama roleplays full of drama and angst, fallout related roleplays, roleplays centered on fictional NHL players, slice-of-life or modern romances, and a few more.

what do I write?

I can write f/m, m/m, and m/f pairings- doesn't really matter to me so long as the plot and characters are compelling. I love smut just as much as anyone but I need a good story and solid character development to go back on. I want to feel something when we write and I hope you do too! I don't have a ton of limits when it comes to kink etc aside from the basic ones, but generally each of the characters I write have varied and different interests and preferences. I'm interested in writing the following fandoms right now:

Transformers personified: Essentially, utilizing characters from the Transformers universe to make characters and stories based off of them/using them in a personified manner. We could depict the war as a political one, or with warring armies, or anything we wanted to do. I'm most familiar with Transformers Prime, and I would be really excited to talk this one over with you!

Disney personified: Similar to the idea above, we take stories/characters and springboard them into our own content and plots. Let's talk it out!

The Outer Worlds: Admittedly I haven't finished the game yet, but I would love to do some character and world building here. Canon characters could be brought in if needed.

Fallout: New Vegas: I can do OCs for this, or I can play several canon characters such as Arcade Gannon, The King, and Cass. Either way, I'd be more than happy to plot with you in this world. I'm also interested in playing out a story related to Fallout 4, where I can play Elder Maxson or Paladin Danse, or we can write OCs.

X-Men: Give me all the plots utilizing Jean Grey or Wolverine, those are my favorite canon characters to write. I can also write OCs. I would also love to play Wolverine against a Jean Grey. All in all, I am a happy camper with this one.

The Crown/British Monarchy: I have a niche interest in the British monarchy and figures related to it, specifically George VI, Elizabeth II. I'd love to take the concepts and maybe the figures and write out some stories, historically-based or not, that involve some of the character types, situations and challenges faced. This idea is really flexible and I'd love to do some world-building here!

Mafia 2: I can write a pretty decent Vito Scaletta and I'd love to write him against your OC. We can take the premise and play with it, maybe make a spinoff or a sequel, something like that.

The Man in the High Castle: I would love, love, love to write something set in this universe. We'd definitely have to do some worldbuilding here but I would love to figure something out based around this universe and the characters in it.

Right now I also have a huge interest in doing period pieces/setting slice-of-life stories in different historical settings. I'd really love to do some plotting together and come up with an intriguing original story. I would love to do stories with the backdrop of the first or second world war, the great depression, the turn of the century, etc etc. I think so many of my plot ideas would be much more interesting placed against different historical settings. I'm most familiar with 1900-1960s backdrops but I would love to explore earlier (little women, or pride and prejudice-esque) eras as well! Pleeease get @ me if you're interested in a healthy dose of history with whatever twists we can come up with :) Here are a few plots/prompts to get started:

**** (m/m) sugar daddy: My oc is a law student studying in your oc’s country in order to get their degree abroad. They’re from eastern Europe and uh. broke af. They settle into an arrangement with your oc where your oc agrees to ~pay him for his company~. We could take it anywhere- your oc could whisk mine off his feet and ‘save’ him or. Be toxic & trashy and make my oc’s life hell.

****(m/m) the guardian: Your oc is a newcomer to the NHL but is quickly making waves- think Connor McDavid style. He’s young and impressive, but mostly, impressionable. he starts to get battered around by both his teammates and opposing teams. After a few hard hits and fowl play within the game that have cost your oc bench and recovery time, the team’s coach calls in reinforcements to boost the team’s morale and serve as a protector to your oc. My oc is a player who hasn’t got the talent part but has got a huge heart. Not to mention… huge hands. Good for makin’ fists. Good for fightin’. My oc protects your oc during the games, coming to your oc’s aid, picking fights for your oc and protecting him on the ice. As such, the two players grow attached to one another.. perhaps too attached for the captain to be comfortable with. Possibilities for a love triangle and other complications, for sure

***(m/m) too good to be true: Our ocs start out in the WHL, both as promising wingers. Their good chemistry is vital to bringing back their team’s success. However, one of our ocs starts to get too attached to the other, and when an NHL draft separates them, one of our ocs is all too eager to cut contact and try to forget. The two excel in their NHL careers without one another, and end up on NHL teams with a history of deep rivalry. Occasionally, the gloves hit the ice, fueled by the tension of unresolved feelings and the pressure of the respective teams to keep up the rivalry. The two are reunited when they are both chosen to play nationally for the same team, and are forced to reconcile what they have both buried so deeply within them.

***(m/m) big money: These two ocs play for rival teams in the nhl. while their teams have a history of tension, our two ocs take it to the next level. Audiences are more excited to watch these two fight than they are to watch the game itself. There’s a market in the violence between these two, and a reputation to maintain on both ends. If the public found out that these two were secretly seeing one another, their careers would both be over.

My oc has serious commitment issues. They often go around leaving individuals after 4-5 dates, with little to no explanation of why. Your oc falls for mine, and is the first to confront my oc about their shitty habits.

Your oc is a huge fan of my oc’s hockey or political career. Your oc wins a contest to meet and have dinner with my oc. While my oc expects a boring night out, my oc is completely surprised by how well they hit it off with your oc.

My oc, your first oc and your second oc all grew up together. Your first oc has always been pining for my oc’s attention, and is thrilled when my oc and your first oc finally get together. They develop a long term relationship, but my oc knows it would devastate your first oc if they told them that they have been seeing your second oc for most of the relationship.

My oc and your oc are in an arranged marriage. My oc is actually a spy on your oc's national government. Espionage, reconnaissance, and betrayal abound.

My oc is royalty (think British monarchy) and yours is, absolutely not; either a reporter, a soldier, maybe a business person. My oc has taken interest in yours as a friend to keep them grounded... or as a thin veil for a romance that absolutely no one would approve of.

As for general OC ideas, here’s a list:

street racing, fast-and-furious-esque setting

small town canadiana or americana

fun, fluffy romance based modern settings

light worldbuilding - new to this but wanting to learn

WWI / WWII history based

something based around the Titanic (I know, so cheesy)

alternate history — I would love to work on doing some worldbuilding with you and creating some kind of retro-futuristic alt history IE fallout before the nukes dropped.

estate drama — something akin to Downton Abbey but with our own spin on it

honestly whatever you can pitch to me that isn’t high fantasy :)

I can expand on and work with any of these ideas, these are just topics. Whatever I do with you, I promise it’ll be fleshed out, with tons of opportunity for drama.

how do we get started?

Pleaaase send me an email at ehmmywrites@gmail.com; I can give you my discord if we hit it off. Please give me some of your thoughts/an idea of why/what you’d like to write with me! I can write over discord or email or both. We can sort out the brass tacks there and figure out if we’re a good match. :) Thanks for your time and I hope I hear from you!

[largemaxa]

Devotion Without Religion

Devotion to God has been at the figurative heart of man's religious and spiritual quest for millennia. Saints and texts alike have spoken of man's love for God, God's love for man, and the ecstasy that comes from realizing that love within oneself. But we live in a rational and secular age, and the path of devotion has been de-emphasized. When we admit to having spiritual urges at all, we often speak of the search for peace, with its main route being through meditation. When the emotions are engaged in the spiritual search, they are directed towards aims like self-actualization and healing. Actual devotion—the practice of love, worship, and prayer—is viewed as misguided at best, and dangerous at worst.

It is not at all clear how to reconcile the path of devotion with the independent spiritual path. This is because the way of devotion is associated with the worst aspects of religion, such as irrationalism and fanaticism. The argument goes that only a force like religious devotion is able to lead otherwise intelligent people to embrace the irrational aspects of religion, such as beliefs that contradict mainstream science, or partisanship that rejects or persecutes those who hold differing religious opinions. Therefore, for the modern reformer of spiritual seeking, devotion with its irrational emotional intensity is the force that must be excised when we go to recover what is good about spirituality.

But it's unfair to blame religious devotion for all the problems that the emotions bring to man. On one hand, emotional attachments can lead to fanaticism even without a religious component, as we see in the case of nationalist passion. And on the other hand, as we learn more about man's psychology, we see increasingly that emotional attachments are a key factor that keeps human life and society running. In his treatise The Origins of Political Order, Francis Fukuyama points to research that shows that man was always involved in social and political groupings held together by emotional ties and was never in a solitary state of nature. Modern psychology emphasizes the fact that human relationships are essential for mental health. Even in the hard-nosed field of business management, ever since the publication of In Search of Excellence by Thomas Peters and Robert Waterman, it has been acknowledged that emotional factors like pride in one's work and the joy of serving the customer, as opposed to the rational pursuit of wealth alone, are crucial for success in business.

Therefore, we can't rule out the engagement of the emotions in spirituality solely on the basis of the negative aspects of religion. And while it may seem easier to leave the emotions to the adjacent fields of mental health or business success coaching, the essential connection between engaging the emotions and the search for the Divine cannot be neglected indefinitely. Most people would never be able to undertake an endeavor as difficult as the search for the Divine, not even on the austere path of formless meditation, without a strong emotional connection to the path. And once we admit the possibility of engaging the emotions, we must also admit that deepening that emotional connection to God is one of the most accessible and powerful paths to God.

Devotion to Forms, Abstract and Concrete

The contemporary understanding of God does not allow us to easily see how to do this. Because of the aversion to the religious approach to God, which is caricatured as propitiating a stern old man in the sky, the contemporary tendencies are to either view God as a pure abstraction, a powerful deity but one who is ultimately unknowable in a human way, or otherwise to deny that there is a God in the sense of a conscious being, imagining only an abstract energy. If those two conceptions of God exhausted the reality of God, that still wouldn't necessarily mean that the path of devotion is impossible—after all, such abstractions as a flag, nation, or business organization are all able to command sustained emotional commitment and sacrifice. But it remains true that devotion to tangible forms is a powerful practice—the practice which gives religious devotion its power and which makes the modern spiritual reformer wary.

One interesting thing to note is that just because we find the approach of devotion to concrete forms problematic doesn't make those forms of God any less real. The modern reformer takes God to be an abstract energy because it would be distasteful to worship God in the specific form of Krishna or Christ; but if God really does take the form of Krishna or Christ, the opinions of the modern reformer wouldn't matter. Of course, the modern reformer would hold that there is no specific evidence for God having the form of Krishna or Christ either. Still, if we are open to the idea of devotion at all, we must hold out the possibility of the validity of the recognized forms of God; after all, any argument that discounts the God of specific religious forms could easily be modified to discount the formless and abstract God as well.

But whether we admit traditional forms of God or only abstract forms, the problem for those on the independent spiritual path remains as to how we are to pursue a path of devotion that avoids the trap of the religious approach of exclusivity, irrationalism, and fanaticism. It's hard to see what the options are, but if we are clear eyed we can see that there are only so many possibilities. One is to preserve the old gods of the religions, but to try our best not to get stuck in the religious traps. This approach would acknowledge that there is an unknowable mystique around the forms of God that have been handed down, and that it is not possibly to synthetically come up with a new form or abstraction which can command the same reverence or devotion. In this approach, the heart would be devoted to Christ or Krishna without participating in the other social and institutional structures of organized religion. The danger of this option is that it will slide too far to the faults of the old religious mentality. After all, if the revered forms of God are worth preserving because of their irreplaceable essence, why shouldn't the associated religious practices and social forms be viewed as similarly meritorious? It may not be clear how to extract devotion to these forms of God from concrete religious practice.

A second approach would be to channel devotion to human gurus. There are obvious problems are here as well, and they may even seem to be worse than the problems with the previous option. Namely, this option could lead to personality cults, which are regarded as the worse and more extreme than even religious institutions. If an individual human is loved and regarded as God, they may feel as though they are granted absolute power, which no human being should have. Further, it is not clear whether anyone currently existing on earth is worthy of being placed in this position. What makes this opportunity worth considering, though, is that the human guru provides a target for the devotional impulse that is tangible without relying only on the classical forms of the religions. And in an ideal world, there might be enough spiritual masters and gurus that would make this a legitimate outlet for the devotional impulses of the spiritual seekers.

A third approach would be to reserve the devotional impulse for the forms and institutions of human life as they are: the family, the nation, various secular and religious institutions. This approach would powerfully ground spiritual seeking in the structures of everyday life. The problem with this approach is that even though the human affections can work effectively through these human organizations, it is not clear if the highest form of religious devotion could flow through these mundane channels. A fourth option would be not to try to send the religious devotional impulse towards any forms or structures at all, and instead to focus on revering the abstract forms of God instead. This approach would seem to at least avoid the problems of the earlier methods in principle, though in practice one may wonder if the human heart could really love an abstraction. The modern reformer or critic may hold that any effectiveness of the concrete forms for devotion is still too big of a risk, and that man will have to learn to love the abstract. But it must be noted that even movements with aniconic policies or tendencies have had trouble with fanaticism.

It may seem like there are no good options for how to safely direct the devotional impulse: either there is the option of a cold abstraction that doesn't inspire devotion, or otherwise the problems that come with emotional attachments to people, forms, or institutions that are not fit to bear the pressure of being loved as God. But there is a subtle shift of framing we can use to open another option. In options one through four, we assumed that we were disconnected from God and needed to find the right way to connect with him; if we didn't find it, we might be disconnected forever. In this way of thinking, the old religions may have had a channel through their various forms, and if we can't use their channel as it was initially set up, we could lose access to God completely.

But we don't need to make that assumption. We can assume instead that we already have a relationship with God, and from there assume that we will be guided to the right devotional channels when the time is right. This is a fifth, all-encompassing option that gives us not a simple answer for how we should direct our devotional impulse but rather a way of living that will dynamically channel our devotion. The specific devotional forms may be different at different times; and they may include some of the options from above that may seem "dangerous" for their proximity to religious methods, such as the use of older religious forms of God, devotion to human spiritual teachers or institutions, or the sanctification of human relationships like the family, romantic love, or friendship. But as long as we keep in mind that our relationship with God is prior to any given form of him that we are devoted to, we will be relatively safe as we negotiate the shifting tendencies of devotional spiritual practice.

A Devotional Relationship to God

The possibility of a devotional practice in the contemporary era requires that we have a relationship with God that is prior to any specific form of God, and use that as a basis for devotional relationship to various forms of God. But what is this relationship with God? This may seem like an impossible query. How can a human have a relationship with God, the creator of the entire universe? We are used to relationships with our fellow humans; these relationships are characterized by mutual support, or antagonism, or indifference. Assuming God is a real being, we have a relationship with Him, just as we have relationships with our fellow humans on Earth; if it doesn't seem like we have a relationship with Him, that just means that our relationship is characterized by ignorance, or perhaps worse, indifference, just as so many of our relationships with humans are.  

The first step to improving this relationship is to acknowledge that God exists and try to be more open to Him. The first step in improving a human relationship is to listen more, to be more attentive; so it is with God. We do this by being quiet and listening for what God has to say to us. But what if God says nothing? In that case, we might feel that our relationship with Him is characterized by abandonment—as with a child whose father or mother has left. In an adult relationship with God, though, there can be no question of abandonment; we must realize that the issue is not with us or with God but with the limits of our human finitude, our ability to hear. So if God seems quiet, we must trust and wait for His voice to be heard more clearly, whether that takes a day, or a week, or even many years. A relationship with God must take into account the type of being that God is, which means understanding God as a being that works on timescales that are vaster than ours are; we cannot be upset if he doesn't immediately answer us as we might expect a human relationship partner to return our texts and calls on the same day. The relationship with God is not a relationship between humans but rather a relationship between a human and the all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving creator of the universe. We must trust his timing, and we must trust that the circumstances he arranges for us are the best ones for us to be in.

We must be present in our relationship with God just as we stay present in a relationship with a human, being open and listening and staying connected; only then does the possibility of insight and trust open up. We don't need to start with trust—we simply need to start with staying connected. As we communicate and listen, the forms that we need to interact with God will be suggested, whether these are human relationships in our life that are symbols of the Divine, or are ancient forms of the Divine that have been revered through the ages and find a renewed relevance for us, or are the beloved forms of spiritual teachers that come into our lives. By following the path that opens up, we find the forms that are needed to practice the path of devotion. Even in this modern era that has identified the problems with religion without providing a replacement, if we trust the spiritual path that unfolds, the heart will still be able to fulfill its desire for the Love of the Divine.

[itsclydebitches]

How do you go about redeeming villains from a writing perspective? How would you write Adam, Salem, Cinder, ect and make a good redemption to them. A lot of villains are redeemed through death, but I know many don't find that effective. How do you take a character who has genuinely hurt the protagonist and committed atrocities and give them a compelling redemption?

Oooh tough (but fun!) question. Honestly, I think most characters are “redeemed” (I don’t consider it true redemption) via death because most characters simply don’t have the time or proper setup to be redeemed in a way that feels appropriate. To demonstrate what I mean I’m going to use Regis as an example. You all are doomed to suffer through my Witcher obsession even as we chat RWBY. I’m so sorry. 

Regis, if you don’t know, is an immortal vampire who is a blood addict. Long story short he had a pretty messed up youth wherein he was a slave to his addiction, terrorizing people and, it’s implied, killing a whole lot of them to feast. It’s, you know, a bit not good. But he becomes one of the most beloved characters in the fandom because: 

He underwent an incredible punishment that feels fitting for his crimes. Regis was dismembered by a village he attacked, buried, and spent fifty years in isolation, thinking about his sins. This not only served as just desserts but gave him the time needed to think about how he got there and why he wanted to change his ways. That change—decades of reflection—makes sense in a way that most, “I decided one day to stop being bad” redemptions don’t.  

Regis then goes on to lead an incredibly altruistic life. He becomes a surgeon, helping those he once hurt. He assists Geralt on his quest for Ciri for no reason other than it’s the right thing to do. We see his changed behavior in action every time he’s in a scene. 

At the same time, Regis doesn’t ignore or dismiss his past. He frequently makes reference to it and, though he’s not wallowing in self-pity, he doesn’t let himself off the hook either. We’re more open to accepting his redemption precisely because he doesn’t think he’ll ever be fully redeemed. Like being an addict, it’s life-long work, not something you just finish and completely move on from. 

During book/game content Regis is removed from anyone he ever hurt simply because they’re all long dead. Though he speaks about his past, we as the audience never have to grapple with seeing someone, say, scream at him for killing their baby. Which finally brings me to perhaps the most important point: 

We never know anyone other than this good guy Regis. His past is in the past, something we hear about but never have to actually experience. Therefore it’s so much easier to dismiss it. Hearing that someone did something horrible simply isn’t the same thing as knowing them when they did that thing, and when the character has since worked to make amends, that good version is always going to supersede the bad one. 

Going back to the actual fandom in question, Cinder and Adam have none of this (Salem being a slight exception since we got flashbacks to her as a good person). We’ve only ever known them as villains, which right off the bat makes them incredibly difficult to redeem. If I were to attempt it though I would need to have them face some fitting punishment, work through a compelling reason to change their behavior, have a great deal of time to enact that change (including failures because change is never linear), and separate them from the people they’ve abused. Which might seem an odd thing to include because doesn’t every redemption include the villain reconciling with the heroes? Pretty much, and that for me is a problem. Keeping the villains among the main cast sets up the expectation that they have to forgive them, sooner or later. We’d reach a point where if Adam or Cinder had been Good Guys for a season, two, three, the audience would be going, “C’mon! What more do they have to do? Why are Blake and Ruby still giving them the cold shoulder?” When in reality they’re free to continue hating them until the end of time because of what they’ve done, but that’s not what we expect from a story. There’s too much pressure for the victims to “get over it.” Plus, it ultimately wouldn’t assist the villains in their efforts either. Having your victims around constantly reminds you of your own failings and/or introduces a lot of pressure to just give up. If you’re surrounded by people who (rightfully) hate you it’s easy to go, “Well fine. If being good doesn’t change their opinion of me then why bother?” (given that former villains are going to have a harder time with the concept of doing something because it’s right, not because you get a reward out of it). If I were to redeem them with any hope of success and satisfaction on the part of the audience, I’d have to do all of the above and then have them leave. Go somewhere else. Start over. Lead entirely new lives under new names and with new goals. Because I don’t believe that redemption can occur among your victims without pressuring those victims to assist or validate said redemption which is… not good. If we’re talking about “Please forgive me for being a dick that one summer,” that’s one thing. It’s something else entirely to have the implicit message of, “Please forgive me for all the murder, torture, and abuse.” So Cinder and Adam need to head off to another kingdom to start over. Salem would ideally find a new planet… 

Honestly though? I wouldn’t be interested in redeeming them. I know a lot of people are really invested in redemption arcs—in the message that you can always change for the better—and while I believe that, I’m not sure from a practical perspective whether that’s worth upholding to the extent a redemption arc does. Meaning, you reach a point where the crimes your characters have committed are just so horrendous that they have lost all right to engage with society. The risk and damage done to others is too great. There’s a reason why many crimes are given life in prison as opposed to “Meet certain standards of Goodness and then we’ll let you out again.” The amount of harm Cinder, Adam, and Salem have done to society means, to my mind, that they’ve lost the right to be a part of that society. They should still change if they have the inclination to, but that doesn’t mean they can or should be rewarded for it by the people they hurt. Which is why, if you’re redeeming a character, immortality is definitely handy. The character has the time needed to change in a way that simply may not be possible in a normal human lifetime and once they do change, the society they’re re-entering into is not the same one they harmed. So if Salem was cleansed of the grimm pool influence, we learned that’s what was the primary motivator for all these bad deeds, she is repentant, is punished, works hard to change, enacts that change, and as an immortal is able to re-enter society as someone new fifty years later… then yeah. We might have a compelling redemption. 

[sorrelchestnut]

a question of motivation

Are any of my followers actually playing Greedfall?  (Aside from you, @arlathahn, I know you’ve been out there suffering along with me.)  If you are, hit me up, because I have fallen down this rabbit hole and I don’t seem to be hitting bottom anytime soon.

Which, obviously, means it’s time for some some overly-elaborate character speculation!  Because how would you even know I’m in a fandom if I’m not overthinking things, amiright?

Spoiler warning for Treason! and Kurt’s companion quests ahoy.

*

*

*

I've been thinking about what causes Kurt to betray you if you don't do the Ghost Camp quest before Treason, because I finally got a chance to play through The Bad Version, and on the surface of it, it doesn't make sense.  All of the things he says to you when he doesn't betray you - that he cares about what happens to you, that he might be a mercenary but he still values his honor - aren't any less true in the world where he does.  I mean, he might agree when you call him honorless, but when you step in front of Constantin and tell him to "fight with honor" he nods and stands down the guard, and does his damnedest to oblige.  When he says, "Sorry, Green Blood," he seems to mean it; when he says, "I am proud of you - truly," he seems to mean that even more.  To all appearances, he doesn't seem to care about those things any less just because he's trying to kill you.  So why do it at all?

The narrative seems to imply that his loyalty to the Guard was stronger than his loyalty to de Sardet.  That without knowing that Torsten condoned the kind of torture that he suffered through when he was younger, he'd be willing to follow his commander's orders, even to the point of the betrayal and murder of someone he clearly cares for a great deal.  Even Sieglinde says it, when he tells her about the Ghost Camp: "You've always been a loyal person, and too many loyalties are sometimes hard to reconcile."  His loyalty to de Sardet and his loyalty to Torsten are presented as two opposing forces, the proverbial rock and a hard place, and without learning about the Ghost Camp, his loyalty to Torsten wins out.

(Okay the rest of this is going behind a cut because it got absurdly long.)

My problem with this is that it implies that, without de Sardet's intervention, Kurt is the sort of man who would blindly follow orders to the point of assassination and murder, and that… doesn't square with what you learn about him in the Ghost Camp questline.  That's exactly the sort of mindset that he's spent the last two decades struggling to leave behind.  He takes honor seriously, to the point that it's something he went out of his way to teach de Sardet alongside swordsmanship; he takes personal responsibility for the soldiers he recruits and blames himself when something happens to them.  He doesn't believe in following orders blindly: when you go to the Ghost Camp, he says, "It's not too late to refuse all of this," and, "Are you really going to obey these scoundrels?"  That's not de Sardet's influence; it's a deeply-held belief, a reaction against the violation and trauma he suffered as a youth.  I find it hard to believe that conditioned obedience could go so deep that it would override that part of his psyche.

And the thing is, if Torsten knew him at all - and it's implied that he did, especially since he targeted Kurt specifically for his weapons-smuggling scheme at the beginning of the game - there's no way he wouldn't have known that about him.  Especially since the game implies that Torsten also knew about Hermann's old training camp back in the day, which  means he'd also know how deeply Kurt's loathing ran.  If you were in Torsten's shoes, would you trust a man like that to be in charge of clandestine mission that could decide the fate of your entire endeavor?  I submit that you would not - unless you were a complete idiot, and a complete idiot does not manage to plan a three-pronged coup d'etat that nearly succeeds.

No, I think Torsten offered something that he knew Kurt couldn't refuse.  Something that he knew Kurt would want more than anything else, maybe even want badly enough to be worth betraying someone he cares about deeply.  And it wouldn't be rank, or power, or even money: despite Kurt's jokes on the subject, it's obvious that honor means a lot more to him than gold, and I doubt he’s making pennies as a legate’s personal guard anyway.  No, it'd be something that only Torsten could offer him, something he's wanted long before he even heard the name de Sardet.

I think Torsten offered him Hermann.

Hermann obviously suffered no consequences for running a fucking torture camp and calling it elite training.  Someone must have shut down the camp back in the day, because Kurt says he thought it was a thing of the past, but Hermann himself got off scot-free.  Hell, they promoted him! And you know from Kurt's final mission that Hermann is much-respected by his soldiers, some to the point of hero-worship.  Kurt had to live with the knowledge that his abuser was living the high life less than a day's travel from where he was stationed, and there wasn't a single fucking thing he could do about it, because Hermann was their golden boy, and that meant he was fucking untouchable.  Even de Sardet, if Kurt had ever been able to bring himself to tell them about it, wouldn't have had the leverage to do anything to him, not in someone else's city.

But Torsten could.  Torsten was the only person on the island with a higher rank than Hermann, and in the chaos of a coup d'etat it'd be easy for one man to disappear, especially if you were the one giving him orders.  I think Torsten went to Kurt and told him that he could have his vengeance, finally, after all these years… and all he had to do was betray the person he cared about most.

It squares with the way Kurt acts in his betrayal sequence: he's not bitter, or defiant, or proud, like he would be if he believed in what he was doing.  Mostly he just seems tired.  I think the promise of vengeance was enough to secure his agreement, to carry him through rounding up a squad of obedient young idiots too beaten down to question orders and march into the throne room…  And then he looked at these trusting young nobles, these kids he's been charged to protect, and all that promised vengeance just turned to ashes in his mouth.  Which is why, I think, he stood down the guard and fought de Sardet one-on-one: he’d trained them himself, he knew how good they were, and dying on their blade seemed a lot easier than living with the consequences of his actions.  And why, if you choose to spare him and he regains the upper hand, he turns the pistol on himself rather than pull the trigger on his best and favorite student.

On a somewhat less depressing note, it also squares with the way things play out if Kurt doesn't betray you.  Think about it: Torsten obviously heard about Kurt shutting down the Ghost Camp, but he still brought Kurt into his attempted coup anyway.  He had to at least suspect that Kurt might not be feeling cooperative: when you search Torsten's office during Treason, they even say how Torsten was hedging his bets with Kurt's loyalty.  But hedged bets or no, Torsten had to have a reason to think such a close compatriot of the legate would worth the risk of exposure.  And the only way that calculation makes sense is if he had leverage: Hermann's head on a pike, if only Kurt joins his little rebellion.  And even then, Torsten must have managed the timing very carefully; the only way that scene makes sense in a no-betrayal version is if Kurt just straight-up didn't have time to warn de Sardet between Torsten's approach and the Guard's attack.

(Relatedly: typing this out, it occurs to me that something must have happened to move up Torsten’s planned timeline.  Think about it: de Sardet had the chance to warn the other cities, even though they're like a day's travel apart, which means that the attacks weren't coordinated to occur all at the same time.  That's Rebellion 101, so something about Constantin's diagnosis must have caused Torsten to attack earlier than planned.  Maybe he figured it'd cause too much of a shake-up in the guard rotation so he had to make his move before it could happen? Maybe he found out de Sardet cleared the room, leaving them alone and vulnerable, and thought the opportunity was too good to pass up?  Either way, he clearly made his move ahead of schedule - and it came back to bite him in the ass in the worst way possible.)

Anyway, the point of this theory - besides filling in what I see as a hole in his character arc - is that it makes Kurt's decision not to betray them even more poignant.  It means it's not just a matter of picking one loyalty over another: it's him making a deliberate choice to sacrifice what might be his only chance at vengeance against the monster who ruined his life, in order to save his best (only?) friend.  That's powerful stuff! And it makes it all the more rewarding when de Sardet manages to take out Hermann anyway, unflinchingly getting their hands dirty with bribery and corruption just because Kurt asked it of them.  And afterwards – and this is the crucial part - they don't even ask him for anything in return.  It's the final and tangible proof that de Sardet deserves all the loyalty he's already given them, and contrasts all the more beautifully with Kurt's realization of how misplaced his loyalty to Torsten had been.

So.  There you have it.  My 1500-word answer to a question probably nobody but me was asking, but damned if I wasn't going to answer it anyway.

[kyojuuros]

do you think mikasa would be in a leadership role again? she was in a role like at trost after eren died. the series doesnt seem to touch that again and instead focus on armin/jean/eren as leaders despite that in one of guides(was it the 1st one?) where shadis gives a grade on certain characters and says what they would do or why are they important he says mikasa is bound to lead the crops someday. both things remained untouched so i am curious and you're good at answering this type of asks.

Hey there! I don’t believe that Mikasa is ultimately destined to be a leader in a traditional sense, and I don’t think Shadis necessarily saw that in her either. 

She displays a proficiency in every subject and is considered one of the most valuable soldiers in the military, even as a cadet. Naturally, those who are strong will play a role in spurring others into action and leading those who are weaker or less confident on the field when it’s needed. Mikasa definitely can and has played this role. However…

To me, Mikasa’s arc is a lot more about personal growth (as a person and as a soldier) than it is something to prop her up into a proper leadership role (at least, not in the same vein as Jean or Armin). But as a strong fighter on the field, there are times when people may rely on her to make critical decisions, and there are some aspects of her character arc that reflect a need for her to take up the mantle of others when they are not present. 

This is something that is apparent in situations where Levi cannot be there:

Given that Levi is the captain of the Survey Corps (and leads his own squads), it seems only natural that one day she will take up a similar mantle as the “mentee” character that takes to his likeness. And there are times where we see her taking the helm on the field:

All of this is large in part due to her maturing as a soldier as she starts to focus on putting her skills toward the bigger picture and shed her intensity when it comes to keeping Eren safe. People trust her judgement on the field, and her performance in this respect increases exponentially when her judgement isn’t clouded by her prioritizing Eren over everything else.

Back in Trost, she makes a rash decision in a moment of grief due to the news that Eren has died. She’s devastated and tries to use fighting to push down the pain. At the time, she’s displeased with the cowardice from the other soldiers and their unwillingness to try and fight (fighting being something that she personally values since she met Eren) and chastises them for it. She wasn’t really thinking about her fellow cadets or their safety. She lashed out on them and spurred them into battle without really considering the consequences of doing so. She didn’t even care if she herself had died. Eren was gone, so nothing really mattered. 

She realizes this later when she finally has a chance to reflect on her words and actions and how they affected herself and the others:

This is a moment I feel that reflects more on how her loyalty to Eren directly conflicts with her duty as a soldier, and it hits her very hard. While she continues to struggle through this for a couple more arcs, it sets the foundation for her to learn how to be more responsible when it comes to the lives of the others around her. It’s not all about Eren and it can’t be. She is part of a larger group and the world is bigger than those two.

Rather than build her up to a character whose sole role is to take on a position of leadership, her character arc challenges her feelings and shapes her into someone who learns to better control herself and dedicate her heart to something bigger than her own needs and wants. 

Currently her arc is reaching its peak, where she must choose between trusting in Eren or opposing him. It’s a journey of self discovery which will no doubt be heavily pushed by Eren’s cruelty toward her when they last spoke and how she’ll reconcile with what happened (and whether they can determine Eren’s true goals). 

That being said, I imagine that her choice will have some influence on whether the 104th decide to aid Eren or resist him. And with Levi potentially out of commission for good (or at best, not the soldier he once was), she will have to step up to the plate once again in his absence. 

In short, I do believe that she will take on a leadership-esque role similar to Levi’s. Still following the plans and orders of another person with better judgement than her, but in a way that inspires people to follow her lead. To do this though, she must be fully loyal to her duties as a soldier, feelings for Eren aside and regardless of Eren’s true intentions.

[a-queer-seminarian]

the Confessions

The Presbyterian Church USA makes use of Confessions to guide our interpretation of scripture and how it relates to our own lives. Here are my notes from my Polity and Heritage class on these Confessions.

(This post probs isn’t gonna be of interest to any non-Presbyterians out there, sorry to spam your feed yo)

Basic facts

The primary Confession is “Jesus is Lord;” all other confessions are an elaboration of that statement of belief.

each confession discusses God, the world, and the relations between the two. One vital component that the PCUSA has determined over the years is the sovereignty of God -- God cares about and is involved in every part of life; there is no part of human life outside of Hir command or care.

This concept opposes the “doctrine of spirituality of the church” that says the church shouldn’t involve itself in sociopolitical issues -- because God cares about suffering and oppression, we must be active in fighting it.

many of the confessions were written in a time of crisis – when the Church has been compelled by things happening within the church or outside the church to say “oh hell no!”

The Confessions are

provisional – open to being corrected

reformed theology emphasizes our tendency towards idolatry; we are always going to be looking for an easier God to deal with than the true God; we love things more than God -- and thus we have to be ready to realize that what we once confessed is not actually right and fix it

temporal – open to new ways of God speaking to us

relative – scripture first

even so, the confessions should guide us in our reading of scripture

Why do we keep all the old confessions? Even with their instances of sexism, antisemitism, and more?

humility – we do not get to pick what to keep or get rid of

keep even the problematic stuff – to remind ourselves of where we’ve gone wrong in the past instead of pretending it never happened

“A dangerous memory” -- Johann Metz, Catholic:

most forms of oppression and injustice rely on our capacity to forget those who have suffered; thus, memories of suffering are dangerous to oppressive regimes because they interrupt our ways of being

Thus the Confessions do not only guide and prepare us, they interrupt us and force us not to assume the status quo is how things ought to be

By keeping these historical confessions, we are equipped for the future crises we cannot yet foresee

The big question: how much of the Confessions do I actually “have to” believe to be a “good Presbyterian” (let alone to be ordained)?

Yoo’s book shows those arguments in the United States (pp. 5-14) 

Dickinson: worries that the Confessions will start to be on par with scripture

Thomson: scripture is still first, but the Confessions offer nothing new – just tell us the proper way to interpret and live out scripture; also says the Confessions unite us

The Adopting Act, 1729 -- Came to the decision that ministers must subscribe to Confessions to be ordained, but are allowed to have ‘scruples’ – places where they disagree with the Confession

We are a church that respects freedom of conscience 

if it’s not an “essential and necessary” part of scripture, they can still be ordained and that scruple is fine 

but who decides whether a scruple is critical or not?

different presbyteries tend to come to different conclusions about what counts as a scruple -- that’s just part of our polity

Okay, time to dive into each confession, under the readmore.

The Scots Confession

1560

Created in a time of turmoil when religious leaders were being persecuted in fight between Catholics and Protestants

Makes a point to state that they are willing to listen to any arguments that anything in the Confession is not biblical and to change it if that turns out to be true

God ordains leaders (kings, parents, etc.) and we should obey them – unless they make commands “contrary to the commands of God” and fail to “suppress idolatry” and to protect the innocent.

Scots Confession came up with a Third note of the Church – ecclesiastical discipline

Calvin had two notes: preaching of the gospel and administering of the two sacraments

Ecclesiastical discipline is to make sure that good fruits are coming out of the church rather than corruption and “idolatry”

priesthood of all believers

lots of Trinitarian language, emphasis on how we are “by nature” “so dead, blind, and perverse” and how both justification and regeneration/sanctification are God’s doing not our doing

The Heidelberg Catechism

1563

Written to help reconcile the Lutheran and Reformed views of the Eucharist, to find common ground that could unite the two groups

Catholic view of Eucharist

“Heavy Cookies” – Marilyn McCord Adams – term she used approvingly for the Catholic view that the bread and wine truly become the bread and blood of Christ -- not just symbols, they’re heavy with grace

Transubstantiation – accidents stay the same; substance/essence changes

all the accidents could be changed in a thing and the thing would still be that thing: example of a chair: could change the cloth and plastic to wood, but if it is still a human-made thing that one sits upon it is still a chair – the essence makes a thing a thing

the accidents of the bread and wine remain the same so it still looks and tastes the same, but the substance changes to that of the body and blood of Christ

The Lutheran view of the Eucharist

Consubstantiation – substance of bread and substance of body are both present in it

Reformed view of the Eucharist

it’s a “sign and symbol,” a seal, a confirmation of the real spiritual nourishment that God gives us as we partake

The substance and accidents both remain that of bread and wine/juice, don’t change -- it really does nourish your faith to partake, but it’s not really the body and blood of Christ

a symbol participates in what it points to – so it’s “heavier” than the way we think of signs in the secular way -- spiritually weighty but not physically so

Zwingli, meanwhile, had the “lightest” cookies -- for him, the eucharist isn’t even a sign and symbol that nourishes spiritually; it’s just a reminder

Other content in Heidelberg

spiritual progression starts with recognizing one’s own sin

“how great my sin and misery are; how I am set free; how I am to thank God”

Reformed theology is distinctive on sin:

total depravity is the central plotline; focus on what happened long ago (crucifixion) rather than what God is doing in my community right now (God’s transformative and saving power in my particular life)

any belief in our own self-sufficiency is an obstacle to seeing the grace of God in our lives

Those of us who are progressive / leftist are often too optimistic – if we could just have excellent education, resources for all, we could fix everything on our own

BUT the reality that we are always sinning does not mean we should not act: Martin Luther says, “sin boldly, and trust in the love of God more boldly still”

this doctrine of sin should get rid of any notions of purity among Presbyterians

purity politics is not right: you will not find a savior, and looking for one is heretical

Some of the bad things about the Reformed doctrine of sin: hard to have moments when we just feel grace

it should expand grace, but self regard is kind of difficult

Valerie Saiving Goldstein: feminist theologian who pointed out that so much of Protestant theology points out pride as the major sin; but often for women and especially woc, the sin is not self-aggrandizement but self-abnegation

Karl Barth: pride, which is the attempt to justify one’s own life, is the flipside of sloth, which is refusing to step into yourself fully as a child of God

both are a refusal to let God’s love be the defining factor of your identity

refusing that identity involves not believing you have gifts in a situation, etc.

Focus on the Crucifixion

Jesus is seen primarily as the one who fixes sin – hence the emphasis on the cross

Christological to the point that we sometimes don’t focus much on the Spirit, etc.

Heidelberg’s description of what happens on the cross is really interesting, because it’s the stuff we call substitutionary atonement and it’s their misunderstanding of an older theory about the cross

Heidelberg says we deserve eternal punishment because we sin so much; we can’t fix it; it needs to be fixed by a human but only God could possibly fix it – so we need a human who is also divine

Jesus takes the wrath of God: God’s righteousness requires “justice” – punishment – and Jesus takes that on for us

Goes back to Anselm’s satisfaction theory from medieval times – based on a system of honor; the reason our sins are so bad is because we impact God’s honor

God has two options: humanity could be punished, or humanity could pay satisfaction -- God chooses the latter

but Heidelberg changes it: Jesus pays satisfaction is what Anselm says, but that concept has faded away (the concept of honor isn’t how the world works anymore); so Heidelberg says Jesus is punished

change from saying the honor of God is such that God needs punishment or satisfaction and God chooses the one that has no punishment involved – change to saying God requires punishment

so instead of saying, as Anselm did, “God is the kind of God who will bend over backwards to avoid any punishing,” Heidelberg says “God has to punish” – God does take on that punishment Themself, but for Anselm there was no punishing at all!

The Second Helvetic Confession

1562-1566

Early on the confession says we get to decide how much power we give to church leaders, and we are going to measure it by scripture

all that the Second Helvetic says is that “we’re going to question authorities based on scripture”

but from a Catholic viewpoint this was a huge deal, as big as saying popes, priests etc. were not authoritative at all anymore -- because the Church has been the entity handing down the knowledge of Christ throughout the ages; if you suggest the Church could be wrong about authority, its knowledge of Christ is also endangered (apparently. idk)

Providence

Creation is preserved and governed

if God did not continuously sustain Creation, it would fall out of existence

Adam and Eve

this confession blames them for a whole lot huh

all was perfect until they willfully chose to disobey God

If you are perfectly content, where does the impulse to disobey God even come from?

And if God is governing all things in a micromanaging way, why did God govern this as well?

Helvetic puts these in the category of curious questions we are not meant to ask lol that’s so frustrating

 Bible

Protestants had severed with so much, at this point they wanted to keep the Bible a certain thing – a touchstone they could hold on to

Romans is central to Heidelberg and Second Helvetic both

the gospel and the law – third use of the law

grace of God

Emphasis in the Second Helvetic on works

we are to do good works to demonstrate our gratitude for God’s grace and gift of salvation

we do not get any merit for the works; we do get a reward, but it should not be attributed to our merits but God’s grace in recognizing them

The Westminster Confession

1647

This is a big but tricky Confession to know.

There were arguments in the Presbyterian Church about this Confession and whether we wanted to keep it at all

We ended up revising it because its way of reading scripture is no longer the way we read scripture

The 3 main issues that (spoiler alert) the Confession of 1967 worked to fix

the issue of divorce – all divorces were to be condemned according to Westminster, but that just wasn’t the experience; sometimes divorce was the healthy option

the issue of mission – “saving the heathens”

the issue of what happens to infants who die before baptism

When did Jesus put on the salvific role?

Did God ordain Jesus to salvation eternally (before the Fall)? The Super-lapsarian view says yes, he was always going to have the salvific role.

Intra-lapsarian (”within the fall”) view says that the Fall happened and then the Person of God who is Jesus stepped into the salvific role (pretty sure I remember that happening during Paradise Lost)

Presbyterians are permitted to believe either. Shannon says she’s super-lapsarian

part of that has to do with what that would say about the Incarnation: that God was eternally intending to join in with Creation

What we should know about this confession’s content:

Scripture

= the canon lacking the Apocrypha

= the Word of God that reveals everything we need to know about God’s glory, our salvation, faith, and life – either explicitly or in a way that can be deduced

while individuals may interpret some parts of scripture differently, the parts necessary for salvation are clear (i wish man)

As different as they are, Westminster asserts that all the books in the scriptural canon convey one theology, one message about God

the whole is the Law of Love

If you find something hateful in one place, you reject that hate because the whole is about love and grace

Westminster says that scripture should be interpreted by scripture

if there is a part that you can’t figure out, look to parts that are clearer to help you interpret / look to the overall themes (like the Law of Love above)

The Trinity

= the unity of Three Persons who are infinite, sovereign

we are orthodox in our Trinity – the Reformers held on to the Trinity in the way it was figured out in Chalcedon, didn’t mess with that

Westminster casts Jesus as a mediator -- the Person of the Trinity who connects Divinity to humanity/Creation

Creation and Providence

= the manifestation of God’s glory, power, wisdom, and goodness

God created the world ex nihilo

this is God’s world, God’s dominion, and no one shares that stage with God

God “leaves for a season his own children to manifold temptations”

First and second causes:

the first cause of everything is God. God causes everything because God is sustaining creation; and as in Calvin, God is a micromanager

the second cause – at the same time, we are causing it too – a layered causality

when bad things happen you shouldn’t be interpreting it as God punishing you / God being unpleased with you (says Shannon)

feeling God’s absence doesn’t mean you’re not elect

Westminster does claim that God seems to leave us to chastise us or teach us about our dependence on God

God can withhold grace from people and withdraw gifts from people

God can give power over to Satan (eek creepy) – this is double predestination stuff

Sin

Adam and Eve’s fall was permitted by God because God  “purposed to order it” to God’s own glory

Now all humanity’s nature is totally corrupted so that we sin and thus are doomed to God’s wrath -- that’s total depravity, baby

even tho God let it happen, we take the blame for the Fallj

Election

Two doctrines of election are held in tension in Westminster: double predestination vs. God’s grace being sufficient for all

double predestination and Arminianism don’t work together At All, yet the Confession tries to hold them together – basically the Confession just sorta throws up its hands and goes, we don’t know, but we do know that God’s got a hold on us

Either way, we affirm that we do not merit our own salvation

Election in a sentence: God’s already got a hold on your life

Law

6.106 -- the three uses of the Law: lets us know how sinful we are; restrains and forbids sin (helps keep order); and guides toward life

A part of this that’s distinctly Westminster -- the distinction between moral law and ceremonial law

God gave the moral law as grace to Adam; meanwhile, the ceremonial law was repealed by Jesus in the Second Testament

the eternal moral law serves to guide Christians towards how the world should be ordered

The Declaration of Barmen

1934 -- how’s that for a time jump?? it had been nearly 3 centuries since we churned out a new confession!

Special vs. General revelation

General = always available to everyone

example: nature

Special = available to a limited time and place

example: the burning bush

Okay. So. Gotta know a bit about Karl Barth to understand the context around Barmen. There’s a lot more on him in my theology post but basically he blew up Liberal Theology’s whole Thing -- argued that they were attempting to domesticate a God who is unknowable and breaks into the world in completely unexpected ways; he also said that Liberal Theology’s tendency to see God’s activity in our little human movements wasn’t right for a similar reason -- it makes God smaller and more manipulable than Xe is.

Anyway, he moves to Germany in time for the rise of Hitler, including how that impacted German churches -- they were now expected to 1) not allow anyone of Jewish ancestry to be ministers and 2) accept Hitler as revelatory, the latest of God’s great proclamations 

While many Liberal theologians had a problem with this, their theology didn’t give them much to work with.

if you say you see God in nature, in family, how do you discern that this guy is not revelatory?

if you can say that the move to house people and feed them is God’s activity in your world today, how do you say that what Hitler is doing is not what God is doing? he is housing and feeding some.

And so the Confessing Church argued amongst themselves about what to do about the whole Hitler crisis.

should they just tell Nazis to stay out of their church, but let Nazis keep doing their thing unopposed?

do we allow that moment in worship to acknowledge Hitler, without letting Nazism control anything else in church?

full-out rebellion seemed not feasible – especially because most congregants were all-in with Hitler

And so the stage was set for the Barmen declaration.

Barth and two Lutheran pastors – Lutheran, Reformed, and United churches

Couldn’t be outright anti-Nazi because they are pastors of congregations enthralled by Nazis

8.11 “Jesus Christ, as he is attested for us in Holy Scripture, is the one Word of God which we have to hear and which we have to trust and obey in life and in death”

they were putting their lives at risk by publishing this declaration, because statements like this suggested that Hitler was not revelatory

8.15 “We reject the false doctrine, as though there were areas of our life in which we would not belong to Jesus Christ, but to other lords”

8.22 “Fear God. Honor the emperor”

This declaration is not very satisfying to us, but it was a way of saying to the Nazi regime that functioned on fear: “We don’t fear you.”

8.25 “The word of God is not fettered”

My classmate Daniel’s view: this declaration is like a subtweet – we all know who this message is about, but we’re not overtly saying it

How do you say it without saying it, with chances of being heard and not being shut down?

My professor Shannon: “I wish that he had flat-out said, ‘Because of Jesus, we reject genocide.’ But I do see that he was pointing out the central issue: how do we know God? on what do we plant our feet? our ground is Jesus.”

The Confession of 1967

you’ll never guess the year for this one....stumped? it’s 1967

A “Thrilling revival of theology” – Edward Dowey Jr. as chair

This was a time of new decisions: to make a new Confession and compile a book of Confessions

thus the other 10 confessions were adopted at the same time as ’67.

originally, the first step was to revise Westminster; after a few years they decided that wasn’t working and needed a whole new Confession

a 15-member committee – one member per synod -- worked on it

Opponents: Presbyterians United for Biblical Concerns (PUBiC lmaooo); The Layman; the Evangelical Presbyterian Church

Highlights of the Confession of 1967

Belhar addressed the Church; “1967″ addressed the world

named Jesus in new ways, such as “Palestinian Jew”

talked about the Bible in new ways too – Word vs. word

focus on reconciliation as the role of the church

race, war, poverty, sexuality

and yet the language is sexist lol -- it’s since been edited

“life is a gift to be received with gratitude and a task to be pursued with courage”

“With an urgency born of this hope the church applies itself to present tasks and strives for a better world.”

9.47 is shitty – “sexual anarchy”; man and woman marry; anti birth control? lmao what is this Catholicism

A bit more on the reconciliation theme of this confession

back then, the idea that without reparations, reconciliation cannot happen was implicit

nowadays, white people might see the idea of reconciliation as an “out” from doing the hard work – that we can just move on and be together instead of working to confront and right past wrongs

Cliff: this Confession actually arose from a committee on reparations – for African Americans, Native Americans

realized that reparations can’t only be about money – there must also be reparations in our theology

Major changes in how we understand confessions after ’67

a transition to the confessions being more of a guide instead of less prescriptive according to what you believe

changed the ordination questions – and thus changed the authority system for pastors, deacons etc.

new conception: this person, Jesus, is the one revelation who helps us understand scripture

 impacted our relationship with other churches as we made an effort at ecumenism; there was a similar impact on interfaith relations

9.41 “The church in its mission encounters other religions and in that encounter becomes conscious of its own human character as a religion…” – separation between revelation and religion

still says that you have to connect revelation to Jesus Christ; but is a step towards finding a way to work with people of other faiths respectfully

The Confession of Belhar

This confession was written in the 1980s, but was not officially added to our Book of Confessions until 2016

One reason for the resistance was the fact that adopting this confession would mean admitting that apartheid is wrong, and therefore admitting that what Israel was/is doing to Palestine is wrong

Another is just the Western-centricism of the Book -- some people weren’t willing to see a confession written in Africa as useful for the whole Church

Context behind Belhar

The World Alliance of Reformed Churches declared in 1982 that theological support of apartheid is heresy

Apartheid was more a theological concept than political

God created people “separate but equal”

in the Reformed Church, you had 4 different denominations based on race

white, mixed race (this was the group that really took leadership for Belhar), Black, Indian and South Asian

The Confession was named Belhar because that’s the city where they met to write it

near Cape of Good Hope, southernmost part of South Africa

a committee stayed up all weekend working on it

two of the most active people: Dirkie Smit (white) and Russell Botman (Black)

The Confession of Belhar was finally adopted by the Dutch Reformed Mission Church in South Africa in September 1986

A Reformed Confession

reflecting the confessional history of the church

modeled on the Barmen declaration – each section having affirmations and rejection

Accompanying letter says the Gospel is at risk among us:

an unchristian theology of racial separation infects us, our Church, and our nation

a cry from the heart based on truth of Scripture

we call on all Christian people everywhere for all time, to join us in confessing the truth of the Gospel for this time, place, and setting

Adopting the Confession

first adopted in the USA by the Reformed Church in America

in 2010 after 5 years of church discernment

declaring Belhar’s themes as central to the whole church: justice, unity, reconciliation

proposed to the PCUSA in 2008 “as a means of deepening the commitment of the PCUSA to dealing with its racism and as a means of strengthening unity”

we need reparations in our theology

approved by 2010 General Assembly, but only 60% of presbyteries – needed 2/3. Thus it was defeated, not added to Book of Confessions – sent again to the presbyteries with a vigorous program of study

the second time around it got a 90% approval

 Content of Belhar

Articles 1 & 2

begins with affirmation of Trinity (ends with affirmation that Jesus is Lord)

unity is a gift and an obligation

this unity must “become visible so that the world may believe that separation, enmity, and hatred between people and groups is sin which Christ has already conquered”

Reconciliation was the most difficult of the three themes for the Confession writers to decide upon – how can we reconcile before there is justice?

“why would I share communion with the murderer of my children?”

are they willing to give up all that power and privilege?

“Absolutising of diversity”

 taking natural diversity – people come in different shapes and colors etc. – and building race in order to exploit it

“Our Confession”

while this confession was made in one context, we claim it as ours too – it’s about our own need to confront racism, etc.

the confession is making a difference in the world

contribution to Liberation Movement in South Africa

inspiration for justice struggles across Africa

importance to Palestinian Liberation Struggle

adoption by other churches in the USA and worldwide

A Brief Statement of Faith

The last one!! We made it folks!!

So this one was added to the Book of Confessions in 1991 -- before Belhar, but was written after Belhar

Context

It was written after the two largest Presbyterian Churches in the USA reunited in 1983

It “does not pretend to be a complete list of all our beliefs, nor does it explain any of them in detail” -- made to be confessed in public worship

“It celebrates our rediscovery that for all our undoubted diversity, we are bound together by a common faith and a common task.”

Content

“In life and in death we belong to God.”

Trinity affirmed

Churches are not a “refuge from the world”; we are called out into the world to do ministry

We are Fallen, we sin, we “threaten death to the planet entrusted to our care” -- “Yet God acts with justice and mercy to redeem creation.”

“Like a mother who will not forsake her nursing child, like a father who runs to welcome the prodigal home, God is faithful still.”

In gratitude to God, empowered by the Spirit, we strive to serve Christ in our daily tasks and to live holy and joyful lives, even as we watch for God’s new heaven and new earth, praying, “Come, Lord Jesus!”