"Genuine fairy-story" ?

[Aiwendil]

Lalwende wrote:

Not a theory, knowledge and experience.

Call it what you like, I suppose. Perhaps "belief" is a better word? The point is that this is your opinion, not a universally acknowledged truth. So you cannot expect others to accept it as a premise.

And indeed, a debunking of those who know about Faerie, who have experienced it, applying knowledge to what they read could likewise be applied to those who apply Christianity or other formalised religious beliefs or theories to what they read. Steady.

Yes.

In a rational discussion among people who do not necessarily share the same religious/supernatural beliefs, we cannot take any of those beliefs as premises. Christians will read and evaluate Faerie stories in the context of their Christianity. You read and evaluate them in the context of your belief that Faerie is real. There's nothing wrong with that. But unless you are talking to other people who share your beliefs, you cannot expect those beliefs to be taken as given. Of course you can try to convince others that your beliefs are true, but I fear that would take us rather off-topic.

Which I seem to be accomplishing anyway . . .

No, but are they stories about Faerie, as it is? Or are they tales made safe, as if for the nursery?

Beowulf was made "safe, as if for the nursery"? That's one grim nursery! In any case, Tolkien refers to Beowulf several times in OFS, which at least indicates that he considered it a valid specimen.