Why hate Paganism?

[Contarini]

Not really. That’s a cover for an end run to grasp ‘objective’ Truth and an ‘objective’ articulation of it which paganism ultimately never claims.

Language like “cover for an end run” isn’t going to get us anywhere. If you simply want to rant, then feel free. But if you want to have a rational discussion, you’ll have to try to use less loaded language. For practicing monotheists, the priorities are the other way around. Because we believe in one God who reveals Himself to human beings, it follows that yes, we can speak of universal religious truth. I would avoid the term “objective,” and I think your use of it is inappropriate. It’s not an idea that really existed before the modern era. So of course paganism never claimed any such thing, because the idea didn’t exist–but the same is true for the “Axial” religions.

To a certain extend I might agree with you but Protestantism is a more literal application of the Christian message

Not of all parts of it, in the first place. And in the second place, who cares? Even if you were right about this–which I don’t think you are (Protestants generally have to explain all sorts of stuff away)–it would be irrelevant. Why would Christians necessarily want to engage in something you would deem a “literal application”?

and is ultimately pushing both traditions into facing up to the fact that they aren’t the purest application of the message.

Ridiculous. First of all, what is “pure”? A pure version of what? What is this message? What access do you have to it that Christian believers lack? And pure from what? Who says that a religion is supposed to be “pure” in the sense of free from outside influences? There is no such religion anyway.

Of course that application demonstrates that the message is questionable ethically.

And of course that’s why you are arbitrarily making these sweeping judgments without any valid basis. You want to get to the conclusion–that Christianity is unethical–so you decide from the start that the version you find easiest to attack is the “purest” version. (This is like the Christians who decide to take the word of Tantric Hindus or Buddhists that their version is the “deepest” or most authentic version of the religion, so that Christians can smear the traditions as a whole with the things they find repugnant in tantrism.) Or maybe you come from some sort of Protestant background and you just assume that this must be the “purest” version. No matter what your reason, you need to reexamine what you are doing, because it’s fundamentally unjust and intellectually dishonest.

I couldn’t possibly care less about whether you think my version of Christianity is “pure” or not. You have to deal with Christianity as it is actually practiced, not with the version you find most convenient for ideological purposes.

Edwin

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I believe you personally carry ‘some’ responsibility for the ‘evils’ of your tradition and it’s teachings by the fact of promoting it knowing what you should know.

And you don’t have to take responsibility for the massacre of St.Boniface & his companions in 755 ?​

The difference between a religion such as yours, & our faith in Christ, is that your religion has no room for grace - it is a closed system, because it is a nature-religion. Our faith is grace through & through. We believe that God is transcendent, yet ever-active in the universe He has created - IOW, our faith is an open system, in which nature is not & cannot be closed in on itself, precisely because it is wholly dependent on Him Who is not limited by it. So our God is Our Glorious Sovereign Lord, infinite in Glory, wonderful beyond description, glorious in holiness, boundless in might - the “gods” of the heathen are not like this; they are dependent on their adorers, & are no greater than they.

Our God shows His Goodness by dying for us, even though we were his enemies - He is powerful enough to be utterly powerless. That is quite something - Odin never managed that. IOW, our God is infinitely surprising, yet entirely dependable - as He has died, He cannot die again: whereas the Norse gods have the Twilight of the Gods, to deal with. But because our God is Almighty, He cannot be matched against any giants or world-serpents - to be Almighty, is to have nothing at all in common with the nothings worshipped by the heathen: for God Almighty, the Living God, is so real that all others are mere fantasies. God is the definition of reality - things are real, only so far as they resemble Him. So a Christian saint is more real than a “god”. ##

Christianity was spread throughout europe by the sword of Charlemagne’s armies in service of the Pope. Do your history and you will find it outrageous to see the kind of posturing found on this and many other Axial Religious sites.

I’m only visiting to wake you up to the fact that there are those who haven’t forgotten and demand that europe be given back it’s birthright that was taken from them by Christian Usurpers.

That is greatly exaggerated, & irrelevant; & it is not news The difference between us & you is, that we know we are sinners. Nature religions hide man’s desperate neediness; that neediness is invisible unless one compares it with the Glory of the Holy One, the God of Heavan & Earth. You have no way to see your true state, because you are worshipping the creation, & & not its Creator. IOW, nature-worship is idolatrous - & idolatry reduces the worshipper to the same state as his idols. That is one of the reasons it is so vast an evil ​

The false gods of nature, because they are within nature & come from it, cannot save from it - only the God Who is Lord of all nature can save from it, because He created it, & He knows it through & through. Polytheism with its many gods is too small for the One All-Wise & Saving God; it has no room for Him.

Nature religions do not allow God to be known as God - they cramp Him into their own limitations, so they falsify Him. He can be known as God by revelation - for that comes from His gracious Sovereign Choice; He speaks on His terms, & not on ours. And He is supremely revealed through Jesus Christ, his Living Word.

We are Christians by His grace - not because of our goodness; we are not good; your complaint assumes we are. So we are upheld by Him; our sins cannot destroy His Church. We cannot destroy Him, because we tried that, by crucifying Him. All He did, was turn the death we gave Him into Life for us through Him. If we cannot overcome Him, we can certainly not destroy His Body (which is His Church) by sinning. So the sins of Christians don’t in the least destroy the validity of His revelation. So it remains for ever true, despite us; or you ##

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

You know, when I get into my automobile to go driving, I often think to myself that in a way it’s kind of a shame that we don’t have horse powered transportation. After all, horses were around for thousands of years as transport.

But then I think, you know, people who WANT to use horses still can for the most part. They may have to make a little more effort than just going out and catching a wild horse (although I think that was a lot harder than it might sound today). It may cost a little more (but then again, gas and insurance etc. cost too.)

So you know, if people really WANTED to do things the OLD way, they could (look at the Amish).

If people really had WANTED to keep to a particular belief, they could. It would have been maybe a little difficult, but it could have been done. Even today there are plenty of Native American cultures, beliefs, languages that are still used. In Spain the Basques still speak their language. In Africa, plenty of tribes still hold to farming or hunting practices thousands of years old.

If something is worthwhile, it is not going to be ‘superseded’.

Why I believe that wicca will ultimately fail as ‘paganism’ is that ‘paganism’ was not superseded; the pagans CHOOSE conversion. You probably don’t want to believe it, and obviously there were INDIVIDUALS who didn’t choose (just as there are individuals even today who believe the earth is flat for example), but the majority ultimately freely chose. Those who did not freely choose may have suffered (suffering happens, ask your friendly Buddist as well as your friendly Christian).

What is offered now as ‘paganism’ isn’t really paganism, it’s a reaction against religion, especially Christianity but against any other that is perceived of as a ‘threat’. There are no people out there who really BELIEVE in Thor, or in Zeus, or even in a real living “Mother-goddess”; because while all of these beliefs have some part in innate truth of Creation and Creator, none of them possessed fullness. Christianity does. . .and the pagans chose Christianity.

Personally I think most of them would be royally ticked to see people who do NOT believe as they do but are claiming that because they hold covens, or chant spells, or plant herbs, that they are pagans.

If antique Roman religion were restored, PETA would complain like crazy at all the sacrifice of thousands of oxen (& other animals).​

If the worship of the ancient Near Eastern goddesses were renewed, STDs would rocket, what with all that cultic prostitution & sacred sodomy - though the cross-dressers might be pleased.

The assumption that all was fine & dandy before the nasty intolerant imperialistic women-hating “Xians” came along and ruined all those nice earth-loving religions which would never dream of abortion, or of exposing unwanted children, is unhistorical bunkum.

Today’s pagans wouldn’t last very long in a really pre-Christian world - their paganism is in part a product of the very thing they reject. It is Christianity, not Thor-worship, that brought hospitals; Christianity, not cosmic necessity & bondage to the stars & the Fate they decree, that brought love for beggars & other unfortunates.

Pagans have paganism in plenty as things are in society - that is a principal reason they have so much to complain of.

Some people are never satisfied Unsurprisingly, as the heart is restless, if it does not rest in Christ - to Him be Glory for ever !##

 

[chrisb]

Edwin

Grace and Peace Contarini (Edwin),

I’ve been following this thread and I have to say that you have been the most impressive respondant. That of course is my own personal observation but I have to jump in here and give you a big thumps up!

As a struggling Catholic I am personally very tender to sweeping accusations from individuals like mjolner. With the amount of scandel facing the RCC, particularly in the States, I can extend a certain amount of sympathy for Wiccans and other neo-pagans. The West is struggling with and for identity and I believe its been very difficult to look at the Christian Institutions as beacons of light in our modern era.

I’m not sure where you are from or what your background is but you appear well versed with this. May I ask what you background is and if you have experience with Wiccanism and neo-paganism?

Thank you and God Bless.

Pax

 

[Victorious]

I believe you personally carry ‘some’ responsibility for the ‘evils’ of your tradition and it’s teachings by the fact of promoting it knowing what you should know.

Like the oppressive evil of not imputing an individual’s personal sins to his descendants?

The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.

Ezekiel 18:20

 

[Contarini]

Grace and Peace Contarini (Edwin),

I’ve been following this thread and I have to say that you have been the most impressive respondant. That of course is my own personal observation but I have to jump in here and give you a big thumps up!

As a struggling Catholic I am personally very tender to sweeping accusations from individuals like mjolner. With the amount of scandel facing the RCC, particularly in the States, I can extend a certain amount of sympathy for Wiccans and other neo-pagans. The West is struggling with and for identity and I believe its been very difficult to look at the Christian Institutions as beacons of light in our modern era.

I’m not sure where you are from or what your background is but you appear well versed with this. May I ask what you background is and if you have experience with Wiccanism and neo-paganism?

Thank you and God Bless.

Pax

I don’t have a lot of personal experience with it, no. I’ve sometimes hung out on the “Reconstructionist Heathen” board at beliefnet, where there are a lot of folks who talk much like mjolnir. I find them fascinating for a number of reasons–partly because they take history very seriously (unlike the Wiccans, these guys are actually trying to re-establish heathen religions as historically practiced; I’m not sure if mjolnir fits in this category or in more of a “neo-pagan” category). I’m intrigued by any movement that tries to recover ancient traditions. I’m a big fan of Tolkien, and you can see this fascination with the pre-Christian European heritage, in creative tension with Tolkien’s devout Catholicism. (Tom Shippey’s work on Tolkien discusses this issue in a very intelligent way. Tolkien had little interest in the ancient gods themselves, but he created a whole world embodying the best of the ancient Norse/Celtic ethos–Aragorn and Faramir and the rest are basically northern European Jobs and Melchizideks).

I’m also preparing to teach a class on world religions next semester, so I’m thinking a lot about these issues. . . . My own field is the history of Christianity, actually.

Edwin

 

[chrisb]

I don’t have a lot of personal experience with it, no. I’ve sometimes hung out on the “Reconstructionist Heathen” board at beliefnet, where there are a lot of folks who talk much like mjolnir. I find them fascinating for a number of reasons–partly because they take history very seriously (unlike the Wiccans, these guys are actually trying to re-establish heathen religions as historically practiced; I’m not sure if mjolnir fits in this category or in more of a “neo-pagan” category). I’m intrigued by any movement that tries to recover ancient traditions. I’m a big fan of Tolkien, and you can see this fascination with the pre-Christian European heritage, in creative tension with Tolkien’s devout Catholicism. (Tom Shippey’s work on Tolkien discusses this issue in a very intelligent way. Tolkien had little interest in the ancient gods themselves, but he created a whole world embodying the best of the ancient Norse/Celtic ethos–Aragorn and Faramir and the rest are basically northern European Jobs and Melchizideks).

I’m also preparing to teach a class on world religions next semester, so I’m thinking a lot about these issues. . . . My own field is the history of Christianity, actually.

Edwin

Grace and Peace Edwin,

Well it’s been a pleasure to read your posts here. I hope to see more of them as this topic is addressed.

I’m a big Tolkien fan myself as well as an old RPG and Dungeons and Dragons geek!

Of course, I like to think of myself as a Paladin than a Druid… he he he

Okay, the cat is out of the bag and no one is going to take me seriously here anymore…

Pax

 

[corvidae]

I have a great deal of respect for what Wiccanism is attempting to do but ultimately it’s fighting against a lot not to mention our own hard-wiring from culture.

Most Pagans are ultimately ‘self-taught’ due to the brutal oppression of witches and so tend to be a bit ‘anti-social’ or at best ‘counter-cultural’. I would hope that I don’t fall into those traps.

mjolnir is an apt name as paganism is going to have to be prepared to defend itself against both Christianity and it’s child Islam.

We don’t profess a sole source of objective truth so it might be that our ultimately exist as pockets of pagan expressions colored by our culture. That was the way it was meant to be anyways until the Axial Age. Ugh.

So as most pagans I’m a self-style, organic and unique expression of the divine. I’m western by culture and so that too will create differences with others who might be Taoists or Shinto or Hindu etc.

The point is we don’t need to be objective to be instructive.

Just a thought for your peaceful religion-
It seems that whenever someone took the name hammer it was because they were or were going to destroy something. Maccabees were destroying hellenism in Israel. Charles Martel was destroying the “pagans” and Muslims who he was fighting against. Even the Malleus Mallefecarum (hammer against witches) was meant to hunt out and destroy witchcraft. Perhaps it is not wise to name yourself the hammer of thor if you only wish to defend yourself.

Also, I believe that the Malleus Mallefecarum was a banned book in the Catholic Faith because it taught falsehoods.

In addition to this, I encourage you to keep searching for how on earth Islam is the child of Christianity. Let me know if you find the answer.

A lone Raven
Trusting Hugin and Munin- Thought and Memory

 

[corvidae]

Just thought I would make it clear I am not accusing you or your religion of anything. I just think that in annonymous places at the very least, things must be stated clearly, and with good intention.

I personally believe that there are parts to paganism that are good, it is not a devil worship religion. However, I also believe that myth is man trying to reach God, and so is good for someone to find out what others have done, and see the truth behind the stories. However, I do not believe paganism has the fullness of the truth, and so it would be absolutely inconcievable to me to not try and witness to pagans.

A lone Raven

 

[Sixtus]

I don’t presonally hate anyone or anything.

I once worked with two men who were pagans. They both expected [and received] respect towards their beliefs from me. But, they were both very mocking, scornful and disrespectful of my Christian Catholic Faith.

They asserted more than once that it was not unreasonable to expect folk to respect their views, while paradoxically showing the most disrespectful attitude and contempt for my faith and beliefs.

They asserted more than once that ‘everyone should respect paganism but Christianity was a joke’.

They complained about me to managment for having Christian literature 'IN MY DESK DRAWER which I read in my lunch break. I kept it to myself and put it away when I had finished. But I was still repremanded over it as they had complaind. But is was deemed acceptable to leave the magazine ‘The Pagan’ around the office.

I now regret the amount of tolerance I showed. I would never be so accepting again of paganism if I ever encountered it in the future…

 

[puzzleannie]

Well it’s pretty common knowledge that all the Axial Age Religions have a few key attributes which asserts a Patriarchal Social Worldview which appears to attack the equality of women.
-4

must not be all that common if most of don’t know what you are babbling about.

 

[Dancelittleewok]

I don’t presonally hate anyone or anything.

I once worked with two men who were pagans. They both expected [and received] respect towards their beliefs from me. But, they were both very mocking, scornful and disrespectful of my Christian Catholic Faith.

They asserted more than once that it was not unreasonable to expect folk to respect their views, while paradoxically showing the most disrespectful attitude and contempt for my faith and beliefs.

They asserted more than once that ‘everyone should respect paganism but Christianity was a joke’.

They complained about me to managment for having Christian literature 'IN MY DESK DRAWER which I read in my lunch break. I kept it to myself and put it away when I had finished. But I was still repremanded over it as they had complaind. But is was deemed acceptable to leave the magazine ‘The Pagan’ around the office.

I now regret the amount of tolerance I showed. I would never be so accepting again of paganism if I ever encountered it in the future…

I’ve had a similiar experience with a now ex friend of mine. He was an atheist, but was converted to Wicca via his fiancee. We had many debates (which he initated) about Catholicism and paganism. Unfortunately, our differences in faith caused a such division that our friendship was ended. His last words to me that as a Catholic, I couldn’t think critically. I cried that day. I loved him like an older brother…

In the course of our debates, it noticed a persecuted mentality and desire that Christianity make reparations. My ex friend said the reason that covens are limited to six is because pagans are afraid that Christianity will wipe them out again if they reunited corporately, but I am not sure if there’s any truth to this.

Mjolnir, I was not trying to pigeonhole you with the example of the Romans martyring the early Christians. If you want to condemn the persecution of pagans, it follows that you must also condemn the persecutions made by the pagans as well.

I am still not understanding your statements about truth…is truth objective…relative…made up…what?

I look forward to your post.

 

[mjolnir]

I’ve had a similiar experience with a now ex friend of mine. He was an atheist, but was converted to Wicca via his fiancee. We had many debates (which he initated) about Catholicism and paganism. Unfortunately, our differences in faith caused a such division that our friendship was ended. His last words to me that as a Catholic, I couldn’t think critically. I cried that day. I loved him like an older brother…

It’s a shame that Catholics and Pagans have so much baggage but that is just that way it is. As one starts to dig into history the spread of Christianity through Europe was forced plain and simple. Rationalizing that pagans also fought doesn’t make the case that Christianity restores some ‘graced state’ to man. In fact, it makes the point all too clear that man is in the state that he is in because of our familar to grasp the divine corporately.

In the course of our debates, it noticed a persecuted mentality and desire that Christianity make reparations. My ex friend said the reason that covens are limited to six is because pagans are afraid that Christianity will wipe them out again if they reunited corporately, but I am not sure if there’s any truth to this.

I don’t know much about Wiccanism so I can’t comment.

Mjolnir, I was not trying to pigeonhole you with the example of the Romans martyring the early Christians. If you want to condemn the persecution of pagans, it follows that you must also condemn the persecutions made by the pagans as well.

I am still not understanding your statements about truth…is truth objective…relative…made up…what?

I look forward to your post.

I believe we can touch objective truth only distantly but not necessarily in language etc. If you look at Christianity it has expressed itself through a multitude of different philosophical frameworks over it’s existence. The facts may still be there but the facts keep getting expressed through different philosophical means. This ultimately changes the facts, at least in the sense that the people encounter them.

So Show me an objective truth… and I’ll show you a concept pointing to something unspeakable.

 

[Dancelittleewok]

QUOTE=mjolnir;1597302]It’s a shame that Catholics and Pagans have so much baggage but that is just that way it is. As one starts to dig into history the spread of Christianity through Europe was forced plain and simple. Rationalizing that pagans also fought doesn’t make the case that Christianity restores some ‘graced state’ to man. In fact, it makes the point all too clear that man is in the state that he is in because of our familar to grasp the divine corporately.

Catholics should be held to a higher standard than the Romans. Faith was spread by the sword but we have changed that. Any individual is free to deny the faith.

Perphaps you can explain this to me: how does the persecution in the past relate to you? What kind of reparations do you want Christianity to make? Do you feel like you are being persecuted in the 21st century?

I believe we can touch objective truth only distantly but not necessarily in language etc. If you look at Christianity it has expressed itself through a multitude of different philosophical frameworks over it’s existence. The facts may still be there but the facts keep getting expressed through different philosophical means. This ultimately changes the facts, at least in the sense that the people encounter them.

You think that truth is not relative but not universal? It’s been argued that our language shapes our reality i.e. a French man and a English might have two entirely different views of reality. But reality itself doesn’t change, even if the means of articulating it do. Do you believe that we cannot know what reality truly is, even though it is there?

 

[Sixtus]

It is conceivable that for us, reality may as well not exist for we cannot reach it objectively

We are the product of our social contexts. We each have our own conception of reality. But reality can only be expressed to the extent that we have experienced it. Therefore, I can only speak of my personal construction which is based on my experiences in s a social context. The objective reality may as well not exist for it is unobtainable to me

 

[mjolnir]

Catholics should be held to a higher standard than the Romans. Faith was spread by the sword but we have changed that. Any individual is free to deny the faith.

Perphaps you can explain this to me: how does the persecution in the past relate to you? What kind of reparations do you want Christianity to make? Do you feel like you are being persecuted in the 21st century?

Because it tells me something about the system which is in place (i.e. Christianity) and at what lengths it can go when not checked. Currently Christianity is larged kept in check by secularism but if it was ever out from under the thumb of secularism it could and would go right back to it’s oppressive and abusive behavior. Such is the fact of elitist beliefs.

You think that truth is not relative but not universal? It’s been argued that our language shapes our reality i.e. a French man and a English might have two entirely different views of reality. But reality itself doesn’t change, even if the means of articulating it do. Do you believe that we cannot know what reality truly is, even though it is there?

I think that truth is ‘unspeakable’. There is no real reason to suggest that our conjecture about it is objective and there is no real reason to assume that ‘any’ particular religion has an ‘inside’ track to this reality.

I think we have limited means of encountering reality so from that I think there is large parts of reality unencountered and misunderstood. I’m shocked that others here don’t think so too.

 

[corvidae]

Mjolnir
What time period do you believe the Church had the most power? And what was holding it in Check at that time.

It seems to me that the Church (though I should say some members of the Church as the Church never said to do it) used conversion by the sword was during the reign of Charlemagne, when there were pagans of various sorts on one side, arians on another, and muslims on another. It does not seem to have been during a peaceful moment in history, and perhaps that has something to do with the conversion by the sword.

Even during the majority of the inquistition, witchcraft was seen as a delusion, and not something you could be prosecuted for. In addition, paganism was seen as another religion that the inquisition could not touch. The inquisition was to stop false teachings within the Catholic faith, by people who said they were Catholic, but also said things that were against Catholic teaching. Some of the inquisitions overstepped their bounds, such as the spanish inquisition, or the one that burnt Joan of Arc as a witch, coincidentaly, she is now a Catholic Saint.

There were abuses, but that is exactly what they were abuses. Someone abused the authority they had and misused it. I do not think the Church as a whole can be blamed for that, and I do not think that the Church will let those abuses happen again.

A lone Raven

 

[Medbh]

Originally Posted by mjolnir
I believe you personally carry ‘some’ responsibility for the ‘evils’ of your tradition and it’s teachings by the fact of promoting it knowing what you should know.

:nope:
Sorry but this is quite embarassing… mjolnir how can they carry a responsibility for something they didn’t personally do?

Besides, every civilisation has done something wrong. We fed them to the lions, they burnt and tortured us to death. But there’s no point wasting time argueing which was worse and which is the “less bad”…as both are bad enough. It’s the past , and doesn’t have to be forgotten on neither side, but still you can’t blame someone today for something that happened centuries ago.

I’d rather blame lunatics like those people in Stonehenge who attacked the local Pagan group a couple of months ago.

ps. Malleus Maleficarum existed, WAS commissioned by the pope and was something just horrific. It was mostly derogatory towards women, and was giving instructions on the “modus operandi” to use during trials or interrogations. These instructions were based on the personal experiences of the two German monks who were commissioned it and wrote it.

 

[Loginus]

O come on, cry more. Religions evolve as do all things in the universe.

Everyone started out as a Pagan thats fine. (For those of you who dont know your lovely God had a wife and many kids in his earliest incarnations. All of the Pagan religions in the area are shootoffs of him).

You get one crazy group that thinks its different and destroys religious tolerance
They wipe out their predecessor
And now they rule the world.

Dont worry folks, the story aint over! Given the direction of society this new trend may end soon! Gracias a secularization and education, ppl are turning away from Christianity, Islam and Judaism and being more moderate. Give it enough time and youll have an apathy for religion

My friends, Nihilism is the ‘religion’ of the future! Get use to it

 

[Tantum_ergo]

My friends, Nihilism is the ‘religion’ of the future! Get use to it

Um, thanks but no thanks. I prefer the eternal, unchanging TRUTH of Catholicism. I don’t ‘do’ religions of the past, present, or future that are finite and changeable.