Path: shell.portal.com!svc.portal.com!uunet!news.sprintlink.net!tezcat.com!tezcat.com!not-for-mail From: wednsday@tezcat.com (Wednesday) Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.fan.wednesday Subject: Vorpal Christ and Non/Reality Date: 19 May 1995 04:52:42 -0500 Organization: The Underground Revolution Working Overtime Lines: 79 Message-ID: <3phppa$d3a@huitzilo.tezcat.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: huitzilo.tezcat.com Xref: shell.portal.com alt.magick.tyagi:3067 alt.fan.wednesday:568 ~From: wednsday@tezcat.com (Wednesday) ~Newsgroups: alt.religion.apathy,alt.pagan ~Subject: Re: Vorpal Christ And Non/Reality ~Date: 19 May 1995 04:43:56 -0500 Organization: The Underground Revolution Working Overtime Message-ID: <3php8s$d0r@huitzilo.tezcat.com> In article <3ph2va$q8u@sundog.tiac.net>, Gwendoly Piper wrote: > >Qusetion, isn't appropriating Wiccan ceremonial practices to worship >Jesus equivalent to Westerners appropriating Naticve American practices >in the name of pursuing a Western idea of "Enlightenment?" I don't think so, particularly. As it stands, traditional Christianity has already adopted aspects of pagan (!neo-pagan) religious practices; seasonal festivals, for example, along with some of the traditions observed in saidsame festivals (e.g. painting eggs and decorating trees). If one takes into account that Wicca, as we understand it, is very likely an invention of the modern era, it may very well be that both religions have appropriated something somewhere along the way; if this is the case, then taking the next step of fusing the two splinter 'factions' is no worse than the original splits. Neither religion can claim to be wholly unique, insofar as cere- monial observation is concerned, or utterly differentiated from one another. This is -not- the case with Native American spirituality. (For the record, aspects of my faith are also drawn from Mi'kmaq traditionalism; I am part Mi'kmaq). While I would certainly not object to a Westerner's efforts to embrace and better understand -that given paradigm-, what we're talking about here is two very separate and distinct worldviews that don't merge very easily, if at all. >And don't the *Natives* have the right to protest that, before their >cultural symbols become meaningless? The Natives do, in fact, have the right to protest. However, thanks to that wonderful thing called "freedom of religion," those seeking to utilize aspects of aboriginal North American traditions and practices also have a right to use what they use. I posit that Wicca lacks any significant cultural symbols that are 100% unique to itself. In fact, I cannot think of a single one that has not crossed paths with at least one other religious belief somewhere down the line. The *synthesis* may have created something unique. But, to my mind, Wicca holds -nothing- that does not owe something to something else. To a large extent, I suppose this could be said of just about any religion. Or occult practice. Or whatever. "There is nothing new under the sun." Therefore, I see little point in attempting to section off anything as 'untouchable' -- though the effectiveness of the touching may vary from person to person. >So why don't Pagans who happen to be White, Northern Europeans? As I have said, the right to protest is there. One has the right to respond, to rail, to wail, to wheedle, to whinge and to just plain cry out. This does not stop me from taking what I have found to be a very effective *and harmonious* framework, assimilating my forever- evolving relationship with God into this thing, and setting the stage for having all of it blown away in the face of something that defies definition. > >To us, Christianity is the religion of the invaders, >who tried to *obliterate* our ways, and now want to *appropriate* them.... To some; not to all. As far as I am concerned, the acts of the various and sundry peoples who killed, maimed, burned, tortured, and just generally played God (if you'll pardon the term) with all that was not of them, were not committed by me. I expect that our mutual understandings of what constituted Christianity would be radically different. A religious structure is -not- something one can own like property. http://www.tezcat.com/~wednsday/ - - - - - - - w e d n e s d a y @tezcat.com