|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 4:56 pm
Hello!
I thought I'd see if I could give a topic for this place to talk about....even if it might die in a day or so here (and I may have just jinxed).
I currently find myself locked in a required religions class, one that is supposed to give an overview of the major religions of the world (and I do not mean just the three Abraham-ic ones, even if this is a religiously affiliated private college) in some attempt to make those of us here that pass through a little less ignorant of what's out there. Enough background there.
So in the reading today of one of the required books I started and figured it was the full chapter like all the rest. Not quite. Now this chapter was about social formations/transformations of religions. All fine, it brought up Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism and Christianity at least once before it hit the final part, the New Age Religious movements. Guy talks about there being to many to cover and picks two. Scientology and Wicca.
Now the big thing that I'm (long windedly) leading up to isn't the content. I find the guy biased in everything so far. Thing was that this book was recently revised to have New Age ideas and Neo Paganism and other reforms and changes in the original focus of the book. Yet my teacher cuts out two pages of this chapter. The two on Wicca. Yep, keeps Scientology but not Wicca. Skip half the portion, why not all of it? Considering the entire idea of this class, isn't that almost strange? It does to me in a sense (a tiny tiny little thing). In fact the entire course seems to be planned to smoothly gloss over the entire Neo Pagan Umbrella.
So if you're gonna bother to have a Religions class that wants to combat just a little of the ignorance most of us are going in to with and are going to have a book that specifically mentions Wicca with all the rest, why would you ignore it? Or is that just how religions classes go? Share some experiences if you have 'em, help puzzle this out...or you can yell at me for posting something stupid. Thought I'd see if this could inspire a little talking/bafflement/laughs, what have you.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:07 pm
This is becoming an increasing problem with "the need to be on top".
I looked up this website CARM. They are even rejecting other Christian branches. I'm not sure who CARM is, but I know it is definately a strain on Coexisting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
witchunterobin Vice Captain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 8:12 am
That'll happen a lot. It depends on who your teacher is. Some are completely ok with teaching on the subject of wicca, some aren't. It sucks, but it's life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:11 am
Wow, even in my religions class in college, my professor managed to not only admit Paganism as a valid religion, but it being a pre-cursor to the Big Three (which was what the class was focused around) and its revival being a good thing (and he was a pastor!). I know history teachers, however, that seems to look over the fact that religion had anything to do with developing ancient and early cultures. Heck, I've heard ancient Rome taught without even a mention of temples!
I know its a bit out there, but I follow the idea that the Big three took so long to cement themselves, that its going to take them a while to calm down. Not only that, take a look around at who is representing the different branches of Paganism these days. Granted, we're making leaps and bounds as far as being recognized goes, but a hulking mass of our population are fair-weather Pagans. Even more, sadly, come off as total whack jobs to those that don't or wont understand (I'll admit, the first time I was approached by someone dressed in full garb, who followed the Norse gods, I was really apprehensive). Not that we should change, or that they -completely- have to accept us (it would be nice, as we generally accept them...). It's just hard to come to a middle point where a god-squad girl and a hardcore goth dripping with pentacles try to make decent religious conversation. Honestly, coming from a family thats pretty "neat and clean" (to the point of sheer obnoxiousness), anyone whos different (including myself) scares the daylights out of them. Heck, I wear dark makeup and my opinions automatically don't count.
It isn't fair, but its the product of so many years of hard wiring. Not everyone got to be a flower child in the sixties. Not everyone fell in with the New Age crowd back in the 80's, and truthfully, not all of them are old. Not only that, it's religion we're talking about. It is something profoundly mystical and almost completely faith-based, and somewhat hard to look at from a professional point of view by many. The Big Three have the benefit of being the "norm" for the past 2000 years (give or take, depending on who you're following). I'm not surprised classes completely throw out the idea that Paganism is a serious religion. There are still too many points against it, in the publics eye, which sucks.
My advice, stick to your guns. If you can make the point that Paganism is not only valid, but valid to a growing chunk of the population in a polite and professional manner, do it. Back up your sources, and know your points before presenting them. Knowledge is power, and understanding helps it flourish smile
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:34 pm
I never really went to college, so I don't really know what to say to this.
I do know that around here, in the nearby community college and in UMASS Dartmouth, there are Pagan clubs and Pagan classes. One former CUUPS member had taught the Pagan class at one of the colleges around here - some of her students came to CUUPS, but most of them don't come anymore.
It is sad that there are still people out there who automatically think, "Wicca/Paganism = Satanism", and they would probably be all up-in-arms with whatever college (depends where it is) teaching about it. It could be that a college had gotten complaints about teaching it. Or they wanted to drop it just to be safe. I'm not really sure, just throwing out some half-philosophies here.
If there are any Pagans at your college, and, if by some chance, a Pagan club or something, try to join them, or at least learn from them in some way, though be careful of who you choose to learn off of.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 2:09 pm
Delequen That'll happen a lot. It depends on who your teacher is. Some are completely ok with teaching on the subject of wicca, some aren't. It sucks, but it's life. Yea, I imagine though his demeanor would have made me think different. Maybe I'm just reading his personality wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 2:24 pm
Witchhunter: The 'need to be on top'?
Meri: That's really cool honestly (the class). I'm just trying to understand the concept. Its even harder to get considering a paper given to use that specifically mentioned polytheism (which I imagine maybe the closer that we'll come now based on the course outline), Sadly this isn't much a debate class, its a required Gen Ed class so I don't think I'll be backing up my position even if I could summon up the guts.
Neri: It didn't have to be a college class, just if you'd been in something that could even be called a religions class that wasn't real specific. I dunno I've heard of World Religions classes in high schools but maybe I was misunderstanding. My high school was too small for that to have enough interest.
The college is Evangelical Lutheran based (it was the campus that captured my heart) so I don't see much chance of Pagan like classes unless their out of the classics department. Still good but I don't think its what you meant. Clubs are even more out of the question, though I'll keep an eye out for something that might be flying a bit under the radar.
Dropping it to be safe or complaints would make a lot of sense. Enough complaints and there goes their funding real fast since its private. I frankly hadn't thought of that.
I'm kinda glad this sparked a little talking, really it was just supposed to do that, don't need to find the answer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 11:26 pm
Ryu Dassohei Witchhunter: The 'need to be on top'? It is a thing a lot of religions try to do. They have a need to be the top dog or the group the biggest following. I find that some Christian branches, some Islamic branches, and a few other branches from other relgions do this kind of thing the most. [?]
|
|
|
|
|
|
witchunterobin Vice Captain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:43 pm
witchunterobin Ryu Dassohei Witchhunter: The 'need to be on top'? It is a thing a lot of religions try to do. They have a need to be the top dog or the group the biggest following. I find that some Christian branches, some Islamic branches, and a few other branches from other relgions do this kind of thing the most. [?] Ahhh, I see. I didn't quite get what you meant for some reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
