|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 9:39 pm
PrometheanSet You see, there's the difference in mentality - when you take out the exclusivity of a priesthood, it becomes less of a title and more of... well, just a description for their path. Right or wrong, if you try to take it from them, they're going to get defensive. As has been explained Wicca is a preisthood. Wicca is a poor descriptor for an eclectic path. If one wishes to be dishonest with themselves or remain ignorant fine, but its not going to stop people from calling them on it. A lie can only last for so long. PrometheanSet Interesting. Well, if you're that concerned about saving someone from misinformation... Wow way to take things out of context. Prostelyting involves encouraging one to change their beliefs/religion. The misinformation being corrected is that they are calling their belief/religion something that it is not. It would be akin to a correcting someone who is a Mormon but is calling themselves an Eastern Orthodox. PrometheanSet Huh? Could you explain that interpretation so I understand how you came to it? You quote a part of my post about play vs harm, and about just taking abuse, and then say that "anything that doesn't feel good should be avoided". That seems a little awkward to me. Your post didn't make sense to me either. Guess we're in the same boat. Basically I had commented that there is socially acceptable harm and some harm that one has to go through in order to grow spiritually and intellectually. How you posted what you did just made no sense to me either. PrometheanSet Rather, I am relating Wicca with Christianity. Maybe it's just the hour in which you post. It would be more accurate to relate Wicca with Catholic priesthood. I work nights. I'm up and at 'em at this time. It's during the daylight hours when you should really question the coherency of my posts.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 10:09 pm
Pope:
Pope is just a descriptive title for the head of God's Church, historically it was 'Bishop of Rome' for a long time and you can see that in a lot of the early christian writing that the Bishop of Rome was recognized as the head of the Church and it all started with Peter:
Matthew 16:18-20 18 And I say to you: That you are Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. 20 Then he commanded his disciples, that they should tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ.
Peter means Rock and in Koine Greek which was was the dialect spoken at the time and place both of the forms uses (petra and petros) meant the exact same thing. So Jesus essentially changes Simon's name to Peter and any name change like that carries great meaning (such as Abram to Abraham) so it's something that should at the very least be taken note of. Basically Jesus is telling him that you are the rock and on this rock I will build my Church. Right there is where he set the foundation for something that the gates of hell would not prevail against.
John 1:42 42 He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas” (which means Peter [9]).
Here you have the Aramaic which is even more clear you get either kepha or cephas depending on who's translating which in turn translates into petra.
I wonder why those who take the dissenting opinion on this do not recognize the gravity of the situation of the name change. With Abraham for example no one doubts his role when it is clearly laid out before him:
Genesis 17: 4-5 4 “Behold, my covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. 5 No longer shall your name be called Abram, [2] but your name shall be Abraham, [3] for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations.
a.) We have Abram who is now Abraham because he was made father of a multitude of nations.
b.) We have Simon who is now Peter because upon Peter Jesus is building his Church and for what purpose? How could the people be led correctly without his followers there spreading the word as it was meant to be understood according to God.
It's the only thing that makes any sense at all especially since the bible wasn't compiled until some 300 years later more or less.
Priests & confession:
Heb. 5:1-4 5:1 For every high priest chosen from among men is appointed to act on behalf of men in relation to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. 2 He can deal gently with the ignorant and wayward, since he himself is beset with weakness. 3 Because of this he is obligated to offer sacrifice for his own sins just as he does for those of the people. 4 And no one takes this honor for himself, but only when called by God, just as Aaron was.
Matt. 18:17-18 17 And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to you as the heathen and publican. 18 Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.
John 20:21-23 21 Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.” 22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld.”
In the last two sets of passages from Matthew and John, Jesus is speaking to his disciples. I know it's important to read all of these in context so I definitely encourage you to go back through your bible and look through it. I think I'm done for now, let me know if you have any questions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 10:13 pm
rmcdra It would be more accurate to relate Wicca with Catholic priesthood. ugh. Don't do that gonk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 10:53 pm
Semiremis rmcdra It would be more accurate to relate Wicca with Catholic priesthood. ugh. Don't do that gonk I mean that they are both part of a larger super-group descriptor and they both have specific requirements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 11:26 pm
rmcdra PrometheanSet You see, there's the difference in mentality - when you take out the exclusivity of a priesthood, it becomes less of a title and more of... well, just a description for their path. Right or wrong, if you try to take it from them, they're going to get defensive. As has been explained Wicca is a preisthood. Wicca is a poor descriptor for an eclectic path. If one wishes to be dishonest with themselves or remain ignorant fine, but its not going to stop people from calling them on it. A lie can only last for so long. PrometheanSet Interesting. Well, if you're that concerned about saving someone from misinformation... Wow way to take things out of context. Prostelyting involves encouraging one to change their beliefs/religion. The misinformation being corrected is that they are calling their belief/religion something that it is not. It would be akin to a correcting someone who is a Mormon but is calling themselves an Eastern Orthodox. PrometheanSet Huh? Could you explain that interpretation so I understand how you came to it? You quote a part of my post about play vs harm, and about just taking abuse, and then say that "anything that doesn't feel good should be avoided". That seems a little awkward to me. Your post didn't make sense to me either. Guess we're in the same boat. Basically I had commented that there is socially acceptable harm and some harm that one has to go through in order to grow spiritually and intellectually. How you posted what you did just made no sense to me either. PrometheanSet Rather, I am relating Wicca with Christianity. Maybe it's just the hour in which you post. It would be more accurate to relate Wicca with Catholic priesthood. I work nights. I'm up and at 'em at this time. It's during the daylight hours when you should really question the coherency of my posts. And you know what? The religion is evolving, or something else is evolving to call itself the same thing, similar to Mormons as Christians. They're rarely calling themselves Gardnerian without a lineage. As for correcting the labels - once again, you're neglecting the inciting incident. Are you of the Gael, or in some other way have a stated religious obligation to call someone out on this? If it is a lie, and thus will die by the hands of truth, why not let the Gardnerians put it to rest? As per the harm issue - I don't believe that we're the ones to decide what harm is and is not acceptable. In some cultures, causing shame to someone is the worst thing you can do. No, this isn't just Japan or Scandinavian Satanists, but even subcultures within the US. Since you don't know where someone is from, you will have a hard time determining what harm is and is not acceptable from their perspective. From this angle, unless you want to get to know them *really* well, as you told your PFRC Christian, it is inadvisable to try to tell someone what to call themselves, be it about Wicca or Celtic anything. Have we not established that, psychologically, the label is the same as the religion to many? Or do I need to go into my textbooks for another dive?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 2:17 am
PrometheanSet And you know what? The religion is evolving, or something else is evolving to call itself the same thing, similar to Mormons as Christians. They're rarely calling themselves Gardnerian without a lineage. Yes religions change over time. But the thing that is claiming to be Wicca does not have access to the core that makes a religion Wicca. Mormons on the other hand have access to the core of Christianity and the theology upholds the Law of Agape. Though I don't agree with some of their interpretations on how they uphold it, I can still call them Christian because that love is at the very foundation of their theology. The thing claiming to be Wicca I can still call NeoPagan but I cannot call Wicca because it does not have the core, which is oathbound and includes lineaged initiation. Quote: As for correcting the labels - once again, you're neglecting the inciting incident. Are you of the Gael, or in some other way have a stated religious obligation to call someone out on this? If it is a lie, and thus will die by the hands of truth, why not let the Gardnerians put it to rest? My status as a Gael or not has no place in this discussion. If someone makes a claim why can I not question it? You are making out as if asking questions is wrong. Quote: As per the harm issue - I don't believe that we're the ones to decide what harm is and is not acceptable. In some cultures, causing shame to someone is the worst thing you can do. No, this isn't just Japan or Scandinavian Satanists, but even subcultures within the US. Since you don't know where someone is from, you will have a hard time determining what harm is and is not acceptable from their perspective. From this angle, unless you want to get to know them *really* well, as you told your PFRC Christian, it is inadvisable to try to tell someone what to call themselves, be it about Wicca or Celtic anything. If one is claiming to be something they are not, am I the one bringing shame by questioning them or do they bring shame to themselves by their arrogance? Also from what I know of Celtic culture, it is very dishonorable to complain about being challenged. Quote: Have we not established that, psychologically, the label is the same as the religion to many? Or do I need to go into my textbooks for another dive? No you haven't. All I've seen so far in this discussion is that you are trying to justify self-entitlement by claiming that questioning one's self-entitlement is psychologically damaging. If I am mistaken please correct me in this assessment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 8:40 am
rmcdra Semiremis rmcdra It would be more accurate to relate Wicca with Catholic priesthood. ugh. Don't do that gonk I mean that they are both part of a larger super-group descriptor and they both have specific requirements. So you're saying that protestant denominations that have gone off and done their own thing would be more equivalent to those Wiccans who call themselves Wiccans but are not apart of the originally recognized tradition which has certain precepts that need to be observed in order to gain membership?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 9:04 am
Semiremis rmcdra Semiremis rmcdra It would be more accurate to relate Wicca with Catholic priesthood. ugh. Don't do that gonk I mean that they are both part of a larger super-group descriptor and they both have specific requirements. So you're saying that protestant denominations that have gone off and done their own thing would be more equivalent to those Wiccans who call themselves Wiccans but are not apart of the originally recognized tradition which has certain precepts that need to be observed in order to gain membership? It would be more like if a Hellenistic eclectic group when around teach whatever and calling themselves Roman Catholic, and saying they are teaching what the Roman Catholics have been teaching.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 2:35 pm
Semiremis rmcdra It would be more accurate to relate Wicca with Catholic priesthood. ugh. Don't do that gonk I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Why not? Wicca itself is a priesthood. When Wiccans are initated they are declared Prests/Priestesses. Both sides have to work hard, and study study study in order to become Priests, correct? Catholics have their initations of sorts to become priests as do Wiccan priests. So the comparison is more accurate than a Protestant.. I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:13 pm
rmcdra PrometheanSet And you know what? The religion is evolving, or something else is evolving to call itself the same thing, similar to Mormons as Christians. They're rarely calling themselves Gardnerian without a lineage. Yes religions change over time. But the thing that is claiming to be Wicca does not have access to the core that makes a religion Wicca. Mormons on the other hand have access to the core of Christianity and the theology upholds the Law of Agape. Though I don't agree with some of their interpretations on how they uphold it, I can still call them Christian because that love is at the very foundation of their theology. The thing claiming to be Wicca I can still call NeoPagan but I cannot call Wicca because it does not have the core, which is oathbound and includes lineaged initiation. So... What about those crazy Lutherans who deny the trinity, a central part of Catholic dogma? Was that not Christian when it split off? If this is the case, when did it become Christian? Quote: Quote: As for correcting the labels - once again, you're neglecting the inciting incident. Are you of the Gael, or in some other way have a stated religious obligation to call someone out on this? If it is a lie, and thus will die by the hands of truth, why not let the Gardnerians put it to rest? My status as a Gael or not has no place in this discussion. If someone makes a claim why can I not question it? You are making out as if asking questions is wrong. Depending on the time and place, confronting someone with questions *is* wrong. The individual in question replied to a thread in which his status as a Gael had little to do with the topic. I'm personally willing to make an exception for those who have a legitimate theological obligation, but not those on a "Crusade against the fluff". Give those you consider "fluffy" the resources to find this all out for themselves, and if they're going to change by any method, they'll change by a diplomatic implementation of this approach. What's so wrong with that? Quote: As per the harm issue - I don't believe that we're the ones to decide what harm is and is not acceptable. In some cultures, causing shame to someone is the worst thing you can do. No, this isn't just Japan or Scandinavian Satanists, but even subcultures within the US. Since you don't know where someone is from, you will have a hard time determining what harm is and is not acceptable from their perspective. From this angle, unless you want to get to know them *really* well, as you told your PFRC Christian, it is inadvisable to try to tell someone what to call themselves, be it about Wicca or Celtic anything. If one is claiming to be something they are not, am I the one bringing shame by questioning them or do they bring shame to themselves by their arrogance? Also from what I know of Celtic culture, it is very dishonorable to complain about being challenged.This depends on *several* things. Is the shame an emotion? Then yes, such a practices as you wish to partake in does provoke the same. Are we looking at the social aspect, where the group views another with shame? Well, that depends on the community, and whether or not they know about these things already. And if they did, they would most assuredly let them know themselves. (Pssst! xyz bro!) Otherwise... you would still be the one to bring the instrument of their shame. And plenty of those cultures view that as a shameful act on your behalf. Quote: Have we not established that, psychologically, the label is the same as the religion to many? Or do I need to go into my textbooks for another dive? No you haven't. All I've seen so far in this discussion is that you are trying to justify self-entitlement by claiming that questioning one's self-entitlement is psychologically damaging. If I am mistaken please correct me in this assessment. I've got a meeting to get to. I'll hit the books when I get back. You'll have your answer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:46 pm
xLady Tsukiyox Semiremis rmcdra It would be more accurate to relate Wicca with Catholic priesthood. ugh. Don't do that gonk I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Why not? Wicca itself is a priesthood. When Wiccans are initated they are declared Prests/Priestesses. Both sides have to work hard, and study study study in order to become Priests, correct? Catholics have their initations of sorts to become priests as do Wiccan priests. So the comparison is more accurate than a Protestant.. I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan Wicca would be more comparable to the Mormon Church in Christianity. Something that's already bastardizing something else, a new group claiming to be something greater and to come from something more then what it is. Wicca in itself is dishonest in it's own organization. Best start there with correction before moving on to its offshoots and they are offshoots.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 10:50 pm
PrometheanSet So... What about those crazy Lutherans who deny the trinity, a central part of Catholic dogma? Was that not Christian when it split off? If this is the case, when did it become Christian? Mormon's version of the trinity hints at polytheism and you are worried about the Lutherans? Lutherans have an easier time being recognized as Christians than Mormons do. Quote: Again Depending on the time and place, confronting someone with questions *is* wrong. The individual in question replied to a thread in which his status as a Gael had little to do with the topic. I'm personally willing to make an exception for those who have a legitimate theological obligation, but not those on a "Crusade against the fluff". Give those you consider "fluffy" the resources to find this all out for themselves, and if they're going to change by any method, they'll change by a diplomatic implementation of this approach. What's so wrong with that? Actually he did not reply to my question at all. Before any answer was given you began accusing me of proselytizing because I asked a question leading to why he wished to call himself a Druid. This was relevant to growing up as pagan because it deals with how and why someone identifies themselves. Quote: This depends on *several* things. Is the shame an emotion? Then yes, such a practices as you wish to partake in does provoke the same. Are we looking at the social aspect, where the group views another with shame? Well, that depends on the community, and whether or not they know about these things already. And if they did, they would most assuredly let them know themselves. (Pssst! xyz bro!) Otherwise... you would still be the one to bring the instrument of their shame. And plenty of those cultures view that as a shameful act on your behalf. So personal responsibilities for one's own actions just go right out the window there? I am the instrument of shame because I chose to question someone's claim and they could not answer my question? I remember that it's bad to ask questions because I might bring shame if they can't answer my questions. Quote: I've got a meeting to get to. I'll hit the books when I get back. You'll have your answer. Have a good time at your meeting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 7:45 am
Semiremis xLady Tsukiyox Semiremis rmcdra It would be more accurate to relate Wicca with Catholic priesthood. ugh. Don't do that gonk I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Why not? Wicca itself is a priesthood. When Wiccans are initated they are declared Prests/Priestesses. Both sides have to work hard, and study study study in order to become Priests, correct? Catholics have their initations of sorts to become priests as do Wiccan priests. So the comparison is more accurate than a Protestant.. I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan Wicca would be more comparable to the Mormon Church in Christianity. Something that's already bastardizing something else, a new group claiming to be something greater and to come from something more then what it is. Wicca in itself is dishonest in it's own organization. Best start there with correction before moving on to its offshoots and they are offshoots. I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Um actually it's not like the Mormon Church. To be a Catholic priest you do have certain things to do before you can be declared a priest, no? Wicca is not a congregation but a clergy first and for most. When you are initated you are declared Priest/Priestess and a Witch. How is that dishonest? How is claiming to be a Priest after working your arse being dishonest? I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 11:26 am
xLady Tsukiyox Semiremis xLady Tsukiyox Semiremis rmcdra It would be more accurate to relate Wicca with Catholic priesthood. ugh. Don't do that gonk I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Why not? Wicca itself is a priesthood. When Wiccans are initated they are declared Prests/Priestesses. Both sides have to work hard, and study study study in order to become Priests, correct? Catholics have their initations of sorts to become priests as do Wiccan priests. So the comparison is more accurate than a Protestant.. I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan Wicca would be more comparable to the Mormon Church in Christianity. Something that's already bastardizing something else, a new group claiming to be something greater and to come from something more then what it is. Wicca in itself is dishonest in it's own organization. Best start there with correction before moving on to its offshoots and they are offshoots. I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Um actually it's not like the Mormon Church. To be a Catholic priest you do have certain things to do before you can be declared a priest, no? Wicca is not a congregation but a clergy first and for most. When you are initated you are declared Priest/Priestess and a Witch. How is that dishonest? How is claiming to be a Priest after working your arse being dishonest? I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan How much do you know about Mormonism? They're very structured and they're a new religion although they have over 50 years on Wicca. So if you want to compare Wicca to Christianity they're a much better bet and they also have that element of secrecy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 10:26 pm
@Semiremis
uh you really seem to be missing the point of the analogy.
Christianity:Catholic::Neo-Pagan:Wicca.
Both are sects of a larger subset. We are in no way saying that Catholicism is pagan. The reason I chose catholicism is because Holy Orders, is like Initiation into Wicca. They are both orthopraxic rituals that inducts one into the priesthood of the respective religion. It should go without saying but I'm sure someone here will go wild if I don't, but Initiation and Holy Orders are two distinct rituals, with distinct meanings within their respective religions.
If we were to use Catholicism to illustrate the issue of Wicca and these eclectic neo-pagan religions calling themselves Wicca. It would like if we had some group teaching that Jesus is the same as Horus is the same as Dionysus is the same as Hercules and they call themselves Roman Catholic priests and claim that Roman Catholics can believe and do whatever the want to as long as they remember that Jesus is all Gods and they don't harm anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
