World united asa church

[Northman]

Re: World united asa church

Personally I can't see a unified doctrine of pagan religions working as from what I've seen we're all very diverse in our beliefs but I think I get what you mean for one umbrella organisation. I used to be an Anglican and that church was chokka with diversity so I reckon an umbrella organisation for all of the many pagan religions could be successful as long as it had a federal structure. Where all beliefs and opinions were as valid as eachother.

[Blodsbroder]

Re: World united asa church

I think that a unification is what a religion always need. It's important for passing down, for unification between groups and for political influence. Sadly i think some of you are diffrent for the sake of being diffrent, which makes you a indivdualist. Even tho some interpretation is free in almost every religion of the world, see for example protestand chrisianity you are always welcome to explain jesus in any way you want. The storys however are the same, and i beleive that we alteast share those. A system of faith would also be a democratic system, not a pope or a holy man at the top as some of you seem to fear. i think that this is and can become a reality. Not perhaps with individualists with a modern "i do things my way " look at life. But perhaps with those who feel that strenght lies with the many. i will look into this some more..

[thalassa]

Re: World united asa church

Diversity is strength. Genetic diversity, for example, ensures species survival. Biodiversity ensures ecological health. Economic diversity ensures economic prosperity.

Can we all try to get along? Sure. But I certainly would hate to see religious diversity smothered by majority rule under some ambiguous guise of "unification". It is a simple fact that we are individuals. That we have individual brains, individual genetics, individual senses, individual histories, individual experiences, individual interpretations of those experiences, individual ways of encountering diverse ecosystems is a simple fact. That we are all individuals interacting in a series of common experiences in shared locations, interfacing with a shared ecosystem and society is also a simple fact. The idea that you can vote on what that common experience should be to negate what it actually *is* is hubris.

Paganism isn't a religion. Its hundreds, thousands, of religions--its plural, not singular. Certainly that means there is room for groups to cooperate and to form councils or committees to work together for things like legal recognition, or advocacy, or activism, or education, or shared community spaces....but those are things for individual communities to determine, not for some global-scale movement.


(for that matter, Christianity isn't a singular religion either--its 38,000 different denominations and radically different interpretations that often don't cooperate and aren't unified either)

[Blodsbroder]

Re: World united asa church

im talking to a wall.. nvm screw this..

[iris]

Re: World united asa church

I would think this to be a great example of ricks first point "you're doing it wrong", but I see no need for swearing.

[Ula]

Re: World united asa church

im talking to a wall.. nvm screw this..

You summed up our issue with your proposal with this right here.

[MaskedOne]

Re: World united asa church

I think that a unification is what a religion always need. It's important for passing down, for unification between groups and for political influence. Sadly i think some of you are diffrent for the sake of being diffrent

Your lack of perception is not our problem. I don't particularly care how much or little you understand about other PF members as long you behave civilly. It is your problem if you are seriously interested in any form of unification. There is significant variation among just those who work within the Heathen/Northern Tradition framework. If you don't take the time to understand those distinctions than you are pissing away any ethical chance of reconciling them.


Also f bombs in general forums are typically censored on sight by the staff. I've amended the language you used in one of your posts, please avoid repeating that choice of terms on the public boards.

[MaskedOne]

Re: World united asa church

Resist the urge to resort to purely inflammatory responses. They may feel appropriate but they tend to explode and demand that I clean up the mess.Being an actively malevolent soul, my clean-up procedures have side effects that no one wants.

I guess I should actually do this properly.

Be civil. Everyone.

[Thorbjorn]

Re: World united asa church

Sorry, you are right. My humor was a bit misplaced. I don't usually respond in kind. Please delete it if you feel it's the way to go, I understand completely. I would edit it out but I think the time has elapsed?

[SilverShadow]

Re: World united asa church

I think that a unification is what a religion always need. It's important for passing down, for unification between groups and for political influence. Sadly i think some of you are diffrent for the sake of being diffrent, which makes you a indivdualist.

At the risk of being likened to a wall..... (by the way, poor form with that comment)

Why do we need political influence? I could understand advocacy (the way thalassa described) but anything more than just seems a bit, well, pointless to me.

Even tho some interpretation is free in almost every religion of the world, see for example protestand chrisianity you are always welcome to explain jesus in any way you want. The storys however are the same, and i beleive that we alteast share those.

When you're talking about the 'stories', are you referring to the Sagas and Eddas? Because you're right, for the most part they're the same stories (translations not withstanding). But I bet if you and I both read Prose Edda, we'd come away with different thoughts on what it all means.

A system of faith would also be a democratic system, not a pope or a holy man at the top as some of you seem to fear.

We're wary of it for good reason. History (and present day, in which there are still numerous examples) teaches us that systems of faith invariably end up being lead by an elite few.

i think that this is and can become a reality. Not perhaps with individualists with a modern "i do things my way " look at life. But perhaps with those who feel that strenght lies with the many. i will look into this some more..

I don't doubt for a moment that there is strength in numbers, in fact, that's what I'm a bit wary about.

Could you explain what a world with this church you're talking about would look like? What would be the rules? Maybe if you give us a clearer idea of what's in your head, it would make things easier.

[MaskedOne]

Re: World united asa church

Sorry, you are right. My humor was a bit misplaced. I don't usually respond in kind. Please delete it if you feel it's the way to go, I understand completely. I would edit it out but I think the time has elapsed?

I was intending to just edit it but apparently modded attachments are still accessible to non-staff so yeah it's pulled till I figure out why the attachment is stubborn.

[Thorbjorn]

Re: World united asa church

I was intending to just edit it but apparently modded attachments are still accessible to non-staff so yeah it's pulled till I figure out why the attachment is stubborn.

Works for me, either way.

- - - Updated - - -

Sadly i think some of you are diffrent for the sake of being diffrent, which makes you a indivdualist.

Wasn't being individual, self-reliant and independent among the defining, and highly prized traits of the northern peoples?

Someone mentioned the Anglican Church somewhere; the closest I think anyone would come to a "united Heathenism" is something like the Anglican communion or the Eastern Orthodox Churches. All independent, self-governing, yet bound by certain commonalities. If the different Heathen and Pagan groups identified along the lines of those two churches, with a primus inter pares, first among equals "face", ala the Archbishop of Canterbury or the Ecumenical Patriarch, it might work, but still a very long shot. But neither the Archbishop of Canterbury or the Ecumenical Patriarch has any administrative power over the churches, and neither should the "face" of a Heathen and Pagan confederation.

I think even that is too structured for something as diverse in belief and practice, and even language as Heathenism and Paganism. Each village or region even had its own variations of the Gods. H.R. Ellis-Davidson points this out especially in the chapter on Freyr in Gods and Myths of Northern Europe. Even in Hinduism the God Shiva is known as Shiva in Sanskrit, Hindi, Tamil, Telugu, Gujarati, and in almost all the hundreds of unrelated languages of India. Thor and Odin are known by how many names in Anglo-Saxon, Old Norse, German, which are all related languages? All in all, I don't see how it could possibly work. But these are all just my observations with no other claims expressed or implied.

[thalassa]

Re: World united asa church

Someone mentioned the Anglican Church somewhere; the closest I think anyone would come to a "united Heathenism" is something like the Anglican communion or the Eastern Orthodox Churches. All independent, self-governing, yet bound by certain commonalities. If the different Heathen and Pagan groups identified along the lines of those two churches, with a primus inter pares, first among equals "face", ala the Archbishop of Canterbury or the Ecumenical Patriarch, it might work, but still a very long shot. But neither the Archbishop of Canterbury or the Ecumenical Patriarch has any administrative power over the churches, and neither should the "face" of a Heathen and Pagan confederation.

IMO, the answer is Congregationalism--it orginated as a Protestant movement originating in the 1600's, where individual congregations are autonomous, religiously soverign, and independent, but often choose to work together for different things (often by forming an association, council, or conference)...there's a wide variety of Congregationalist groups (which goes beyond Christianity now)--. If this were to work, groups/traditions would choose representatives for a larger council/convention. Individual member groups don't have to abide by every little thing the larger council does or says and can interpret its ideas in its own way. But the benefit of a large group is a) more money, and b) a bigger megaphone...both of which are crucial to education, understanding, and acceptance.

I do see a purpose in intra-Pagan cooperation....getting Pagan chaplains in the military (and I can tell you exactly how to make that work), for one... Heck, that's how the pentacle got approved for veteran headstones, which led for the policy change to get a Heathen symbol approved...and that is how a Druid symbol will eventually be approved (once a family requests it), etc.

I'll be honest, part of the reason I'm Pagan is a matter of "politics" (though I mean that in a round-about way...perhaps better phrased as "world view", rather than religious experience and beliefs)...a couple years ago there was a blogging world push to write about Pagan values--what individuals *think* Pagan values are, or what they should be, whether that be individually or collectively. The ideas that I saw expressed the most often can be summed up as 1) a committment to plurality and 2) respect for the material and physical as sacred, both of which were seen as a natural result of an imminent polytheistic theology. Other than the fact that some Pagans are as ignorant when it comes to science as their other religious counterparts, I see no reason why a Pan-Pagan organization couldn't organize to get behind an idea like keeping creationism out of science classrooms, or sustainabe agriculture, or watershed conservation, or emergency/disaster response, etc.

[Thorbjorn]

Re: World united asa church

If this were to work, groups/traditions would choose representatives for a larger council/convention. Individual member groups don't have to abide by every little thing the larger council does or says and can interpret its ideas in its own way. But the benefit of a large group is a) more money, and b) a bigger megaphone...both of which are crucial to education, understanding, and acceptance.

A synod.

I do see a purpose in intra-Pagan cooperation....getting Pagan chaplains in the military (and I can tell you exactly how to make that work), for one... Heck, that's how the pentacle got approved for veteran headstones, which led for the policy change to get a Heathen symbol approved...and that is how a Druid symbol will eventually be approved (once a family requests it), etc.

The USAF now recognizes Heathenism and Asatru as valid religions. It's here http://www.asatrublog.com/ almost at the bottom of the screen.

...I see no reason why a Pan-Pagan organization couldn't organize to get behind an idea like keeping creationism out of science classrooms, or sustainabe agriculture, or watershed conservation, or emergency/disaster response, etc.

Definitely... no doubt Pagan groups can do a lot, much the same as other religious groups do. Sometimes things like the ones you mentioned can start the ball rolling for some coalescence between groups. I don't want to see any kind of monolithic organism, but it would be nice if Pagans could start finding each other to do stuff like this.

[thalassa]

Re: World united asa church

The USAF now recognizes Heathenism and Asatru as valid religions. It's here http://www.asatrublog.com/ almost at the bottom of the screen.

They've been "recognized" as a religion since 1999, when Wicca was. So has Druidry, and just about every other Pagan tradition.

Seriously, have you ever read the DoD's description of Wicca, in their chaplain handbook? Under "Other names"--"Witchcraft; Goddess worshippers; Neo-Paganism, Paganism, Norse (or any other ethnic designation) Paganism, Earth Religion, Old Religion, Druidism, Shamanism. Note: All of these groups have some basic similarities and many surface differences of expression with Wicca."

The lingo might be wrong, but they've always been recognized. They just weren't always on the list that the personnel office had to put you in the computer.

As an aside, its not technically correct to say that the DoD recognizes "valid" religions... DoD directive 1300.17 states "unless it could have an adverse impact on military readiness, unit cohesion, and good order and discipline, the Military Departments will accommodate individual expressions of sincerely held beliefs (conscience, moral principles, or religious beliefs) of Service members in accordance with the policies and procedures in this instruction" (the wording on this was a tad bit different when I was active duty, and it was a *shall* burden, not a *will* one, which changes the chain of command's required response a bit...).