Ask a Pagan, Part 2

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lokabrenna
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
That definitely wouldn’t work for Traditional British Wicca.

Some of the more recent novelties that certain publishers attempt to pass off as being Wiccan, might have that lack as part of their belief system.

Depending upon the group, or individual, the different spellings of “magic” relate to different practices.

Amber
Thanks to both of you for your answers. Do you believe in angels, esp. guardian angels? (my screen name is about an angel I made in art class, not a guardian angel.) How do your beliefs differ from Catholic ones about angels, and what reading on angels would you recommend? thanks.
 
Thanks to both of you for your answers. Do you believe in angels, esp. guardian angels? (my screen name is about an angel I made in art class, not a guardian angel.) How do your beliefs differ from Catholic ones about angels, and what reading on angels would you recommend? thanks.
Except for, perhaps, Christo-Pagans, Christian Witches, and the like (those who practice a syncretic blend of Christianity and Wicca) most would say that angels are a Judeo-Christian-Islamic thing. Although, some cultures had a similar concept to a guardian angel. In Sumero-Akkadian prayers, for instance, people would often pray to their “personal god” or “personal goddess” (who may or may not be named) for aid. These “personal deities” were understood to be intermediaries between a person and the “high gods” (Inanna, Enki, etc.) although, one could also approach the big gods with things, the personal gods were more concerned with the individual. In Greece, people believed in daimones, the term was sometimes used as an alternative for theos (god) but it was also used to indicate a kind of spirit who again functions as an intermediary of sorts, Socrates had a daimon whom he found was very reliable. In my tradition, the closest thing to a guardian spirit would either be the disir (“the mothers”) who watch over a family line, or the fylgia/fetch (“the follower”) which isn’t really a separate being but a part of one’s soul in animal form. If you’ve ever read Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials his daemons are a lot like the fylgia.

As well, if you think of angels strictly as “messengers”, there are gods who fulfill that role. In Greece, Hermes and Iris were both messenger gods (for Zeus and Hera respectively). I can’t think of anyone in my pantheon who does that sort of thing “full time”, the Norse gods tend to go take care of matters themselves instead of sending messengers to do their work for them.

Anyways, I suppose the short answer is that angels are an Abrahamic “thing” but there are many beings who do the same sorts of things as angels do.
 
so a group of backwards fishermen, tax collectors, and other average joes just decided one day to buck their lifelong cultural traditions and beliefs and found a whole new religion by creatively making up stories about a guy they knew for only 3 years.

I think that’s harder to believe than a Jesus who could perform miracles.
Except that they didn’t need to make up the story completely. What is written in the gospels has “happened” in earlier myths. And whoever wrote it down wasn’t an average guy. At least he could write, that was above average,
 
The original followers of Jesus may have been those things…BUT those that compiled and wrote the gospes were educated individuals…they were able to scour the Hebrew scriptures and compile a “liturgical” framework of Jesus life…Paul was an educated Pharisee. The “authors” of the rest of the NT is only know by “tradition”…the real authors, whom we have no idea who they really were obviously were educated individuals…conversant in Greek, Latin and most likely Aramaic and or Hebrew. “Backwards fishermen” might be able to read some Hebrew or Aramaic…maybe even a smattering of Greek, but literacy was quite low at that time in history.
I’m not sure I’m following you. Why would educated men follow the teachings of a group of average joes if they didn’t believe what those men were teaching and saying?
 
I’m not sure I’m following you. Why would educated men follow the teachings of a group of average joes if they didn’t believe what those men were teaching and saying?
The first Christians were Jews…the gospels were patterned and drew their inspiration from the liturgical year of the Jews in the first century. The story of Jesus was framed around the Jewish liturgical year…the “passion story” was the first to be used…later on…some 40-80 years after the death of Jesus of Nazareth…the gospels were written by those first Jewish followers of Jesus…the “Jesus story” was a “new chapter” in the story of Israel. The gospel writers used Hebrew scripture images and stories to frame the story of Jesus.

After the destruction of the Temple and the Jewish nation, Christianity was “separated” from it’s Jewish roots…one can see the “progression” through the gospels of that separation…Mark, Matthew, Luke and finally John…John now blames the “Jews” and in fact uses “the Jews” through out his gospel as the shift from the Romans then to the Jewish leaders as the other gospels do to finally “the Jews”…“they will put you out of the synagogues” is a reflection of the “Chrisitans” experience as they become a separate faith tradition separated from it’s Jewish roots after the Temple was destroyed and Judaism shifted away from it’s “temple cult”.

The “Jesus story” was tolerated as another “sect” of Judaism as long as the Temple existed…but once the Temple was destroyed and Jerusalem leveled the “break” occured with the rabinical “re-tooling” of Judaism and the expulsion of the followers of Jesus from Jewish worship.

At first believing in Jesus as messiah was “another” way to be Jewish…to view Israel’s history and incorporate another “chapter” into it…with the Gentiles beoming the main adherants of “Christianity”…it moved away from it’s “Jewishness” especially after the Temple was destroyed and there was no longer a Jewish center…Israel was “scattered”.

The men who wrote the gospels were somewhat literate Jewish men of the Diaspora and followers of Jesus.
 
Harry Potter is a real magician. But Harry Potter isn’t real.
This brings up another question I have for “ask a pagan”.

Lokabrenna: Have you read any Potter? (Who hasn’t, right?) If so, did you notice any spells or texts drawn from pagan ritual being used in Potter? I don’t mean so much references to classical mythology, because those are abundant, but more specifically, that some piece of actual pagan ritual is quoted or repeated in some context. On the order of finding Harry saying the Agnus Dei or part of the Our Father, to put it in a Catholic context. Like, could you point to some dialogue of Dumbledore’s, let’s say, and say: “Oh, that is a common blessing in Gardnerian wicca!”

As you might guess by my question, I’m kind of skeptical (or should I say skeptickal? ;)). The “spells” in Potter look kind of hokey to my un-trained eye, but I would defer to your knowledge of things pagan.
 
This brings up another question I have for “ask a pagan”.

Lokabrenna: Have you read any Potter? (Who hasn’t, right?) If so, did you notice any spells or texts drawn from pagan ritual being used in Potter? I don’t mean so much references to classical mythology, because those are abundant, but more specifically, that some piece of actual pagan ritual is quoted or repeated in some context. On the order of finding Harry saying the Agnus Dei or part of the Our Father, to put it in a Catholic context. Like, could you point to some dialogue of Dumbledore’s, let’s say, and say: “Oh, that is a common blessing in Gardnerian wicca!”

As you might guess by my question, I’m kind of skeptical (or should I say skeptickal? ;)). The “spells” in Potter look kind of hokey to my un-trained eye, but I would defer to your knowledge of things pagan.
I’ve read every Harry Potter book and seen all the movies, and I can tell you that the idea that there are “actual Pagan rituals/spells” in Harry Potter is (to borrow a term from my English friends) ‘bollocks’. The spells are in faux Latin (lumos = light, Patronus = from the Latin for ‘protector/guardian’) in fact, the only references I can recall to things that can be found in “real life” are: some information about the creatures (like the veela/vila), alchemy (finding the Philosopher’s Stone was the whole point of alchemy at one point in time, Nicholas Flamel was a real person), the divination methods (although, as you might recall, the main characters are skeptical of Trelawney’s methods) and there’s a throwaway line in Goblet of Fire in which the characters mention an “Abraxas road”. Abraxas is an aeon in Gnosticism, but the term has since been used in a variety of contexts, see wiki’s entry: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraxas

So, I suppose my answer is that some of the elements in the novels have a tenuous connection to ceremonial magic (which may or may not be practiced by Pagans, I certainly don’t practice it) but nothing so overt as a Pagan equivalent of the Agnus Dei. In fact, I had to read the passage several times to catch the reference to Abraxas.

I’ve actually been very amused by the whole Harry Potter controversy. There’s this one website that does an analysis for “satanic” references in the books and they go on and on about how the unicorn represents Satan, and I was like: “Um, you know the unicorn actually represented CHRIST in the Middle Ages, right?” It made no sense at all.
 
has anyone been scourged, hung on a cross, died, buried for 3 days and then risen from the dead?
How long do the Catholics hang on the Cross at Easter?

The LDS records do have documented records of people being resurrected from the dead, seven days after being declared clinically dead.

There are Roman records of individuals surviving a crucifixion.

Amber
 
Do you believe in angels, esp. guardian angels?
Other than those Wiccans that have been heavily influenced by Ceremonial Magick, or practice Christian-Wicca, angels aren’t part of the fabric of the world.

I won’t speak for the role of angels in Christian-Wicca. I’m fairly confident that I mis-understand it.

One of the major rituals in Ceremonial Magick is The Knowledge and Conversation of One’s Holy Guardian Angel. The point of this ritual is spiritual development. Angels come up, but to focus on them is to miss the point of the ritual.

Amber
 
If so, did you notice any spells or texts drawn from pagan ritual being used in Potter?
My impression is that either The Book of Common Prayer, or an Old Catholic Breviary was the source of the spells used in that series.
“Oh, that is a common blessing in Gardnerian wicca!”
The series is Christian Fantasy. Whilst it wasn’t blatantly obvious in the first two books, by the end of the series, Christianity was being pounded into the reader. It isn’t the sermon that Pilgrim’s Progress or the theology of C S Lewis. Think of it as the different types of Christians that one encounters in daily life. The devout High Church Anglican. The LDS Missionary. The snake handling preachers from the South. The Christian who doubts their faith.

Not bad writing, but about as Wiccan as Westminster Cathedral is.

Amber
 
I’ve read every Harry Potter book and seen all the movies, .
I have only seen the movies, and they are an insult to the audience’s intellect. Esp. the last three, which expect that the audience cannot count to seven…
 
I have only seen the movies, and they are an insult to the audience’s intellect. Esp. the last three, which expect that the audience cannot count to seven…
Well, to be fair, there was a lot of content in that last book, so it was either split it up into two movies and keep most of the content, or have one movie and cut down on a lot (I personally think that most of the scenes with Harry and the gang arguing with each other could have been cut.)

I personally LOVED how they did the story of “The Three Men and Death”, it was my favourite part of the whole book besides the battle of Hogwarts.
 
what does “vanic” mean?
Vanic - pertaining to the Vanir in the Norse pantheon, esp. Njord, Freyja, and Freyr

Vanic Pagan - a (neo) Pagan who primarily or exclusively honours the Vanir

Okay, so those aren’t real dictionary definitions, but they’re close enough.
 
Would you say you chose to be pagan because it is fun? Being a Christian isn’t really ‘fun’ it’s hard, hard work.
 
Would you say you chose to be pagan because it is fun? Being a Christian isn’t really ‘fun’ it’s hard, hard work.
I think choosing to follow any religion because it’s “fun” is a poor excuse to follow any religion. Let’s take British Traditional Wicca (that is Gardnerian and Alexandrian traditions) for example. Typically, after being accepted by the leadership of a coven, a person studies for a year and a day before even being considered for initiation into the coven. (Amber can correct me if I’m wrong about this.) Even after initiation, a coven member is still expected to grow spiritually independent of the coven, as well as keep secret any oathbound material that they have learned in their course of study. They might not be required to meet every Sunday, but certainly on the full moon (called esbats) and the eight major holidays (called sabbats), and even then, you’re allowed to call in sick if you need to.

I highly doubt anyone would go through a process like that “just for fun”.

I chose to become Pagan (or even more generally, polytheist) because it made more sense to me than Catholicism, that’s it. Others will say that they were always Pagan, it was just a matter of finding a label for themselves.
 
I personally LOVED how they did the story of “The Three Men and Death”, it was my favourite part of the whole book besides the battle of Hogwarts.
Yes, *technically *that was all very well done.
But the story is poor, no surprises (in the 2nd or 3rd movie is was clear that Harry is the 7th hoaxflux or whatever these things are called), horrible kitchen Latin, most things only happen to show off some magic without any decent reason, logical plot holes everwhere… welcome to Hogwash.

I have no idea why these books are such a blockbuster - perhaps because the reader doesn’t need not to think.
 
Vanic - pertaining to the Vanir in the Norse pantheon, esp. Njord, Freyja, and Freyr

Vanic Pagan - a (neo) Pagan who primarily or exclusively honours the Vanir

Okay, so those aren’t real dictionary definitions, but they’re close enough.
Thanks,

I understand that some white supremist folks are into this culture in their religion. Have you met racists in your pursuit of your practice?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top