|
|
|
|
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/6/2008 3:15:09 PM |
Calling oneself a witch does NOT automatically make one an expert on the English language. As has been pointed out, a warlock is by definition a male witch, and that's a fact, not an opinion
Knowing the english language doesn't make you an expert on what terms people use to describe themselves either... It is just ignorant to insist on calling a witch a warlock if it is known that it is offensive... Get that through your thick skulls! | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/6/2008 4:49:37 PM |
I have to disagree Mr Bad .. a pentagram is just a 5 pointed star, in a circle its a pentacle. The 5 points refer to the 4 elements and spirit the circle references the divine. Never come across one with points outside the circle unless you mean a circle within the central pentagon, that could be used for summoning. 2 points upwards indicates the Horned God, but its also the symbol for a second degree witch.
Your statement is true and not true at the same time. Gerald Gardner, who popularized Wicca in the 1950’s was looking for try to unify the Pagan community through Wicca. He took many of the popular beliefs that many of the old covens held. Some of the older covens, which traced back to Europe, followed the 5-pointed star down method for fall and 5-pointed star up summer. These groups were in the minority so it didn’t make it into his first book. The book History of Witchcraft by Scott Cunningham talked about the debate that split the community. The majority of the Covens suggest that the 5-pointed star represents earth, air, fire, water and the spirit that joins them. Definition depends on the Coven or person’s personal meaning.
As far as the pentagram/pentacle debate the Illuminates of Thanateros, The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn and practitioners of Goetia say define the 5-pointed star whose points outside the circle or no circle at all is a pentacle. The word "pentacle" is sometimes used synonymously with "pentagram", although their technical usages are different, and their etymologies may be unrelated.
Several pagans have both stated that the term 'warlock' is offensive and offered their perspective on the term and its origins. That should be enough.
Thank you!
"I know that in common usage the word 'warlock' means 'male witch', but for many in my circle it has become an offensive term and we prefer just plain 'witch' for both males and females".
You talk about going on line and looking things up, well I looked up the word on Webster.com and the history of the word is: Etymology:
Middle English warloghe, from Old English wǣrloga one that breaks faith, the Devil, from wǣr faith, troth + -loga (from lēogan to lie); akin to Old English wǣr true — more at very, lie
It’s offensive, and there were several requests not to refer to male witches as a warlock. Not very many Pagans want to be referred to as the devil or faith breaker. Your posts continue to insult people by reducing yourself to name calling.
And this one in particular has no problem making unsupported claims about Christianity and it's sacred texts and words.
I can support my claims; you just choose to ignore facts.
has been pointed out, a warlock is by definition a male witch, and that's a fact, not an opinion
You have seen too much Charmed or Bewitched. A male witch is not a warlock. Look it up, even Webster’s says it’s someone who practices the black arts. Thank you for pointing out to the world of your ignorance. | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/6/2008 4:59:59 PM | Here's what I would like to humbly offer, if I may. . .
Everyone is probably familiar with the popular 'footprints in the sand' modern parable. What a blessing it was to discover that those footprints (for me) were delicate and feminine! And the times when there were only one set of footprints? That was when she carried me -- in her womb, after one death and in the anticipation of being born again into the next life.
I'm not going to tell you what is right for you, and it is largely a waste of time to pick at semantics -- (Call me anything you want, BTW, Wiccan, Witch, Warlock, Pagan -- I prefer 'Polytheist' for accuracy). My purpose here is simple; I would like to express the profound joy that one can experience in the knowledge that there exists a Mother-Goddess, whom one can worship and to whom one can pray. . .
What a wonder it is to see the Green Man staring out at me from within the trees as I walk in nature. . .
Can one love a God who puts obstacles in your way? That's what my happy dancing elephant-headed God Ganesh does for me, and I do love him for it. They're all learning experiences and although difficult, lead me inexorably closer to my highest self. But please, O Tusked-One, can you remove a few for me in 2008? Do I really need so many learning experiences?
As I practice a religion that embraces magic, I am empowered. I walk in magic every day, suffusing me with the certain knowledge of my own divine spark, my own creation in her image (if you will), with the power, on a much smaller scale, to co-create. From my vantage, women especially find this empowerment particularly rewarding. Perhaps as a gender, they easily come to an appreciation, being inherant co-creators. Perhaps Goddess-worshipping men have a unique bend towards cherishing the beautiful soul of a woman, regardless of the ephemeral qualities of size, shape and age. . .
Thank you for reading this rather long post. What I thought was absent on this thread was an expression of joy, wonder, love and empowerment. No discussion of Pagan spirituality would be complete without these. . .
Magickally,
Michael Mirth
http://prospero.covenspace.com/ | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/6/2008 5:24:40 PM |
(Call me anything you want, BTW, Wiccan, Witch, Warlock, Pagan -- I prefer 'Polytheist' for accuracy).
i prefer thinking of myself as a 'godless heathen.' | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/6/2008 9:45:48 PM | | Oh, if it wasn't clear before, I discontinued the use of the word "warlock" on the first request. There shouldn't be any more debate about it, except perhaps whether "warlocks" really did exist. I'd still like to see some documentation of some sort on that. | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/6/2008 10:08:27 PM |
Well, trippy. I have to bow to your greater experience with both arrogance and offence giving.
Ah, bait. Sorry, I am not going to descend into the same pattern you are utilizing here. Nevermind that that statement would be considered flaming, and violate the "address the topic, not other posters" rule. Perhaps my "greater experience" is in a field you have not yet mentioned? Or perhaps you are angry or offended, and determined to rationalize your aggression by trying to tempt me into a name-calling contest? No dice.
Will you now lead by example or be a hypocrite, and stop using the expression "what the HELL" because it offends my sensibilities and the sensibilities of many in the faith group of which I am a part?
Sarcasm. Were the sentiment genuine, I would at least make an effort to refrain from its use when taking part in discussion with you. However, since it is clear that the sentiment is only sarcasm, and thus does not apply, I won't.
Of course you won't.
Indeed, since your word usage indicates sarcasm- which amounts to little more than lying about your sensibilities in an effort to denigrate my statement, I see no reason to cater to you. If you are genuinely offended by the use of the word "hell" as a means to add emphasis as well as incredulity, I am certain you would be capable of making that clear.
See what I mean about your greater experience? You are such a hypocrite.
Note that when you posted that statement, I had not yet replied: in effect, you have directly flamed me without due cause.
However, as of now, I have made my reply- your claim to hypocrisy would only be valid if I consciously refused to apply the same standard of civility to myself as I expect from others. Again, were anyone to sincerely claim my word usage to be offensive- without doing so in a desperate bid to circumvent the point I am making- I would at least make an effort to refrain. Can you do the same?
I am going to allow you the opportunity to reply before making any sort of character judgment against you.
And "several"? Two? Maybe three? Where do you get "several"? Oh, right, "Trippy Math" is in play again. 
Unlike pi, 'Several' is not an exact number. If I say 'several', the only conclusion one can reliably draw is that it is more than one. Given that the very OP (which I had originally made a reply chastising the OP for posting a redundant subject and attention seeking/broadcasting, only to have it deleted) centers around misconceptions of pagan lifestyles- and this would include misconstruing terms associated with or used by pagans- the fact that any poster replies negatively to your claim that you somehow know more about what they find offensive than they do would give credibility to my statement.
In layman's terms: telling someone that you know more about what offends them than they do is ridiculous.
Two Hawks could have said to Jacobus, "I know that in common usage the word 'warlock' means 'male witch', but for many in my circle it has become an offensive term and we prefer just plain 'witch' for both males and females".
He indeed could have: a classic mistake among those claiming to be 'pagan' is the vagueness of the term and the enormous variety of faith systems that fit under that terminology. Howe3ver, let me remind you once more that the topic here is 'common misconceptions': if the use of 'warlock' to define a male witch does not apply in every case, its use is a misconception for the groups that do not use the term. Since nobody claiming to be pagan has come forth to say "warlock is a male witch in my faith"- and more than one has come forth against it- in the context of this thread, it is a misconception, as it is a commonly held view that does not apply.
Instead he makes some authoritative claim and makes Jabous the user of offensive language.
The mistake was that Jacobus used the term without knowing that it can be offensive- much like the epithet "porch monkey" used by Randall in Clerks 2- and Two Hawks responded somewhat aggressively, muck like the african-american couple in the same film. This is a classic example of two slight miscommunications escalating what could have been a simple correction into a conflict. The difference between that exchange and the one you and I are having is that I highly doubt Jacobus consciously used the term in an effort to offend.
Not that I really give a sh!t what some select group want to do to create offences and mess with the English language anyway. And this one in particular has no problem making unsupported claims about Christianity and it's sacred texts and words. If he wants respect for his special words, maybe he should start by giving it to others.
Ah, the irony. I would suggest taking your own advice.
And, trippy darling
Do not call me darling. Regardless of your opinion of me, I am not some uneducated child needing a scolding, and you are far from being in any sort of instructional capacity.
you could have picked better analogies.
I purposely chose the most blatantly obvious and crude analogies possible, to illustrate the extreme polarities to which this scenario can be applied. That, and even the most dense forum user would understand the connection I am illustrating. This serves two purposes: it shows the severity of glibly making comments about a group outside one's own, and it also displays the inappropriateness of not recognizing such as an error.
You always struck me as way more intelligent than the lame examples given.
Then you clearly failed to see the point. The more cruel and obvious the analogy, the easier it is for everyone reading it to understand. Since you displayed a complete and total disregard for the umbrage other posters took towards your claim, I made my analogy flagrantly obvious. It was a deliberate strategy on my part, since you had set a precedent for disregarding subtlety or tact.
But maybe I was wrong.
I would say so- but what you were incorrect about seems to be the bone of contention. I would certainly hope that those reading this thread would know better than to glibly use the term 'warlock', even if you do not see any reason to.
Good day. Moving on:
Oh, if it wasn't clear before, I discontinued the use of the word "warlock" on the first request. There shouldn't be any more debate about it, except perhaps whether "warlocks" really did exist. I'd still like to see some documentation of some sort on that.
Though I am not a pagan, I can appreciate your concern for remaining civil. As a historian, the idea that the Roman Catholic Church sent out 'spies' to infiltrate covens strikes me as absurd on several different levels, as there is a propensity of historical documentation verifying that the Church had far more effective conversion tactics- not all of which were what we today would call reasonable.
However, that is a topic for a different thread- or perhaps more direct correspondence. Again, thank you for your concern for being civil. :)
You're welcome, mrbadkitty. :)
I would say this discussion is bordering on hijacked: though the topic as a whole is rather redundant. There has already been at least one thread dedicated to dispelling misconceptions. | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/6/2008 10:19:49 PM | Two Hawks takes the Talking Stick:
Let me clear something up about that warlock thing. YES! I understand it was used to indicate a male witch. YES! I understand it offends some. NO! it doesn't offend me! I have been called that on several occasions. It doesn't bother me. It comes from those who don't understand its meaning and associate male witches with it. When I brought that up I was just trying to correct Jacobus. He DID NOT offend me with it.
Two Hawks passes the Talking Stick | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/7/2008 2:22:46 AM | Two Hawks takes the Talking Stick:
Msg 31 > Nergal
I hesitate to discuss the Swastika publically because some people can get a little sensitive about it. You and I both know it was not an invention of Nazi Germany, but some think it was because they don't know the history of it. I have been "rapped on" in the past for discussing it publically, so I kind of hold that discussion to a private talk.
Does that make sense?
Two Hawks passes the Talking Stick. | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/7/2008 4:37:57 AM | I am not a pagan! I practice magick, and you reckon Pagans are misunderstood. People don't know what a Pagan IS, or the difference between High and Low magick because they don't bother to learn. Misconception, I'm sure some of them were mis-concieved. Not everybody is into Devil worship or whips an chains but they can't (or won"t) get a real life. LOL but people are generally biased | |
|
Nergal
|
Joined: 4/29/2007
Msg: 35 | |
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/7/2008 8:46:17 AM | Well I checked my bookshelf and found the following ...
CEREMONIAL MAGICK AND SORCERY
By Manly P. Hall
A good instance of this practice is found in the pentagram, or five-pointed star, made of five connected lines. This figure is the time-honored symbol of the magical arts, and signifies the five properties of the Great Magical Agent, the five senses of man, the five elements of nature, the five extremities of the human body. By means of the pentagram within his own soul, man not only may master and govern all creatures inferior to himself, but may demand consideration at the hands of those superior to himself.
The pentagram is used extensively in black magic, but when so used its form always differs in one of three ways: The star may be broken at one point by not permitting the converging lines to touch; it may be inverted by having one point down and two up; or it may be distorted by having the points of varying lengths. When used in black magic, the pentagram is called the "sign of the cloven hoof," or the footprint of the Devil. The star with two points upward is also called the "Goat of Mendes," because the inverted star is the same shape as a goat's head. When the upright star turns and the upper point falls to the bottom, it signifies the fall of the Morning Star.
The Lesser Key of Solomon, has a section on the Pentacle of Solomon. where it differentiates between the Pentacle, as a whole, a Pentagram within a circle, and the actual Pentagram itself.
Henry Cornelius Agrippa references Pentacles as well. He doesnt differentiate but specifies them to be contained within a double circle.
Benjamin Rowe In modern magickal systems, it is customary to associate the elements
with the points of the Pentagram as shown in Figure 1. This set of associations
derives from the Golden Dawn, and was intended to reflect the positions
of the Elemental Tablets within the “Revised” Great Table of the
Enochian magickal system. Had they chosen to use the original version of
the Great Table (as would seem more appropriate, from more recent
research) a substantially different set of associations would result: Earth
would be at the upper right point, Water at the lower right, and Fire at the
lower left
The Greater Key of Solomon, Order of the Pentacles, has a collection of symbols which are contained with double circles, and dont have pentagrams at all.
The actual diagram is a pentagram, as far as I can make out, a pentacle indicates a sigil in effect within a circle, not necessarily containing a pentagram, but probably because they originally did. | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/7/2008 9:03:21 AM | Such condecending by a few who "know".
How can anybody say that being a pagan has to be the way it was 1000 years ago? We are talking about a way of viewing the world and not really about a dogma although many people can't function without one.
I like what wiki says;
Paganism (from Latin paganus, meaning "country dweller, rustic") is a term which, from a Western perspective, has come to connote a broad set of spiritual or cultic practices or beliefs of any folk religion, and of historical and contemporary polytheistic religions in particular.
Nice post Trippy....
Wanna try a really cool "pagan" ritual? Call fire with nothing but 2 sticks.....where the talk and the walk intersect.....
I would put money that more people into BDSM are from Christian backgrounds and there behaviour is more representative of subconciouse guilt....especially the SMer's. | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/7/2008 9:15:24 AM | There are a lot of misconceptions about "pagans", "heathens", "witches" and actually any term really. I agree that hollywood has given us really bad press. Even the other night was watching a show and it portrayed witches as demon worshippers... it really pissed me off.
From what I understand "Pagan" means "country-dweller". In the middle ages it was sort of akin to "hic"... a heathen was someone from the "heath"...also a country-dweller. The people in the cities were fast converting to christianity and the people in the country still followed the old religions...so these terms stuck for describing someone who wasn't a Christian, Jew or Muslim.
Nowadays pagan is used to describe someone who doesn't follow the big three judeo-christian religions, and probably also includes Buddhism and Hinduism as well as North and South American indigenous religions (any shamanistic faiths)...technically. A heathen is one who follows Asatru or similar Nordic faith.
The very first symbols used were the dot, the circle, and the equal armed cross...followed by the spiral and the swastika (a form of spiral + cross) The pentagram and the pentacle came after but have a very long history from Babylon, Egypt and also was used in early christianity. The circle around the pentagram signifies the circle of life, and/or the womb of the goddess. Akin to the ourobos, actually.
A NEO-pagan is one who follows reconstructed earth-based spiritual paths. But as we all know labels are adopted for many reasons ad many people use pagan as a way to distant themselves from organized judeo-christian religion.
A "witch" is one who practices witchcraft...no matter what "religion" they follow...except in the case of traditional witches for whom it is also a religion. Correctly "warlock" means "oathbreaker" and is an insult to a witch. Or anyone, as much as any derogatory statement. The "oathbreaking" comes from the fact that to be in a coven one must make an oath of secrecy and commitment... obviously a spy would have to break these oaths.
A Wizard is one who works with elements... mre alchemy than witchcraft. A Sorcerer/Sorceress one who works with demons or other powerful non-corporeal spirits. I'm not sure but I would think that sorcery is probably walking the line between non-harmful magick and that which is harmful. This would include necromancy, darker forms of houdou and voodoo... santeria and a few others which are much older than neopaganism.
There is a lot of cultural stigma attached to the word witch, coming down from the ages... not just the middle-ages, as there have been many "witches", "oracles", "sorcerer's" and others who have abused their power... these are the one's who are remembered, and not the healers and other community "witches" who used their knowledge for good. In the middle-ages many healers were accused of being "witches" in the "satanic" form because they were feared...life was hard, disease was rampant, and people were looking for scapegoats. Also the church and the accusers could profit from the witchhunts.. they aquired their land and goods after they were executed. There is another reason witches were maligned.. they were the village healers.. and the profession of "physician" was becoming a very lucrative one.. mainly by learned men (sic). The midwives and healers were a threat to them, and being women, and mostly single women, they were easy prey for those who wished to eliminate them. There is also the fact that a single woman was considered wanton(it wasn't very acceptable for a woman to live on her own without the "control" of some man, whether her husband or father or even employer)... and a threat to the marriages of the other people being like "eve", sinful and too weak to deny carnal urges. That's a nutshell rendition of the witchhunts.
People still fear things they don't understand... and "witches" have a power they don't understand. How many fairytales have a bad witch as an antagonist?
Modern pagans do not have the constraints of the judeo-christian sexual moral code... this scares people also. We accept all and consider sex to be a gift of nature, or the goddess. Homosexuality and bisexuality are not condemned in neopaganism...this could be one of the roots of the misconceptions about us. BDSM has a large following in the Goth community(which is another story completely), and although most Goth's are NOT witches (some are pagan, some aren't) the majority of society thinks of ALL witches as goths...I think it's the black and spooky thing... as witches we are supposed to dress like goths I suppose (hahahahahahahahaha) Although I have been to many pagan events and witches are more likely to be hippies than goths. I am Goth... but that has little or nothing to do with my paganism, it's an aesthetic, artistic and literary thing. Most real witches look like anyone else and could rarely be picked out of a crowd. The broad down in Salem doesn't really do us any favours by running around in a cape and goth make-up. (Linda?)
For people's conceptions about pagans to change I think more witches need to come out of the broom closet and be more public... the only one's most people see are those who are "over-the-top", who make the papers with some stupid stunt, or stereotypes in the media. It's gonna take time.. and there are those who just will never see us as anything but evil, sinful, anti-christian satan worshippers,... because they NEED to have somewhere to direct their fear and anger. The freedom of paganism is a threat to their need for a tightly-controlled, proscribed set of moral rules that they also need to apply to everyone to feel safe... and the idea that pagans also practice witchcraft (have unseen power) is terrifying to them. C'est la vie! We learn to live with it... and, for me, I remind myself that I may be the only pagan, the only witch... and even the only goth that some people will ever meet. I try to conduct myself in a way that can't be construed negatively, in public anyway. Each one of us is a poster child for paganism, whether we want to be or not.
Peace, and many blessings! Merry Imbolc, may Brigid light your hearts and homes! (sorry I missed it...I was offline for a bit) | |
|
Nergal
|
Joined: 4/29/2007
Msg: 38 | |
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/7/2008 4:00:44 PM | Good post Raven. I'm still not sure on the Warlock taboo though. I agree with it meaning oathbreaker, and thats given as a reason for its insulting usage. But I am more inclined to think of two other possible reasons. The bulk of pagans are hippies, or alternative lifestylers. So people that generally have an anti-war footing wouldnt like having their male members labelled with such a warlike term. It might be seen as antagonistic towards conventional religions. The other is that its been largely female dominated. Gardner aimed it that way in the first place. Given male members a more aggressive name might have appeared to be putting them in charge. Whereas this way it effectively gives males a traditionally female name.
Had to add a couple though ... sorceror .. one who imposes his will on others, or one who works with fate. | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/7/2008 5:31:40 PM | I've been trying to post my replies for days. I really think this is all very constructive and it's exactly what I wanted to see to a certain degree.
The lack of knowledge the public has about witches, wicca, paganism and the like is astounding and it's all right here in the world wide web, in book stores and in libraries for them to see and read and research. In my opinion there is no excuse for the publics ignorance of the facts. | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/7/2008 7:28:15 PM | Following Gardner's thought.... Wicca and Wiccan is a term adopted from the term "wicce" which means "to bend" as in wicker.. or willow... but in a spiritual or magickal sense. Some have said it could have meant "wise" but I think that is an affectation. A male wiccan is called a "wicca" and a female is called a "wicce". The word "witch" may come from this root but my linguistics are not quite that good, so I couldn't say for sure.
Gerald Gardner, for all intensive purposes, was actually a bit of a womanizer... he DID introduce the modern world to the worship of the Goddess, sure... but in his form of Wicca, the High Priestess must have a High Priest, there was a balance of male and female he was quite vocal about... and he seemed unduly concerned with the sexual aspect of the pagan rituals.(read up on his life...it's interesting) I do not think he would have been as accepting of alternative lifestyles as are modern pagans. As far as I know in Gardnerian Wicca the Great Rite is actually acted out by the High Priest and Priestess.. whereas in Seax Wicca and others (Alexandrian, maybe?) the Great Rite is symbolically performed.. using the Athame and Chalice, and not the bodies of the Priest and Priestess. Obviously in Dianic circles and for solitaries the Great Rite would be done differently. Dianics put more emphasis in invoking the Goddess than in acting out the universal dichotomy of the creative principle. I, personally, do not have a problem with HOW it is done (by consenting adults)... it's the motivations that concern me. Young people could easily be misled by unscrupulous practitioners.
I agree that there is a ton of info out there, but for those whom paganism and witchcraft are on the periphery of their lives I doubt they will go to the trouble of finding it. And there are so many BAD websites, created by baby fluff bunnies... it hurts just to come across them. I sure hope those looking for good info do not come across some of the utter CRAP I have seen on the net. Google "love spell" or "teen witch" some time... good grief.
Peace all | |
|
Nergal
|
Joined: 4/29/2007
Msg: 41 | |
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/7/2008 7:49:12 PM | Excerpt from a True History of Wicca ...
It seemed to be a cold January
afternoon, and Aleister Crowley was having Gerald Gardner over
to tea. It was 1945, and talk of an early end to the war was
in the air. An atmosphere of optimism prevailed in the "free
world" , but the wheezing old magus was having none of it.
"Nobody is interested in magick any more!" Crowley ejaculated.
"My friends on the Continent are dead or in exile, or grown old;
the movement in America is in shambles. I've seen my best
candidates turn against me....Achad, Regardie -- even that
gentleman out in California, what's - his - name, AMORC, the
one that made all the money.."
"O, bosh, Crowley," Gardner waved his hand impatiently, "all
things considered, you've done pretty well for yourself. Why, you've
been called the `wickedest man in the world' and by more than a
few. And you've not, if you'll pardon the impertinence, done
too badly with the ladies."
Crowley coughed, tugged on his pipe reflectively. "You know" he
finally ventured, "it's like I've been trying to tell this
fellow Grant. A restrictive Order is not enough. If I had it
all to do over again, I would've built a religion for the
unwashed masses instead of just a secret society. Why, the
opportunities! The women!"
Gardner smiled. "Precisely. And that is what I have come to
propose to you. Take your BOOK OF THE LAW, your GNOSTIC MASS.
Add a little razzle-dazzle for the country folk. Why I know
these occultists who call themselves `witches'. They dance
around fires naked, get drunk, have a good time. Rosicrucians,
I think. Proper English country squires and dames, mostly; I
think they read a lot of Frazier and Margaret Murray. If I could
persuade you to draw on your long experience and talents, in no
time at all we could invent a popular cult that would have
beautiful ladies clamoring to let us strip them naked, tie them
up and spank their behinds! If, Mr. Crowley, you'll excuse my
explicitness."
For all his infirmity, Aleister Crowley almost sprang to his
feet, a little of the old energy flashing through his loins. "By
George, Gardner, you've got something there, I should think! I
could license you to initiate people into the O.T.O. today, and
you could form the nucleus of such a group!" He paced in
agitation. "Yes, yes," he mused, half to Gardner, half to
himself. "The Book. The Mass. I could write some rituals. An
`ancient book' of magick. A `book of shadows'. Priestesses,
naked girls. Yes. By Jove, yes!"
Gardner was a noted letch and bondage freak so perhaps thats where some of the association comes from, as well as some rituals. | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/7/2008 11:32:31 PM | Two Hawks takes the Talking Stick:
The bulk of pagans are hippies, or alternative lifestylers. So people that generally have an anti-war footing wouldnt like having their male members labelled with such a warlike term
I'm not a member of that "bulk", nor was I ever a hippie and I don't have an alternative lifestyle. Some do....I agree. I lead a pretty straight forward life. I've retired from the 8 to 5 routine, but I work, part time about 29-35 hours a week. I'm also retired Army. I gave Uncle Sam 24 years of my life and retired a Sergeant Major. I would have stayed longer, but they force retirement at age 60. It used to be 62, but they changed that. I asked for a two year extention, but they didn't give it to me. Oh well!
Two Hawks passes the Talking Stick | |
|
Nergal
|
Joined: 4/29/2007
Msg: 43 | |
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/8/2008 3:42:35 AM | | I wasnt aiming it at anyone in particular Two Hawks ... I dont know what the 'official' pagan scene is like in the USA or Canada. Over in the UK we have the Pagan Federation and various Orders of Druids. Most of whom spend their time arguing between themselves. The problem being that they arent filled by the most knowledgable practitioners, they are ruled by what I call committee people. People that naturally form commitees and organise raffles and events and publicity. You get them in all walks of life. The same is true of people writing books, they may not be the most skilled or 'in tune' people, but they can turn a good set of words at a fair rate, and thats what publishers want. A lot of the women involved in these committees have been lesbians, or at least man-hating feminists. And a lot of them have tried to adopt a more rural hippified existence. These are the people that write and produce the magazines, or at least send them 'Our official line on the matter is ... ' statements. And because they have that air of authority its what gets accepted. And it harks back to the 50's and 60's and Gardner and I know witches from that time period, and the attitude of the early Wiccan movement was a more in tune with nature and anti war one. | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/8/2008 9:42:09 AM | Two Hawks takes the Talking Stick:
Nergal:
I know you weren't aiming that at me, or anyone else. You were "generalizing" and that's ok. Sometimes when you aren't exactly sure....you need to do that I've done it on many occasions and for many situations. I posted what I did to make sure no one would think I fell into the categories you listed.
You are also very correct about people "claiming" to be Pagan and not knowing diddley about it. I've encountered those. They want to seem "unique" so they claim to be Pagan. When asked questions about it they draw a blank, or come up with something that doesn't fit.
Thanks for clearing that up.
Two Hawks passes the Talking Stick | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/9/2008 6:57:07 PM | | I think its because the Christians invented Satan, not the "witches"! It was to convince theirselves that their religion was good and everyone else is wrong and going to a hell they created.Most christian's also aren't aware that their holidays are acually pagan ones that the church developed to get the pagans to worship with them...If more would follow their beliefs and love thy brother, the world would be more at peace and all wars would end. Sorry if my words offend anyone. | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/10/2008 1:01:47 AM | Two Hawks takes the Talking Stick:
Mistic one:
Very true. Excellent post. Something a lot of people don't know is....December 25th. was not recognized, or accepted by the Christians as the birth of Christ until the 4th. century. 400 years after the fact. December 25th. is A Pagan Holiday. Winter Solstice. The ending of a year and the rebirth of Mother Earth. I read somewhere that the Romans had a party from December 25th. to January 1st. A week long! Oh to be in Rome then!
Two Hawks passes the Talking Stick. | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/10/2008 6:47:08 PM | Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Well, that would depend the most on the "pagan" in-group itself. Paganism is not afterall a single religion. It is as one person pointed out early on in this thread an umbrella term, that seeks to encompass as many non-Abrahamic beliefs as possible... in keeping with it's original useage by Christians and urban Romans.
Pagan is a latin term that stands in contrast to the Latin term used at the end of the above paragraph... urban. Like the Anglo-Saxon term *heathen*, pagan denotes the country side. Long before the coming of Christianity the term was used in a derogatory sense by urban Romans in reference to the heathdwellers, who prefered to hold on to their ethno-cultural beliefs rather than getting on the band wagon/s of the latest city trends.
As Christianity was a product of urban life, it is at least somewhat fitting that they took up this term and carried it and it's derogatory useage forward. And the most difficult folk to convert, amongst any ethnic group, were those that were furthest removed from the centres of power embodied in royal villas, large villiages and towns, and of course cities.
Getting back to the ill-defined nature of the term pagan; there are in fact as many different forms of paganism as their are ethnic groups. The Anglo-Saxons have theirs, which they shared with the rest of the Germanic speaking peoples of preChristian Europe, and which looked FAR less like modern day Wicca (an Anglo-Saxon term) and more similar to modern day Asatru... though Viking Age Scandinavian belief would be immesnely more accurate. The various Baltic and Slavic peoples had their own forms, as did the Greeks and Romans, the Celts and Hindus, etc., etc.
Of course, these variosu "forms of paganism" do not exist alongside side other in the same way that different forms of Christianity do. They are not merely different interpretations of some kind of "heathen scripture" that sits at the core of their beliefs. They are as different and varied, in all but the most fundamental of ways, as any of the cultures and languages of the modern world.... a difference that is less evident in the outer-trappings of culture, eg. dress, cuisine, etc, and far more evident in the more subtle aspects of culture... thought, perception and expression.
So, to speak of Pagansim like there is only one type, or even a prototype that all others are based on, is like trying to speak of humanity as though we were all the same. We can do that of course, but what we are left with is generally refered to the "lowest common denominator" and there is significantly more, and significantly BETTER, to be said of humanity than *that*.
Incidently, the term warlock is a nasty term and isn't something that a preChristian Anglo-Saxon would have taken well to being called. Breaking faith was one of a few acts that spelt damnation in the Anglo-Nordic view of the afterdeath, and was something that was deemed utterly dispicable by the greater Germanic culture as a whole. The masculine form of the Anglo-Saxon *wicce* (from whence we get the Modern English *witch*) is *wicca*. | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/11/2008 1:12:07 AM | what is a witch?
witch is such a broad word, it can mean many things, depends on where your from and who brought you up.
the label "witch" could have you murdered in one recent era, it could have desperate people coming to you in the hope of you saving the life of a loved one or a couple trying desperately to conceive.
it could have people hiding from you expecting to turn you into a frog, it could have people coming to you to try and rid a ghost from your dwelling.
it could mean your an spiritually empowered modern woman , it could mean years before science that your a doctor.
it could mean your a crabby old lady or someone you turn to for a rain dance in times of drought.
too broad a word,
unfortunately too many people never were given the opportunity learn about religion objectively, it was the christian way in western societies or no other way, it was the Islamic way in arab areas or no other way and thus they have an ingrained almost brainwashed view of all things witch | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/11/2008 6:12:16 AM | Unforunately, the term witch can still get you killed in some cultures. Its unfortunate that natural healers are sent "under-ground" because of this.Most cultures have lost the ability to treat even common complaints because it is veiwed as wrong, you must call a doctor.
Its only been the last 100 yrs,too, that the alchemists and herbalists have started coming back out of their closets and then there are those who still aren`t comfortable because of the memories of burning times. | |
|
| Pagan misconceptions, can we clear them up?
Posted: 2/11/2008 6:15:07 AM | Jmars
FABULOUS post
I think here is the answer to the question about the misconceptions.. the term "pagan" is such a broad term that for someone NOT to have misconceptions would mean they had at least a general knowledge of world religions as a whole. Since it has been a subject of great curiousity for me I have that.. at least a general understanding of the various religious and spiritual concepts of the world... but I would think most people have not looked into it in such depth, if at all. I mean, there are millions who still believe (from trash media) that ALL Muslims are on a Jihad against ALL westerners as a part of their faith, and that's here in the west where information is available almost at one's fingertips about almost anything. Even between neo-pagan polytheism and indigenous shamanism there is a world of difference, though there is some overlap. Then there is the New Agers who may or may not be Christian, yet still practice a fair amount of paganism and shamanism in their daily lives. I can see it being confusing for someone who has grown up in one of the big three, without any other knowledge. It would seem very foreign. very scary.
I can only take myself as an example. I am an eclectic... there are elements from many "religions", "pantheons" and philosophies in my belief system... Woden is one of my very favorite deities, yet I am not an Asatru (though the ethical code from it is one of my faves and one I try to emulate) I also honour the divine feminine, yet I am not a Wiccan... I practice Reiki, work with crystals (my new age influence) and herbal healing (green witchcraft) I believe in reincarnation and the concept of Karma (Hindu influence) and I also do a fair amount of meditation and contemplation on the concept of Maya and the idea of there being only "one" in the universe (Buddhist thought) and I also practice some shamanistic ritual (Celtic Hedge witch/walking and Native American Dreamwalking) AND I incorporate quite a bit of Hermetic/alchemical discipline in my rituals as well and study Rosicrucianism, Gnosticism, Egyptian and Babylonian religion and even Eckankar.This is all on top of the biblical studies I have done...
So.... WHAT do I call myself? And HOW do I explain it to others? I call myself "pagan" out of the need to distance myself from judeo-christian organized religion, fo lack of a better term really... and I find it almost impossible to explain my spiritual path to anyone who doesn't have at least a basic knowledge of paganism. It's far too complex.
As for an "alternative" lifestyle? LOL My life is just NOT that interesting! I live a pretty mundane existance.. I'm more "normal" than I'd like to be.. I work, am raising a child, pay bills... not terribly "alternative" at all. I think it is, like I said earlier, the fact that the loudest, and the most flamboyant get the attention.. most pagans are pretty much everyday people... just slightly more individualistic.. and the masses don't see us because we don't stand out...we aren't performing rituals in public with our "costumes" or makiong the news all that much.. in fact I'm sure a lot of people know pagans, but have no idea that they ARE pagans. There is also the fact that we have to live in the real world and make a living and because of prejudice.... maybe keep that part of our lives quiet in fear of prejudice and losing our jobs/homes/community. It happens, unfortunately.
Great thread | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
