|
Synonymous posted:Is Heathenry considered Christian at all? No
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 16:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
I do not like pagans very much, to be honest.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
Ceciltron posted:I do not like pagans very much, to be honest. and we owe our intellectual ancestry to the greeks
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:e2: I realize my equating church with social interaction is likely extremely Midwestern. Or Protestant? The one thing I miss about Presbyterian-land is that my parish isn't very social. We have cradle Catholics coming to RCIA sessions just to hang out because that's really all there is to do in the parish (our new bishop is also apparently going to put an end to that for some reason) aside from when the Charismatic Catholics meet on Thursday evenings to dance with snakes or prophesy or whatever it is that they do. There's no Bible studies or adult faith formation classes or prayer breakfasts or anything I'm used to from Protestant churches.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
I go to two separate Catholic churches and they're both pretty social but one cheats by being a university parish (Autocorrect wanted to make that 'socialist' but that's unfortunately not true enough)
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
Synonymous posted:Is Heathenry considered Christian at all? How did you find this faith? Tias' faith is called “Asatru“ iirc and is decidedly not Christian, he just posts here because he's cool and likes to hang out with us, I guess 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
Well I finally went to church today. I somehow managed to avoid making a complete rear end of myself and about 80 minutes into coffee hour was even able to interact with people. Was also happy that one of the hymns was Amazing Grace, so I was able sing at least one of them without having to try to sight read.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
Synonymous posted:Is Heathenry considered Christian at all? How did you find this faith? I am not a christian per se, no. I do however feel a kinship with your God, and pray to him on occasion. Many indigenous people throughout history, including the pagan iron age Danes, were both heathen and christian, so I don't really feel that it's as controversial as most purely christians do. System Metternich posted:Tias' faith is called “Asatru“ iirc and is decidedly not Christian, he just posts here because he's cool and likes to hang out with us, I guess Aw, you  "Asatru" means "belief in the aesir", which most heathens find lacking, since we also believe in the Vanir, a group of gods of equal( and sometimes greater) status to the aesir. For instance, Odin and Thor are Æsir, Freja and Njord are Vanir - and we also believe in other quasi-divine elements such as little people, spirits of the forest etc.Some like "Forn Sidr" (lit. 'the Faith of Old') or "Asa- og Vanetro", I personally like the sound of heathenry. Ceciltron posted:I do not like pagans very much, to be honest. Can I ask why? Tias fucked around with this message at 21:28 on Aug 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
Rainbow Pharaoh posted:Well I finally went to church today. I somehow managed to avoid making a complete rear end of myself and about 80 minutes into coffee hour was even able to interact with people. Was also happy that one of the hymns was Amazing Grace, so I was able sing at least one of them without having to try to sight read. Baby steps. Hang in there. Each time you go will be easier than the previous one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 21:26
|
|
|
I went to the catholic church Nice guys, get to talk to a priest later. I took some holy water and splashed it on my face and it burned. I got really scared that I was possessed or something but then I got back to my car and noticed that my face was sunburnt. So I am NOT possessed
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 05:50
|
|
|
Sounds like you possessed a lack of pigment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 07:44
|
|
|
Just found this wonderful tidbit in an article about how the fear of jaguars figured into the proselytisation (this loving word, I swear) efforts of Jesuit missionaries in early modern South America:quote:Yet lack of concrete information about animals in the distant past makes it difficult to move beyond the sphere of religious symbolism. For instance, in his landmark 1993 article “Santiago’s Horse: Christianity and Colonial Indian Resistance in the Heartland of New Spain,” historian William Taylor invokes horses to demonstrate how in Mexico, animals were once seen as “agents of greater forces working upon human destiny.” Taylor describes how this belief led some Catholic Indians to privilege the horse of St. James (Santiago) over the saint himself well into the eighteenth century, when sometimes they represented the horse without its saintly rider in ritual dances. Now I'm imagining an exasperated Jesuit lamenting that they've lost another saint to that drat horse
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 10:12
|
|
|
I went to high Mass at St. John Cantius in Chicago yesterday and honestly it was one of the finest liturgies I've ever seen. The parish itself is just outside of downtown in Chicago, and it's absolutely gorgeous inside: look up photos. I think the best part of the whole thing for me was that the parish has been around and doing fancy liturgies for long enough that the crowd in attendance is...normal people who like nice liturgy. I'm sure there were weirdo trads there, but they were sufficiently dispersed within a normal population that I didn't feel like I had to run out the door. Makes me really glad that it's only a 20 minute walk from my parents' current place.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 15:40
|
|
|
So what's the deal with that? Why is high liturgy associated with conservative politics in this country
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 16:23
|
|
|
System Metternich posted:Just found this wonderful tidbit in an article about how the fear of jaguars figured into the proselytisation (this loving word, I swear) efforts of Jesuit missionaries in early modern South America: Never mind the horse, I want to know more about the jaguars Also generally people who romanticize old fancy rituals also have conservative political opinions. The opposite seems to be true in some Muslim countries, where the religious conservatives are strongly opposed to fancy poo poo. Now that I think about it, maybe hardline protestants of some denominations are also anti ritual?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 16:33
|
|
|
pidan posted:Now that I think about it, maybe hardline protestants of some denominations are also anti ritual? Some certainly are, Baptists and related Evangelical denominations tend to be very strongly anti-ritual even if they're not hardline or fundamentalist - I consider myself basically Evangelical and strongly anti-ritual but I consider fundamentalism a perversion and am very socially and theologically liberal. I've detailed this in the past and can again, and some Evangelicals are of course extremely conservative.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
Smoking Crow posted:So what's the deal with that? Why is high liturgy associated with conservative politics in this country It's weird bc while I grew up in a high liturgy conservative parish, I don't think I know a single leftist Catholic that's not into high liturgy
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 16:56
|
|
|
pidan posted:Never mind the horse, I want to know more about the jaguars The article turned out to be pretty so-so; it mentioned one interesting incident in mid-17th century Paraguay where a pack of roving jaguars (or, as the Jesuits were calling them, "tigers") beset a native village: quote:“Heaven overcame their savagery by means of tigers,” the Jesuit Antonio Ruiz de Montoya wrote of the nearly six thousand Guaraní converts to Christianity at the reduction of Santo Tomé, in the colonial province of Paraguay in the mid-1600s. “[The tigers] ranged in packs through the clearings, farms and forests, killing many people, mainly pagans who rebelliously avoided the Fathers . . . As a result all the pagans started coming into the reduction, and this affliction was ended by a novena of sung Masses.” But else the most interesting thing I gleaned from it was that jaguar attacks were apparently way more plentiful back then than they are now, at least if the missionary accounts are to be believed. In at least one instance the natives even made it a point to receive confession and attend Mass before venturing into the jungle because the risk of not coming back was so high, which reminded me of an article I once read about a village in Bangladesh where one of the main jobs is gathering wild honey from the surrounding jungles, but as the tigers in that area are super aggressive, the villagers always make sure to make offerings to their local tiger goddess before setting off. Re: an appreciation of high liturgy correlating with conservative politics: at least in the RCC (and probably the Anglican and Lutheran churches too, I guess), the current mainstream is that of a more or less simplified liturgy; emphasising liturgy and ritual therefore can serve as an outward indicator of rebelling against said mainstream (which would also explain the prevalence of Catholic leftism <-> high liturgy that I'm observing too). In the RCC there's also the added element of the Second Vatican Council opening the Church towards modernity, i.e. by officially acknowledging freedom of religion as a good thing and lessening ecclesiastical control over its members. Catholics with a reactionary bent have to reject the Council almost out of necessity as well as the liturgical reforms that went on with it. And finally liturgy and Catholic worship are inextricably tied together; if you "tamper" with one, you also tamper with the other. I guess that many conservative Catholics of the time were worried that if millennia old liturgical practices could simply be abolished, then what stopped the reformers from doing the same to core doctrines and the like? They probably passed this attitude of "old liturgy = old doctrine = God's will" then on to their ideological descendants.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
There have been big cats with triple digit kill counts, so I totally believe it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
Tias posted:I am not a christian per se, no. I do however feel a kinship with your God, and pray to him on occasion. Many indigenous people throughout history, including the pagan iron age Danes, were both heathen and christian, so I don't really feel that it's as controversial as most purely christians do. In college, I had to deal with a lot of Wiccans and Neo-Pagans, and it rubbed me the wrong way to be honest. Imagine you have a stoner, who is already pretty...evangelical? about their drug use - then go about telling you that "oh you are just worshipping mithras/the sun" every day for a few years. It gets annoying. Also, I think that historically the european pre-christian pagan religions were, on the whole, bad -Charlemagne burning the Irminsul was a good thing, Caesar cutting down the sacred groves of Gaul to weaken the druids' grasp on society was important. Conversion and destruction of the old gods led to a better world. There's also the whole "You will have no other gods before me" bit where fundamentally, being a Christian means (to me) adamantly denying the reality or existence of any other god but God. Not to say I haven't enjoyed the company of Pagans or non-Christians -I just don't hold their religious beliefs in much esteem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
ceciltron- pro-imperialism because he believes the propaganda written by imperialists
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Ceciltron posted:In college, I had to deal with a lot of Wiccans and Neo-Pagans, and it rubbed me the wrong way to be honest. Imagine you have a stoner, who is already pretty...evangelical? about their drug use - then go about telling you that "oh you are just worshipping mithras/the sun" every day for a few years. It gets annoying. Also, I think that historically the european pre-christian pagan religions were, on the whole, bad -Charlemagne burning the Irminsul was a good thing, Caesar cutting down the sacred groves of Gaul to weaken the druids' grasp on society was important. Conversion and destruction of the old gods led to a better world. Well, if dealing with dickish members of a faith makes you dislike them all, you must imagine how people feel about christians  No, I feel you. It attracts some pretty dumb kids, much like the new age milieu in general.However, I feel rather peeved that you casually dismiss the destruction of a faiths holiest sites on principle. Does this mean you'd be stoked if someone up and nuked the Vatican, Jerusalem and Mecca tomorrow, because it'd fertilize the ground for new beliefs? I can't make the slightest sense out of it. A lot of good developments in Scandinavia were destroyed when the christians rolled in, if you're going to call religions bad, at least be consistent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
There's nothing inconsistent about picking sides between incompatible ideologies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
If you're a fanatic, sure. However, I thought most modern christians were past the "all false faiths must burn" stage of reasoning.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
Ceciltron posted:-Charlemagne burning the Irminsul was a good thing, Caesar cutting down the sacred groves of Gaul to weaken the druids' grasp on society was important. Conversion and destruction of the old gods led to a better world. Charlemagne commiting what is essentially genocide on the Saxons was a good thing? Imperialism and trying to kill of a society is good if it eventually leads to Christianity? I mean if you want to be consequentialist I suppose it's fine but still dude.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
I'm not a fan of neopaganism either but mostly because it seems like a form of cultural appropriation followed by erasure of what makes folk religions distinct; it's pretty annoying when New Age adherents go down the rabbit hole of saying all folk religions just boil down to the Golden Rule and a universal cosmic spirit force, and everyone was super woke and free before evil oppressive religion was invented. Because that's not true from a historical perspective at all; it's just the noble savage idea all over again. I have less of a problem with Pagan Reconstructionism than stuff like Wicca and the New Age movement though. Unfortunately, those tend to attract literal Nazis.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 20:57
|
|
|
mostly only norse reconstruction due to the nazi's love of norse iconography. i don't know if you see as many in like egyptian reconstruction or greek reconstruction
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:mostly only norse reconstruction due to the nazi's love of norse iconography. i don't know if you see as many in like egyptian reconstruction or greek reconstruction Doesn't Golden Dawn have a bit of that or am I thinking of something else?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 21:57
|
|
|
i don't know, but i wouldn't be surprised
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
unless you're talking about the hermetic order of the golden dawn and not greek golden dawn, in which case actually yeah i still wouldn't be surprised now that i think about it nazis is the same
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Charlemagne commiting what is essentially genocide on the Saxons was a good thing? Imperialism and trying to kill of a society is good if it eventually leads to Christianity? I mean if you want to be consequentialist I suppose it's fine but still dude. It gave us this music video though, so it wasn't all bad In unrelated news: I'm in a bit of a melancholic mood rn because this Saturday the altar servers' summer camp of my old Viennese parish will begin which used to be the absolute hughlight of the summer for me and for a ton of other people, and this is the first time I'll not be going. I've spent the last couple hours aimlessly clicking through the digital debris that has amassed over the almost six years where being a part of the altar servers was a huge part of my life: tons of videos, photos, Mass orders, game descriptions, self-written prayers... Feels a bit weird to look back at such a great and personally important part of my life that's irrevocably over, and I sorta feel like someone after a breakup dreading the anniversary date approaching.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn dudes surely love(d) their Ancient Egyptian headdresses: SavageGentleman fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Aug 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
Ceciltron posted:Also, I think that historically the european pre-christian pagan religions were, on the whole, bad -Charlemagne burning the Irminsul was a good thing, Caesar cutting down the sacred groves of Gaul to weaken the druids' grasp on society was important. Conversion and destruction of the old gods led to a better world.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 22:36
|
|
|
cultural genocide is cool and good if it lead to christianity being stronger later on -ceciltron, apparently
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
I'm sympathetic to pagan reconstructionists and pagans in general, but I'd say that overall it's a good thing those faiths were replaced by Christianity. - no more human sacrifice - no killing of disabled babies - a unified structure of learning across the continent - Christianity (monotheism in general) is more rational and allows a more rational worldview than polytheism - I think the fact that men and women celebrate mass together had a huge impact on the freedom of women in society compared to societies where that doesn't happen Pagan gods got to mostly survive in the form of saints and stories. My mum has stories about a guy encountering the wild hunt in her parent's generation, though I'm suspicious that this may have been influenced by the Nazi use of pagan imagery. I don't approve of killing people and imperialism, but if we can discuss the beneficial effects of the Mongol hordes and new world conquest, it's probably not too soon to do the same for Charlemagne.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
human sacrifice only happened in a small minority of religions and it should be brought into question whether firsthand accounts of such sacrifices by the people trying to justify their imperialism can be trusted did it happen? yes. does that justify imperialism and genocide? doubtful. just as christianity grew to condemn chattel slavery in america who is to say human sacrifice could not be phased out over time. let's not forget the atrocities committed by these so called saviors either
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
Tias posted:If you're a fanatic, sure. However, I thought most modern christians were past the "all false faiths must burn" stage of reasoning. Please don't confuse a political claim (people should be free to practice whatever religion they want without interference from the state) with a theological claim (there is one God, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but then also Ismael). From the former standpoint, if people want to pray to Viking gods, whatever, sure, I don't really care one way or the other. According to the latter, the same practice is a bunch of nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
pidan posted:Christianity (monotheism in general) is more rational and allows a more rational worldview than polytheism No
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
are we at evolutionary atheism again
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
Nah I just feel like "how does God work inside time when he exists outside it" allows for a fundamentally more rational answer than "why did Odin eat a whole ox at his wedding". I also don't think "rational" means "smart, good and manly", it just means that a certain form of argumentation is applicable here, a form that incidentally is very useful for things like science and politics.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 23:26
|
|