Neo-pagans and heritage

recedite

My own complaint about these druid loving people is that they forget that the Celtic culture arrived here long after the megaliths were built. The celts held sway for over a millenium, which is not a long time really. Oak groves and deep pools were their sacred places. The megaliths were places of burial and/or healing for an earlier people. So there probably were some sort of shamanic magical rituals going on amongst the neolithic people at the megaliths.
All the same, I'm inclined to say let them have their fun, as long as they don't interfere with other people or damage stuff. I would not consider the candlewax to be damage really. It might even protect against weathering.:)

recedite

sensibleken wrote: »

as i posted this in the A&A forum i concentrated on the religious though i have been far more active in trying to prevent the OPW f*cking things up with concrete.

See, it does not automatically follow that because people in this forum are willing to stand up to the more powerful "respectable" religions, then they will really go to town on attacking a bunch of (harmless) nut jobs. Are these pagans ramming their religion down our throats? Controlling primary education and influencing our legislation?

Truley

I know very little about paganism, in fact I know next to nothing However I do not alot of 'genuine' pagans, and I have never known them to go to old sites and tie ribbons, light candles etc. They look at these sites in the same way I do, as places of historical and cultural interest, they certainly don't worship at them.

I would wager the types of people who hang out at these places are just your average new-agers looking for an excuse to get bombed and have a party. So don't look at the people who do this as representitives of the pagan community in Ireland or the UK, I think they are giving genuine pagans a bad name.

Rev Hellfire

recedite wrote: »

Are these pagans ramming their religion down our throats? Controlling primary education and influencing our legislation?

As sure as day follows night, if they had the numbers that's exactly what they would be doing. They're 'harmless' simply because they lack the volume of numbers to rail-road their beliefs. If you think otherwise you're delusional.

Nemi

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

As sure as day follows night, if they had the numbers that's exactly what they would be doing. They're 'harmless' simply because they lack the volume of numbers to rail-road their beliefs. If you think otherwise you're delusional.

But can't you say that about virtually any belief system, once it gets the numbers to be dominant? Its not even necessarily because they are aggressive. For instance, at a time when 90% of the population were unthinking Catholics, you'd look like a nutter if you demanded a secular primary school system in every corner of the country as there would just have been no demand for it in many places.

As for pagans, now, do they really pose more of a threat to the the stability of Irish society than the ICMSA? Who would you feel exercises more influence over State policy?

Unknown Unknown

Pagans are people too,if they break no laws they can do wat they want.
People should be more tolerant.

Galvasean

Unknown Unknown wrote: »

Pagans are people too,if they break no laws they can do wat they want.

Vandalising trees is a crime.

Unknown Unknown wrote: »

People should be more tolerant.

If people do stupid things they deserve to be ridiculed.

magicbastarder

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

As sure as day follows night, if they had the numbers that's exactly what they would be doing.

does their religion have an inbuilt evangelism?

strobe

magicbastarder wrote: »

does their religion have an inbuilt evangelism?

No religion, that I am aware of, has an inbuilt evangelism. Most as far as I can work out preach a variation of "live and let live".......So why does every religion that I am aware of have a sect that makes evangelism their driving force? Fcuked if I know. Although I have a couple of theories...

robindch

strobe wrote: »

No religion, that I am aware of, has an inbuilt evangelism. [...] So why does every religion that I am aware of have a sect that makes evangelism their driving force? Fcuked if I know. Although I have a couple of theories...

Most religions strongly encourage propagation, aka evangelism, because they'd fade away in no time if they didn't.

In christianity, there's the famous Great Commission which is pretty explicit about the religious duty of christians to spread the religion. Most religions also attempt to control access to mind-altering substances and substitute them with mind-altering experiences, most if not all of which benefit the health of the religion. Many religions also block access or at least discourage access to competing religions and corrosive modes of free-thinking. A lot of religions also attempt to control access to sex, by developing social rules which block access to it unless they agree to submit themselves to the rules of the religion, at which point the submitter is then frequently required to have sex and produce kids who must then be indoctrinated with the religion. In christianity, you're even required to appoint "god-parents" whose duty is to ensure that this indoctrination takes place, in the offchance that the parents don't do it. And so on. There are many more.

Viewed in this way, religions are simply the creations of natural selection operating in the context of human culture -- and the religions which survive and we see in the wild today are simply the ones which have managed to evolve the most effective rules and conventions for ensuring their own survival.

Tabnabs

And pretty much non of those tenets apply to paganism, ranging in spectrum from the conservative to the fluffy bunny variety. There is no pagan pope, no ayatollah high priest and no evangelicalism.

magicbastarder

strobe wrote: »

No religion, that I am aware of, has an inbuilt evangelism.

yeah, it was a badly phrased question. i was more getting at religions having a written creed which could be used as a reference text for their beliefs and evangelising; i don't know much about paganism, and it just seems like a lot of wishful thinking to me, and i'm certainly not aware of any centralisation or standardisation of their beliefs.

Ghost Buster

Dyflin wrote: »

And pretty much non of those tenets apply to paganism, ranging in spectrum from the conservative to the fluffy bunny variety. There is no pagan pope, no ayatollah high priest and no evangelicalism.

For once a topic Im unusually qualified to speak on. Im an atheist married to a Wiccan with a Wiccan Mother in law (Yeah. I can say my mother in law is an auld witch and get away with it!:D). Many of my and my wifes friends are Pagans also.
In the hinterland between abandoning organised religion and belief in God and full fledged atheism I gave paganism a shot, a sort of a last gasp at some sort of spiritual belief i suppose. But I just couldnt stick with it for the reasons you all know and discuss at length.
So yes there are lots of as*holes in paganism, yes it is a lot of mumbo jumbo but that is purely down to individuals and how they approach the religion/ethos/whatever. There is no central power core, no impulse to convert folk in fact the total opposite. many Pagans i know are solitary and dont even discuss their way of life with other Pagans.
I cant speak for all Pagans but I can say that the ones i know are a nice bunch, prone to a bit of wish full thinking to be sure but harmless!!!!
I have attended a few Pagan ceremonys (with hand firmly in my pockets and no greenery round my head!) from my own Handfasting/Wedding, to a my childs naming ceremony and most recently a memorial for a dead relative and though heavy on the mumbo and jumbo i always find them to be uplifting, happy, positive and non demoninational!

Rev Hellfire

Dyflin wrote: »

And pretty much non of those tenets apply to paganism, ranging in spectrum from the conservative to the fluffy bunny variety. There is no pagan pope, no ayatollah high priest and no evangelicalism.

So its a decentralised system of worship, not unlike say Islam which also has no single authority. So all those little pagan sects are in good company there :rolleyes:

Rev Hellfire

Ghost Buster wrote: »

yes it is a lot of mumbo jumbo but that is purely down to individuals and how they approach the religion/ethos/whatever.

*smacks head against wall*
Its either mumbo jumbo or its not, how individuals approach it is irrelevant.
Their hocus pocus stuff is real or it's not, which is it ?

Tabnabs

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

So all those little pagan sects are in good company there :rolleyes:

Absolutely, the same way that your interest in roleplaying links you to the many and well publicised cases of devil worshipping. Oh no wait, I'm talking nonsense... :rolleyes:

Rev Hellfire

Dyflin wrote: »

Absolutely, the same way that your interest in roleplaying links you to the many and well publicised cases of devil worshipping. Oh no wait, I'm talking nonsense... :rolleyes:

I think you'll find the important difference is rpg'ers know the magic, gods and other makey-up stuff is just that pretend.
Though I'm happy to accept the a lot of pagans are probably doing the same.

Ghost Buster

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

*smacks head against wall*
Its either mumbo jumbo or its not, how individuals approach it is irrelevant.
Their hocus pocus stuff is real or it's not, which is it ?

Ummmmm. Not remotely with you. I just said its mumbo jumbo. All Im stating is that of all the mumbo jumbos out there paganism seems to be one of the more benign ones around. As an Athesit I dont think i could be married to a christian, Jew, Muslim etc half as peacefully as I am married to a pagan because it simply isnt an issue. It is never discussed. She isnt interested in preaching to me or my friends or in converting us. Im sure if she knew exactly how barking i find it all it would be an issue but i am given no reason to bring it up because she never does. Neither do her friends.
So yes its all mumbo jumbo but its mumbo jumbo that leaves me the hell alone!!!

Rev Hellfire

Ghost Buster wrote: »

So yes its all mumbo jumbo but its mumbo jumbo that leaves me the hell alone!!!

Mea culpa, I thought you where suggesting that it was somehow lesser bullshít depending on their view/persuasion.
Of-course the real test of how accommodating it is will come when kids arrive (and I'm assuming it they haven't) and how willing they are to allow you to educate your kids on the sheer lunacy of what they believe. Though I'd be very happy to be proven wrong.

Ghost Buster

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Mea culpa, I thought you where suggesting that it was somehow lesser bullshít depending on their view/persuasion.
Of-course the real test of how accommodating it is will come when kids arrive (and I'm assuming it they haven't) and how willing they are to allow you to educate your kids on the sheer lunacy of what they believe. Though I'd be very happy to be proven wrong.

Its already happened. We have kids who are not being reared as pagan or introduced to it because it really really isnt how we operate. The pagans i know sincerely believe that this way of life or belief is not for everybody and is a path you choose or for which you feel a calling.
Hey. Its working for me!

Rev Hellfire

Ghost Buster wrote: »

Its already happened. We have kids who are not being reared as pagan or introduced to it because it really really isnt how we operate. The pagans i know sincerely believe that this way of life or belief is not for everybody and is a path you choose or for which you feel a calling.
Hey. Its working for me!

Well then I stand corrected. Would that all religions where so practiced.

Ghost Buster

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Well then I stand corrected. Would that all religions where so practiced.

If only indeed. But as i said in the beginning i have met plenty of pagans who are as*holes aswell!

TheBardWest

The OP commented about how much litter was being left at various heritage sites, blaming druids, neo-pagans, and others under such umbrella. Curious to know if the OP or others on the thread with similar complaints have taken some kind of formal survey of visitors over some period of time to determine how much of the litter left behind is from said groups, or if you're just conveniently using them as a scapegoat...

For every neo-pagan or nature-based event I've attended, there is almost always a 'leave no trace' policy.

fontanalis

Are they the same Druids who were at Stone'enge, the ones who nobody knows who they were or wot they were doing?
Wait unitl the new age morons get started with the ley lines.

Nemi

fontanalis wrote: »

Are they the same Druids who were at Stone'enge, the ones who nobody knows who they were or wot they were doing?

Hit it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xlf5ucFanpY

einshteen

DIY spiritual systems are great but any form of community seems to attract the space cadets, remember not to assume that there is any official "pagan" belief and that it is a blanket term for many groups and individuals.

einshteen

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

So its a decentralised system of worship, not unlike say Islam which also has no single authority. So all those little pagan sects are in good company there :rolleyes:

see "Quran"

Rev Hellfire wrote:

Its either mumbo jumbo or its not, how individuals approach it is irrelevant.

It's highly relevant. Though there is some common ground between those you would call pagans, it is a blanket term for individual religious systems that utilise the mythology and texts of various cultures. Some treat dieties as an external force that can cause change, others as a psychological tool or a part of oneself. Some abhor group ritual and are solitary practitioners, others find value in the communal ritual experience. The question of whether it's "mumbo jumbo" isn't even valid, because it is a blanket term that encompases individual religions and small cults that can't be classified by the usual religious nomenclature.

Rev Hellfire wrote:

They're 'harmless' simply because they lack the volume of numbers to rail-road their beliefs. If you think otherwise you're delusional.

You need to get to know these people better.

Herbal Deity

einshteen wrote: »

It's highly relevant. Though there is some common ground between those you would call pagans, it is a blanket term for individual religious systems that utilise the mythology and texts of various cultures. Some treat dieties as an external force that can cause change, others as a psychological tool or a part of oneself. Some abhor group ritual and are solitary practitioners, others find value in the communal ritual experience. The question of whether it's "mumbo jumbo" isn't even valid, because it is a blanket term that encompases individual religions and small cults that can't be classified by the usual religious nomenclature.

Err.. if there are deities involved, then it's safe to say it's mumbo jumbo, tbh.

einshteen

Herbal Deity wrote: »

Err.. if there are deities involved, then it's safe to say it's mumbo jumbo, tbh.

Way to not read my post. Also, ironic username.

Rev Hellfire

einshteen wrote: »

You need to get to know these people better.

I'm not sure I do, they've nothing to offer me.

einshteen

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I'm not sure I do, they've nothing to offer me.

Then refrain from generalising.

Rev Hellfire

The only generalization going on here is the fact that the supernatural is bullshít, whether its one god, many gods, the use of hokus pokus; it remains firmly in the realm of the delusional.

Unless you're telling me you know pagans who don't believe in gods, the supernatural and the ability of supernatural agents or forces to effect change in the real world. And if thats the case what do they believe that makes them pagans ?

TheBardWest

Rev Hellfire - for being a moderator, and someone who is supposed to be a representative of the forums, you seem to be unfamiliar with the Charter Rules for this particular area. Check them out sometime - particularly the bit about soap-boxing and repeatedly espousing a single-point of view without entertaining debate (i.e. "everyone in the world who believes something other than me is delusional").

If, on the other hand, you're actually willing to entertain real debate (of which you provide little evidence) and learn a bit about those you so vehemently oppose, might I suggest spending some time reading this blog: http://wildhunt.org


Based on your posts in this thread, I think it is safe to say that your lack of understanding of paganism in any form is about as gross a generalization as can be made of any belief system.

To answer your question - yes. There are pagans who don't believe in one 'god' or 'many gods'. Some pagans simply give praise to 'the earth', or 'the cosmos'. And while others may assign an anthropomorphic quality to 'the land', it doesn't necessarily mean that they think the land is A God by any classical definition.

And for extra credit, try: http://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Do-Druids-Believe-We/dp/1862078645/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1279024915&sr=8-1#reader_1862078645

Rev Hellfire

TheBardWest wrote: »

Rev Hellfire - for being a moderator, and someone who is supposed to be a representative of the forums, you seem to be unfamiliar with the Charter Rules for this particular area. Check them out sometime - particularly the bit about soap-boxing and repeatedly espousing a single-point of view without entertaining debate (i.e. "everyone in the world who believes something other than me is delusional").

As you should be no doubt aware my status as a moderator has no bearing outside of the forum I moderate, here I am simply another humble user.

Rev Hellfire

TheBardWest wrote: »

To answer your question - yes. There are pagans who don't believe in one 'god' or 'many gods'. Some pagans simply give praise to 'the earth', or 'the cosmos'. And while others may assign an anthropomorphic quality to 'the land', it doesn't necessarily mean that they think the land is A God by any classical definition.

Now I can understand someone having an appreciation of nature or perhaps even marvelling at the vastness and variety of the cosmos. But when I hear the word 'praise' it implies an intelligence which simply isn't there. They may as well be praising the blank space in an empty box for all the sense that makes.

Perhaps I'm misrepresenting what you're saying, perhaps paganism is just another word for ecologically aware, to which I'd have no objection.

robindch

TheBardWest wrote: »

Rev Hellfire - for being a moderator, and someone who is supposed to be a representative of the forums, you seem to be unfamiliar with the Charter Rules for this particular area. Check them out sometime - particularly the bit about soap-boxing and repeatedly espousing a single-point of view without entertaining debate [...]

TheBardWest - welcome to A+A where clobbering people with a rolled-up copy of the charter is seen as a mod's job.

Continuez...

magicbastarder

is there a religion which worships forum moderators?

TheBardWest

robindch wrote: »

TheBardWest - welcome to A+A where clobbering people with a rolled-up copy of the charter is seen as a mod's job.

Continuez...

Thanks for the tip - I'll remember it next time. I was under the mistaken impression that reading, and being familiar with, the Charter was seen as the poster's responsibility. Wild idea - I know. Taking personal responsibility vs. waiting for an authoritarian figure to wrangle the naughty children - that's for heathens!

I'll go back to my lurking now...

mikhail

magicbastarder wrote: »

is there a religion which worships forum moderators?

X is to trolling as Christianity is to Satanism?

Nemi

magicbastarder wrote: »

is there a religion which worships forum moderators?

You mean The Moderator who was site banned so that our trolling would be forgiven?

robindch

Nemi wrote: »

You mean The Moderator who was site banned so that our trolling would be forgiven?

Couldn't have been much of a site owner + developer either, if his best response to four thousand years of persistent system and user problems was to let a bunch of regulars ban him from his own site.

magicbastarder

Nemi wrote: »

You mean The Moderator who was site banned so that our trolling would be forgiven?

actually, i could never get my head around that - god had to send himself down for us to kill him so he could forgive us. surely there was less requiring forgiveness if he just dispensed with the coming to earth and being killed bit.

Dades

magicbastarder wrote: »

actually, i could never get my head around that - god had to send himself down for us to kill him so he could forgive us. surely there was less requiring forgiveness if he just dispensed with the coming to earth and being killed bit.

Unbelievable, isn't it?

Nemi

magicbastarder wrote: »

actually, i could never get my head around that - god had to send himself down for us to kill him so he could forgive us. surely there was less requiring forgiveness if he just dispensed with the coming to earth and being killed bit.

OK, this is where I attempt a serious answer to that, as everyone cringes and says 'it was just a joke, alright? Like, god killing himself to forgive us. Geddit? Or, rather, don't geddit?'

Anyway, the thing is actually bit clearer after you plough through the 900 page abridged edition of The Golden Bough. Christianity really just brings together a few ideas that are quite commonly found in religions and myths. Like, its not uncommon for cultures to have a living god-king. Typically, the health of the community was seen as depending on the health of the god-king. So you generally killed him when he was in his prime, as the land might suffer from having a weak, old god as its ruler. And its not unusual for whomever kills the god-king to succeed to the throne - and to be killed in his turn.

If you ever read the Sláine stories in 2000AD you might get a flavour for it. If memory serves, Sláine was to rule for a fixed period, ending with his execution.

This cycle of sacrificial god-kings tends to be linked to ideas of renewal. So your sacrifice of the god-king wipes away past death, and creates the conditions of rebirth. Hence, you get harvest festivals and the like, which feature ceremonies where someone is deemed to be the god-king for a day, and a ritualised sacrifice is acted out. It might just involve the symbolic god-king being dunked in the river, or a straw dummy being set alight. But the symbolism is pretty clear.

There's also a tradition found in some cultures of the scapegoat. Basically, you pick someone out to take the rap for all our wrongs. He typically gets a period where he can do what he likes, maybe even rules for a month, and at the end of the period we execute him and, by that act, wipe our own records clean. (This is also quite a popular ritual in Irish political life, as our Financial Regulator has discovered.)

So there you have it. The whole Jesus business is just a rehashing of ideas borrowed from pagans, of all people.

What do you mean you want the last five minutes of your life back?

recedite

Nemi wrote: »

Typically, the health of the community was seen as depending on the health of the god-king. So you generally killed him when he was in his prime, as the land might suffer from having a weak, old god as its ruler. And its not unusual for whomever kills the god-king to succeed to the throne - and to be killed in his turn.

Maybe this concept is hardwired into our brains. Groups of lions, wolves, deer, apes etc. are usually ruled by a dominant male in his prime. At the first sign of weakness he will be challenged by a would be successor. These "god kings" tend not to grow old, they are killed, or if they lose the battle they may slink away and die of their wounds and the shame (lowered status). The rest of the group then resumes business as usual with the new leader.
Interesting though, that Christianity and Judaism doesn't place more of an emphasis on the coming of the New Messiah, although its always there in the background.

recedite

Actually I'm just thinking... sects that place an emphasis on the coming of the New Messiah tend to get pressurised by the followers into providing a date for the arrival of same, and that of course tends to end badly...:)

Mark Hamill

Nemi wrote: »

There's also a tradition found in some cultures of the scapegoat. Basically, you pick someone out to take the rap for all our wrongs. He typically gets a period where he can do what he likes, maybe even rules for a month, and at the end of the period we execute him and, by that act, wipe our own records clean. (This is also quite a popular ritual in Irish political life, as our Financial Regulator has discovered.)

Wasn't there an episode of South Park, wher Britney Spears was this scapegoat, given fame and attention and the executed for a better harvest ?
I always knew South Park thought us everything we need to know about anything.

sensibleken

I know we've slightly gone off the point of this thread but i just found another one arguing the same thing about ritual offerings messing up megalithic sites. this one in england

http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/forum/?thread=57961&offset=50

TheBardWest

correlation != causation

Anecdotal posts about 'ritual offerings' being left behind, without any particular research on who is doing the leaving, seems off-base.

If people leaving ritual offerings at a neolithic site are 'neo-pagan', then by that logic, all people shopping at Christmas, decorating Christmas trees, throwing wrapping paper and other holiday detritus wherever they may - we can safely assume they're all Christian, right?

I see more trash on the streets of Dublin and surrounding areas than I ever saw living in the US (Pacific Northwest), but I don't automatically assume all Irish are litterers. Generalizations are convenient shortcuts for people who are too lazy to formulate their own opinions based on personal experience and research.

recedite

sensibleken wrote: »

I know we've slightly gone off the point of this thread but i just found another one arguing the same thing about ritual offerings messing up megalithic sites. this one in england

http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/forum/?thread=57961&offset=50

LOL the farmer cut down the tree to get rid of the litter....:pac:

I have seen a good few "holy" hawthorn trees around this country adorned with papers, prayers and tiny ornaments. They are often near holy wells or ancient monastery sites (which could have been taken over from pagan sites I suppose). If anyone cut down the trees they would be lynched. Maybe it was originally a pagan tradition. If so,it must have passed into the local Christianity.