Olympianismos
Welcome to Olympianismos!

Using a rosary inappropriate?

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  Thrasyvoulos on Thu May 30, 2013 9:47 pm

My Catholic aunt gave me a twine rosary today, and I want to actually use it, and not let a gift go to waste. I can adapt the "Our Father" and "Hail Mary" beads for use in my practice easily enough, and I've always, personally, used a cross to symbolise Dionysus, so I -could- adapt it easily enough and use it, but would it be appropriate to use another religion's version of prayer beads for something outside of it's intended purpose? Your thoughts?

Thrasyvoulos
God Member
God Member

Posts : 283
Join date : 2013-04-15
Age : 24
Location : Misery (Missouri)

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  Erodius on Thu May 30, 2013 10:22 pm

but would it be appropriate to use another religion's version of prayer beads for something outside of it's intended purpose?

It depends on how great the difference in intended purpose is. Liturgical Christianity is a Hellenistic Mystery cult rooted in Judaic religion, just as Orphism is a Hellenistic Mystery cult rooted in Graeco-Roman religion, and Isidianism was a Hellenistic Mystery cult rooted in Egyptian religion.

Catholicism is related to Graeco-Roman religion, whether Catholics like it or not, and is even more closely related, in terms of beliefs and practices, to certain Hellenistic Mystery cults, particularly Mithraism and Orphism, with which Christianity shared the same developmental environment, time period, and even language and culture of transmission.

In this case, the ideas of an All-parental Godhead, a semi-divine mortal Mother of God, and as you mentioned, the cross symbol, all have analogues in several Hellenistic Mystery cults. Not to mention, Jesus was revered outside of just Christianity in the Roman Empire. Emperor Alexander Severus (living in the early 200s CE) worshipped the Jewish patriarchs Abraham and Moses, alongside Orpheus, the Orpheo-Pythagorean 'saint' Apollonius of Tyana, and Jesus, all together at the same shrine at his home, and was even planning to sponsor the construction of a Roman-style "temple of Jesus."

There is sufficient analogy and overlap that I think the use of a Catholic rosary is no major issue — at least from a Mystery-cult's point of view.

_________________
"O Best of Gods, blest daimon crown'd with fire . . . hear, and from punishment my soul absolve, the punishment incurr'd by pristine guilt, thro' Lethe's darkness and terrene desire: and if for long-extended years I'm doom'd in these drear realms Heav'n's exile to remain, O grant me soon the necessary means to gain that good which solitude confers on souls emerging from the bitter waves of fraudful Hyle's black, impetuous flood!"
-Iulianic Hymn to Apollon-Helios, ll. 65-106

"Having come for punishment, one must be punished. One must not pull apart the god within oneself."
-Iamblichus, Vita Pythagorica

"Truth would you teach, or save a sinking land,
All hear, none aid you, and few understand."
-Alexander Pope


ΗΣΦ

Blog: eusebeis.wordpress.com
The Orphic Way: www.hellenicgods.org
avatar
Erodius
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 928
Join date : 2013-03-20
Age : 26

View user profile http://eusebeis.wordpress.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  Callisto on Thu May 30, 2013 11:25 pm

Article:

A Garland for Zeus: Modern Prayer Bead Devotions
by Drew Campbell


You might also search for articles on pagan prayer beads and repurposing of rosaries, they might provide additional ideas.

_________________
Επου θεω
"I feel awe of the Gods, I love, I revere, I venerate them"
avatar
Callisto
Sinior Member
Sinior Member

Posts : 136
Join date : 2013-03-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  Erodius on Thu May 30, 2013 11:49 pm

I think Icarus ought to follow his own judgment on what to do with the gift he was given, even if it is just to keep it as a gift from a loved one. Searching for articles on 'pagan prayer beads' I imagine will just bring up ten thousand eclectic solitary neo-wiccans with twenty thousand different ways of using 'prayer beads', whose ideas have no more ethos than Icarus' own, and I would say, less so.

Ultimately, after pondering it more, though I stand by what I said in my previous post about the feasibility/acceptability of using your aunt's gift, I really can't think of a 'use' for it, and, personally, I think creating a ritual action for the purpose of using a certain object is sort of missing the point of why rituals are done in the first place.

Sorry to be a downer — I just don't really see how 'prayer beads' would be particularly useful, and I have misgivings about inventing a ritual for the purpose of using an item. :-S

_________________
"O Best of Gods, blest daimon crown'd with fire . . . hear, and from punishment my soul absolve, the punishment incurr'd by pristine guilt, thro' Lethe's darkness and terrene desire: and if for long-extended years I'm doom'd in these drear realms Heav'n's exile to remain, O grant me soon the necessary means to gain that good which solitude confers on souls emerging from the bitter waves of fraudful Hyle's black, impetuous flood!"
-Iulianic Hymn to Apollon-Helios, ll. 65-106

"Having come for punishment, one must be punished. One must not pull apart the god within oneself."
-Iamblichus, Vita Pythagorica

"Truth would you teach, or save a sinking land,
All hear, none aid you, and few understand."
-Alexander Pope


ΗΣΦ

Blog: eusebeis.wordpress.com
The Orphic Way: www.hellenicgods.org
avatar
Erodius
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 928
Join date : 2013-03-20
Age : 26

View user profile http://eusebeis.wordpress.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  Thrasyvoulos on Fri May 31, 2013 12:10 am

Well, I've always considered not using a gift as an insult to the giver, even if they don't know about it. It's one of my weird traits Laughing and I also don't want to use it too far outside of it's intended purpose, out of respect for the tradition behind it. However, I've already had a similar set of prayer beads (not a rosary, though) that I've been using to add a tactile element to my worship. The ritual didn't follow the beads, the beads came after the ritual. And switching to a rosary would require no altering of the ritual whatsoever, so my main concern is basically the appropriateness of the action in respect to the purpose behind a rosary. But the similarities between how I use my current prayer beads and how Catholics use a rosary are very similar, and the similarities between Catholicism and the Mystery cults you pointed out do make me lean further towards going ahead and switching to the rosary.

Thrasyvoulos
God Member
God Member

Posts : 283
Join date : 2013-04-15
Age : 24
Location : Misery (Missouri)

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  Callisto on Fri May 31, 2013 3:51 am

Erodius wrote:I think Icarus ought to follow his own judgment on what to do with the gift he was given, even if it is just to keep it as a gift from a loved one. Searching for articles on 'pagan prayer beads' I imagine will just bring up ten thousand eclectic solitary neo-wiccans with twenty thousand different ways of using 'prayer beads', whose ideas have no more ethos than Icarus' own, and I would say, less so.

I suggested the articles because Icarus stated his desire to find a use for the rosary. The Drew Campbell link shows a specific Hellenist-type application. The purpose of looking at the others articles is to potentially get additional ideas to aid in developing a repurposing of his own design. Not everything that is Neopagan amounts to folderol.

_________________
Επου θεω
"I feel awe of the Gods, I love, I revere, I venerate them"
avatar
Callisto
Sinior Member
Sinior Member

Posts : 136
Join date : 2013-03-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  J_Agathokles on Fri May 31, 2013 4:33 am

Well, I know some people don't like the idea of prayer beads because the ancients didn't seem to have them. However we live in the 21st century. Christianity is not the only religion that uses prayer beads of once sort or another. Prayer beads seem to be rather popular with certain people, so I think that anyone who thinks they're gonna stay out of our religion is just deluding him/herself. I think it's inevitable that our religion will eventually incorporate prayer beads, in one form or another. I also think it could enrich the experience of worship. When I do my daily prayers/offerings and use incense, I often leave the sticks burning up, leaving me with a lot of time after I finished my prayers and offerings, and the time the sticks burn up. So theoretically I could use that time to contemplate/meditate on the Gods, perhaps reciting epithets of the deity honoured (especially if it's a holy day for some deity), or saying a short prayer, similar to mantra's from Hinduism and it's related traditions.

J_Agathokles
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 172
Join date : 2013-03-19
Age : 27

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  Erodius on Fri May 31, 2013 10:36 am

I suggested the articles because Icarus stated his desire to find a use for the rosary. The Drew Campbell link shows a specific Hellenist-type application. The purpose of looking at the others articles is to potentially get additional ideas to aid in developing a repurposing of his own design. Not everything that is Neopagan amounts to folderol.

Actually, he was asking about the acceptability of using the rosary given by his aunt for something he is already doing.

I've read that page from Drew Campbell many times. First, I think it should be said that, at least as I have been told, Drew Campbell discontinued involvement with any sort of Greek religion years ago and is now a practicing Anglican. All he is doing in that 'garland' is using a string of Greek worry beads to count recitations of snippets from the Jovian parts of Orphic Hymns, and a snippet from the Homeric Hymn #23, which is so short that there is certainly no reason to shorten it further. In doing so, he is also ignoring the invocation of the hymn, as well as the concluding prayer, both of which are integral.

I stand by what I said that Icarus' own judgment is the best in this situation. If he is curious, by all means let him investigate the use of strings of beads in various established religions who have reasoning and centuries of use behind their bead-usage. Either way, however, as I said, and I apologize for my frankness, but I think it is absurd to build a ritual around an implement. That, to me, is real 'idolatry.'

True, not everything that neopagans say is bad, but what they do say comes in most cases either from an occasionally documentable source, or otherwise from personal whim, in which case I think that Icarus' own personal whim, as a student of Greek religion, is more valuable than some stranger who is coming from a totally different religious context and whose character is unknown.

This is why, in the Orphic tradition, we instruct by means of a flesh and blood mentor, whom you get to know personally, and with whom you build a solid and trusting relationship. These are important, I believe, in learning any subject — don't even get me started on comically unbalanced teacher/student ratios or 'online classes' in which students never even meet their teachers . . . Mad

_________________
"O Best of Gods, blest daimon crown'd with fire . . . hear, and from punishment my soul absolve, the punishment incurr'd by pristine guilt, thro' Lethe's darkness and terrene desire: and if for long-extended years I'm doom'd in these drear realms Heav'n's exile to remain, O grant me soon the necessary means to gain that good which solitude confers on souls emerging from the bitter waves of fraudful Hyle's black, impetuous flood!"
-Iulianic Hymn to Apollon-Helios, ll. 65-106

"Having come for punishment, one must be punished. One must not pull apart the god within oneself."
-Iamblichus, Vita Pythagorica

"Truth would you teach, or save a sinking land,
All hear, none aid you, and few understand."
-Alexander Pope


ΗΣΦ

Blog: eusebeis.wordpress.com
The Orphic Way: www.hellenicgods.org
avatar
Erodius
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 928
Join date : 2013-03-20
Age : 26

View user profile http://eusebeis.wordpress.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  J_Agathokles on Fri May 31, 2013 10:38 am

Erodius wrote:Drew Campbell discontinued involvement with any sort of Greek religion years ago and is now a practicing Anglican.

I thought he was a baptist now? Then again, those details matter but little.

J_Agathokles
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 172
Join date : 2013-03-19
Age : 27

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  Linda on Fri May 31, 2013 4:59 pm

Think of a rosary as a help for a moment of prayer and meditation, because that's what it really is. To keep track on prayers. (Back in old Catholic days some people believed that they had to say the exact number of a certain prayer to be pious, so a rosary to keep track was an essential help. Like an abacus in a way Smile ) If you have no need for such a thing, just keep it as a beautiful decoration in your home.

Gifts from a beloved one are often loaded with positive energies, and even if we don't really use them but just look at them now and then they remind us of this person and makes us feel loved. Hestia knows how many kitchen applications I have been given and never use, but I still keep them in the cupboards nevertheless.
avatar
Linda
Full Member
Full Member

Posts : 101
Join date : 2013-04-17
Location : Stockholm, Sweden

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  Callisto on Mon Jun 03, 2013 7:10 pm

Erodius wrote:
Actually, he was asking about the acceptability of using the rosary given by his aunt for something he is already doing.

Yes - acceptability by whom? Whether it's something either of us would consider, I'll not be so presumptuous to tell someone what they can or can't do if they're inclined to include something in their own mode of practice. I'll inform them of what I know, of whether it's known to have been of traditional practice, of whether it's considered proper in that context if they want to know, but ultimately what's acceptable is a personal matter. Asking others opinions can give a gauge of what others think, but unless there's some general authority I'm not aware of, what one person finds personally acceptable or not acceptable doesn't dictate what another may opt to do.

I've read that page from Drew Campbell many times. First, I think it should be said that, at least as I have been told, Drew Campbell discontinued involvement with any sort of Greek religion years ago and is now a practicing Anglican. All he is doing in that 'garland' is using a string of Greek worry beads to count recitations of snippets from the Jovian parts of Orphic Hymns, and a snippet from the Homeric Hymn #23, which is so short that there is certainly no reason to shorten it further. In doing so, he is also ignoring the invocation of the hymn, as well as the concluding prayer, both of which are integral.

What Campbell went on to practice after ceasing Hellenismos is irrelevant, unless the point you're making is that Campbell wrote that article after converting to another religion. Prayer beads are nothing new nor specific to Christianity. The matter at hand is someone seeking to make use of something that he has personal reasons for wanting to use if possible. Pointing to other practices that have pursued use of prayers beads might help him decide, either way.

I stand by what I said that Icarus' own judgment is the best in this situation. If he is curious, by all means let him investigate the use of strings of beads in various established religions who have reasoning and centuries of use behind their bead-usage. Either way, however, as I said, and I apologize for my frankness, but I think it is absurd to build a ritual around an implement. That, to me, is real 'idolatry.'

Nor did I say you shouldn't. However I also stand by the information I provided. Ultimately each person has to make up their idea of what's acceptable as part of their own personal mode of worship. I have no problem with someone choosing to make use of something so long as they remain mindful of what is in keeping with Hellenic traditions and what is a personal innovation. I would not, for example, agree to someone presenting the use of the beads as a traditional practices.

True, not everything that neopagans say is bad, but what they do say comes in most cases either from an occasionally documentable source, or otherwise from personal whim, in which case I think that Icarus' own personal whim, as a student of Greek religion, is more valuable than some stranger who is coming from a totally different religious context and whose character is unknown.

That does happen, but we also see that among individuals claiming to practice Hellenismos. However, I don't think it's for us to dictate to each other or police one other's ability to separate wheat from chaff. Personally I prefer to assume an individual has the aptitude and diligence to research anything they might find of interest unless they've demonstrated otherwise.

Not every Neopagan is a dilettante and not every newcomer is incapable of adequately researching material they come across. I'm quite vocal against playganism but I have known many Neopagans who are well read or academics in their own right and certainly know what they're talking about.

All any of us can do is present opinions with pros and cons. Ultimately individuals must decide for themselves.

_________________
Επου θεω
"I feel awe of the Gods, I love, I revere, I venerate them"
avatar
Callisto
Sinior Member
Sinior Member

Posts : 136
Join date : 2013-03-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  Erodius on Mon Jun 03, 2013 8:28 pm

Yes - acceptability by whom? Whether it's something either of us would consider, I'll not be so presumptuous to tell someone what they can or can't do if they're inclined to include something in their own mode of practice.I'll inform them of what I know, of whether it's known to have been of traditional practice, of whether it's considered proper in that context if they want to know, but ultimately what's acceptable is a personal matter.

Acceptability according to customs and frameworks of Greek traditional religion, which can only be answered by clarifying what mode of Greek religion one is referring to. Depending on the standpoint/mode/school, an affirmative or negative answer may indeed exist. It is not presumptuous, as I see it, when sages like the Master Pythagoras or the Divine Apollonius Tyaneus give instruction on conduct, whether moral, religious or otherwise — in certain traditions' reckoning, Orphism, for instance, these individuals are ectheosized mouthpieces of Divinity, and in the tradition I come from, Truth and Virtue can only come as gifts from Divinity. A student is certainly allowed to question something that has been taught — however, this is only after he/she has first comprehended and grasped the subject as instructed.

But please understand, I am a part of a religion in which I, the individual/self/ego, am not the supreme authority, not in doctrine, not in ethics, not in practice — it is not solitary, nor eclectic. In a solitar-istic/eclectic religious system (even one that may emphasize ancient tradition, as with reconstructionism), yes, it is presumptuous to tell anyone to do or not to do something, but it is likewise nonsensical even to ask, then, in the first place.

I'll inform them of what I know, of whether it's known to have been of traditional practice, of whether it's considered proper in that context if they want to know, but ultimately what's acceptable is a personal matter.

I would not completely agree that it is a personal matter. I say it becomes a communal matter if an individual chooses to pose the question to someone other than him/herself. If there is a disagreement resulting, then it ought to be further discussed and, I believe, an agreement and conclusion should be sought. Agreeing to disagree, I believe, is a last resort if no consensus can be reached.

In this case, the question was of acceptability. The answer is that the subject of bead use is not really addressed. I further explained the likely reason for this, that there is no real reason/function for them. I also voiced my stance that inventing a new ritual for the purpose of using a new object, I think, is nonsense. Icarus then clarified that he was actually thinking of applying his aunt's gift to a personal action he already performs. Finally, I was under the impression that the consensus was that, in this case, in a neutral zone, unaddressed by religious mores — neither supported nor clearly condemned — and thus, an issue of personal discretion.

That does happen, but we also see that among individuals claiming to practice Hellenismos. However, I don't think it's for us to dictate to each other or police one other's ability to separate wheat from chaff. Personally I prefer to assume an individual has the aptitude and diligence to research anything they might find of interest unless they've demonstrated otherwise.

Not every Neopagan is a dilettante and not every newcomer is incapable of adequately researching material they come across. I'm quite vocal against playganism but I have known many Neopagans who are well read or academics in their own right and certainly know what they're talking about.

Actually, I think everyone has a moral obligation to assist others in the process of study and learning in any field, especially those who are experienced in the given field. If anyone is able to assist in the winnowing process, he/she, I believe, is obliged to do so. The assistance can always be declined if unwanted, and can either help or do nothing, but will not harm.

Not everyone of any group is any thing — all generalizations have exceptions. However, I try to speak from my personal experience, which has been that, of the neopagans I have encountered, far more have been dilettantes than have not been, and far more neopagan sites have been total and misleading rubbish than have not been. Further, I would hope that any newcomer is capable of adequate study, but I think it rather cruel and a bit naïve to assume they know even where to begin or how to go about it. I work in education, and it is astounding, even at the college level, how dreadful many individuals' research skills are.

But I think the root of our disagreement is our basic default assumptions about people's primary nature — you seem to be basically optimistic, whereas I would not deny at all that I am basically pessimistic. This is the sort of disparity that I think requires an agreement to disagree.

PS- I must apologize to everyone, as your moderator, for how sidetracked this thread has gotten and all the more that I have absolutely contributed to it's getting so off-topic. It is unbefitting of me as a moderator to have done this. Please accept my apology.

_________________
"O Best of Gods, blest daimon crown'd with fire . . . hear, and from punishment my soul absolve, the punishment incurr'd by pristine guilt, thro' Lethe's darkness and terrene desire: and if for long-extended years I'm doom'd in these drear realms Heav'n's exile to remain, O grant me soon the necessary means to gain that good which solitude confers on souls emerging from the bitter waves of fraudful Hyle's black, impetuous flood!"
-Iulianic Hymn to Apollon-Helios, ll. 65-106

"Having come for punishment, one must be punished. One must not pull apart the god within oneself."
-Iamblichus, Vita Pythagorica

"Truth would you teach, or save a sinking land,
All hear, none aid you, and few understand."
-Alexander Pope


ΗΣΦ

Blog: eusebeis.wordpress.com
The Orphic Way: www.hellenicgods.org
avatar
Erodius
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 928
Join date : 2013-03-20
Age : 26

View user profile http://eusebeis.wordpress.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  Callisto on Tue Jun 04, 2013 6:43 pm

Erodius wrote:Acceptability according to customs and frameworks of Greek traditional religion, which can only be answered by clarifying what mode of Greek religion one is referring to.

Not that anyone has said that using prayer beads is an aspect of Hellenismos. There are two different parts of acceptability. There is whether something is part of tradition and, ultimately, there is what is acceptable for the individual. Sorry, but that's NOT "solitary/eclecticism". It's simply a point of fact that none of us is in a position to control what another chooses to do. Educating still leaves the inquirer to his own conclusions. No amount of emphatic commentary will change that. Unless they've so demonstrated, I don't assume that another is too ignorant to comprehend that they need to exercise diligence when considering something that is not tradition. Being a beginner is not necessarily synonymous with being incapable of critical thought, such would be a rather insulting assumption if not flat out arrogance. There is also merit to entertaining questions as the student learns as it gives insight to their thought process and where they are progressing as well as where they've yet to attain clarity.


But please understand, I am a part of a religion in which I, the individual/self/ego, am not the supreme authority, not in doctrine, not in ethics, not in practice — it is not solitary, nor eclectic. In a solitar-istic/eclectic religious system (even one that may emphasize ancient tradition, as with reconstructionism), yes, it is presumptuous to tell anyone to do or not to do something, but it is likewise nonsensical even to ask, then, in the first place.

I didn't say yours - or mine - is, did I? Please see above regarding solitary/eclecticism. My objection perhaps boils down to a matter of tone since I don't take issue with having differing views. In fact, my point is that it seems you're disincline for there to be any variation of opinion on this. There's a difference between offering personal perspective on something versus sounding as though a different perspective has no merit and/or is detrimental. It implies others aren't contributing anything of worth because it differs from your own stance.

I would not completely agree that it is a personal matter. I say it becomes a communal matter if an individual chooses to pose the question to someone other than him/herself. If there is a disagreement resulting, then it ought to be further discussed and, I believe, an agreement and conclusion should be sought. Agreeing to disagree, I believe, is a last resort if no consensus can be reached.

I didn't suggest that we agree to disagree, I'm referencing sounding dismissive while someone posted on a board that will produce various opinions. I don't object to expressing multiple views, such is a good thing. There is also a difference between gaining communal consensus on what constitutes the actual religion versus giving personal views on external things an individual is contemplating. The latter doesn't mean advocating something be introduced as a recognized part of the religion. I'll not discourage someone from researching topics and inviting others opinions on it.

In this case, the question was of acceptability.

I've already given my view on the matter of acceptability. It would appear we differ in that you look at it strictly on the level of whether it's authentic to the religion, while I look at it as there will be issues that arise that are separate from the religion itself. That is unavoidable given the modern pluralistic society that we live in. We can say "that isn't in keeping with the religion" but that's all because at the end of the day the person will have to make a choice, whether it's right or wrong per someone else. That's true of everyone of us.

Actually, I think everyone has a moral obligation to assist others in the process of study and learning in any field, especially those who are experienced in the given field. If anyone is able to assist in the winnowing process, he/she, I believe, is obliged to do so. The assistance can always be declined if unwanted, and can either help or do nothing, but will not harm.

That has been my point. I haven't suggested otherwise. I simply don't choose to assume someone lacks comprehension skills.

Not everyone of any group is any thing — all generalizations have exceptions. However, I try to speak from my personal experience, which has been that, of the neopagans I have encountered, far more have been dilettantes than have not been, and far more neopagan sites have been total and misleading rubbish than have not been.

This is why it's necessary to have more than one perspective. While I'll be the first to admit there is no shortage of dilettantes, I also have had extensive, personal experience with highly knowledgeable and educated Neopagans. As in, those possessing M.A.s and PhDs in related fields from history to archaeology and Classical Studies. Commonly they belong to traditions which, granted, tends to draw individuals more similar to Recons than Eclectics. But even fluff paganism can be of some value insomuch as an example of what not to do. I'd rather someone read and question, bring it to a topic here than just blindly follow what someone says on a board. To me that doesn't guarantee thought or necessarily correct information.

Further, I would hope that any newcomer is capable of adequate study, but I think it rather cruel and a bit naïve to assume they know even where to begin or how to go about it. I work in education, and it is astounding, even at the college level, how dreadful many individuals' research skills are.

Wait, I'm cruel and naive to assume a person has at least average intelligence, reverence and a true desire to learn? Really? Sorry but that sounds patronizing. Why assume they're incapable of adequate study when they haven't given any indication of that being so?

But I think the root of our disagreement is our basic default assumptions about people's primary nature — you seem to be basically optimistic, whereas I would not deny at all that I am basically pessimistic. This is the sort of disparity that I think requires an agreement to disagree.

On this we agree.

PS- I must apologize to everyone, as your moderator, for how sidetracked this thread has gotten and all the more that I have absolutely contributed to it's getting so off-topic. It is unbefitting of me as a moderator to have done this. Please accept my apology. [/color]

Why is it unbefitting to air differing perspectives? Especially those that give insight as to why individuals hold the views they do and influence how they respond to inquiries?

_________________
Επου θεω
"I feel awe of the Gods, I love, I revere, I venerate them"
avatar
Callisto
Sinior Member
Sinior Member

Posts : 136
Join date : 2013-03-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  Achrelus on Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:46 pm

He was appologizing to the others for getting off of the topic they were on and that which the poster started. If you both would like to furthar discuss what constitutes acceptibility that is fine, but please start a new thread for it. And there really wasn't an issue yet, but certain things being said were border lining personal attacks, and were at least a little rude. Dissagreementt is good and encouraged, but as a general statement to everyone avoid taking it too far, because it wil start to be a fight and that kills the mood. Some people take a liberal stance and some take a conservative one, and that doesn't mean that someone is exclusive or that they are foolishly inclusive. But these are points of discussion, and not enimies of eachother. Neither one makes a person right or wrong and I would like to stress that point.
Erodius' tradition, one I personally tend to agree with, is indeed generally exclusive of ideals other than what it states. He naturally will express that in his posts, dispite how hard he may or may not try to. It also stresses the learning process and how it should be done. Agree with him or not it is a Hellenic Tradition and holds validity here.
Calisto has, or seems to have, a more freely thinking person that finds it different. That each person can and should do it how they want despite exact tradition, and should learn as they go how they see fit.
Neither way is wrong, its about preference. So I would advise that even in disagreeing we keep our personal bias out. We are all students, and all teachers in some respect, and it is important we keep it an intellectual discussion and not an ideological battle.
avatar
Achrelus
Admin
Admin

Posts : 157
Join date : 2013-01-18
Age : 22

View user profile http://olympianismos.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  Erodius on Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:14 pm

a beginner is not necessarily synonymous with being incapable of critical thought, such would be a rather insulting assumption if not flat out arrogance.

No, it isn’t. However, whether individuals are capable of critical thought is not my point. My point is that, whether or not it is pleasant to hear, naïveté abounds, and I have found critical thought to be scarce. This is not to say anyone is incapable, rather that, for whatever reason, be it uncertainty of how to go about critical inquiry, or simple Internet-enabled laziness, rational and critical exploration has not, in my experience, been the default setting. In my book, it is better to assume that someone needs help, and then find out he/she doesn’t need it, than to assume everything is okay and find out later on, after it may be too late, what a mess some person has gotten him/herself into — and when that happens, it hurts me, because it could have been avoided.

There is also merit to entertaining questionsas the student learns as it gives insight to their thought process and where they are progressing as well as where they've yet to attain clarity.

Certainly, questions of clarity and explanation should always be entertained. I was referring to questions of doubt actually; I should have made that clear.

There is whether something is part of tradition and, ultimately, there is what is acceptable for the individual. Sorry, but that's NOT "solitary/eclecticism".

That is partially true. But this is where I see the problem: someone considers him/herself to follow X-tradition (whether or not he/she actually does), and then applies this ‘distributive property’ to mean that anything he/she tacks onto it becomes a part of X, saying that, “well, it might not have been a part of X originally, but it is from now on!”

In this particular instance, the issue of bead use is like asking if it is acceptable in X-religion to draw a picture of a dinosaur on your face. Well, the answer is that it is not expressly addressed (with my non-rhetorical follow up question being: but, why would you do it?). However, what I am taking issue with is that, as I have seen happen, saying that something is “not disallowed” gets taken to mean “you should do it! and tell others to do it too!” and that anything that is not forbidden by XYZ-religion gets taken to mean “everything not forbidden by the religion is part of the religion” or that “doing something not forbidden, as an adherent of X-religion, makes that action a part of X-religion.” This is that to which I am opposed.

In fact, my point is that it seems you're disincline for there to be any variation of opinion on this. There's a difference between offering personal perspective on something versus sounding as though a different perspective has no merit and/or is detrimental. It implies others aren't contributing anything of worth because it differs from your own stance.

I may have a very different approach, partly because of my religious beliefs, to the concept of opinion, as well as to what an opinion is, and whether opinion is valuable.

I affirm variation of opinion where I see that there is cause for variation of opinion, and I am disinclined to it where I do not see there are such grounds. In any case, I think this is a case wherein there may indeed be grounds for variation of practice. In order to figure this out, I have questioned the purpose/reasoning behind using beads, because I cannot, myself, see it. I am not questioning rhetorically either, I sincerely wish to hear a solid reason. Icarus seems to have indicated he does have such a reason. I would be very interested in hearing what this is, if he feels right with sharing it. Sometimes I think my questions may get taken to be rhetorical/sarcastic when they are, actually, not.

I didn't suggest that we agree to disagree, I'm referencing sounding dismissive while someone posted on a board that will produce various opinions. I don't object to expressing multiple views, such is a good thing. There is also a difference between gaining communal consensus on what constitutes the actual religion versus giving personal views on external things an individual is contemplating.

Of course a board will produce various opinions, but I do not consider that all opinions are of equal worth. The genesis of a given opinion and ethos of the opine-r, as I see it, determine an opinion’s worth. I would also say that expressing multiple views is neither inherently a good thing nor inherently a bad thing — it all depends on the views’ source, evolution, rationality, reasonability, defensibility, and again, ethos. In that the issue of beads is an external matter, we agree — you are well versed in many matters of Greek religion, and I know you know it is an external matter — but I don’t think this is necessarily outwardly clear from how we have been discussing it (and I accept whatever portion of guilt for this which is due me), especially for someone who may be whatever degree of new to all of this.

I'll not discourage someone from researching topics and inviting others opinions on it.

I will always discourage someone from taking simple internet searching with any weight. There is a reason that, at least in my department, for many projects I have been specifically disallowed from using any public internet sources — cite-able and verified academic journals (most of which require a password) notwithstanding. Taken to the n-th degree, in the religious studies department, I and others in a class were disallowed even from using e-books of verifiable and authoritative hard-copy publications, which even I agree is a bit extreme.

It would appear we differ in that you look at it strictly on the level of whether it's authentic to the religion,

Not strictly whether something is authentic, though that is part of how I conclude things, but I also look strongly at justifiability, which is, honestly, much more what I am taking issue with in this instance than authenticity; authenticity is not a question here. I recognize that there is room for a degree of supplemental actions — even in the much greater structure of a Mystery religion, there is some room for this — but regardless of whether something is authentic or supplemental, the necessity of justifiability is something on which I do not budge. However, just because I have concluded that something is not justifiable, does not mean I will not change my conclusion. Though it may seem this way, I promise it is not. I will do so at the drop of a hat if someone presents me with a convincing argument of pro-justifiability.

I simply don't choose to assume someone lacks comprehension skills.

Here I suppose we also just differ at a basic level, because I generally do assume that.

While I'll be the first to admit there is no shortage of dilettantes, I also have had extensive, personal experience with highly knowledgeable and educated Neopagans. As in, those possessing M.A.s and PhDs in related fields from history to archaeology and Classical Studies. Commonly they belong to traditions which, granted, tends to draw individuals more similar to Recons than Eclectics. But even fluff paganism can be of some value insomuch as an example of what not to do. I'd rather someone read and question, bring it to a topic here than just blindly follow what someone says on a board. To me that doesn't guarantee thought or necessarily correct information.

I certainly recognize that there are always exceptions to any generalization. There certainly must be individuals who consider themselves neopagans who are well-educated and rational people, as you've said, even with academic degrees in subjects of varying relation. However, I very much doubt that this is the majority, or even a considerable minority (heck, it is not even a considerable minority in most religions), and it has also not been my experience that these individuals are the origin of virtually any of what appears when you google ‘pagan’ or ‘pagan + anything at all’.

I do understand your reasoning behind use of examples of ‘what NOT to do’, and there are plenty of people who would support that approach. I just, overall, do not, at least not until it is clear that an individual has a solid sense first of ‘what TO do’.

Wait, I'm cruel and naive to assume a person has at least average intelligence, reverence and a true desire to learn? Really? Sorry but that sounds patronizing. Why assume they're incapable of adequate study when they haven't given any indication of that being so?

No, you are not. I am speaking of actions and assumptions, not the individuals making them. But ultimately, yes, I believe the assumption that a person is intelligent, reverent, and seeking to learn is a naïve one. To you it may be patronizing, to me it is simply practical and the result of my personal experience of interaction with people. I’d rather it not have been — I really, *really* wish it hadn’t been, maybe then I wouldn’t have exponential blood pressure and an irregular heartbeat — but if wishes and buts were candies and nuts we’d all have a very merry Thargilia, and, unfortunately, this *has* been my experience.

Why is it unbefitting to air differing perspectives? Especially those that give insight as to why individuals hold the views they do and influence how they respond to inquiries?

It is not unbefitting of me to have aired a differing perspective, but it was unbefitting of me to have played a major role in sidetracking a topic, and the blame for it is primarily mine. For this, I apologize. I have been thinking of creating a new thread for our sub-discussion, but have not been able to find a good place to split it, nor think of a good title/subject for it.

Αχρηλος wrote:He was appologizing to the others for getting off of the topic they were on and that which the poster started. If you both would like to furthar discuss what constitutes acceptibility that is fine, but please start a new thread for it. And there really wasn't an issue yet, but certain things being said were border lining personal attacks, and were at least a little rude. Dissagreementt is good and encouraged, but as a general statement to everyone avoid taking it too far, because it wil start to be a fight and that kills the mood. Some people take a liberal stance and some take a conservative one, and that doesn't mean that someone is exclusive or that they are foolishly inclusive. But these are points of discussion, and not enimies of eachother. Neither one makes a person right or wrong and I would like to stress that point.
Erodius' tradition, one I personally tend to agree with, is indeed generally exclusive of ideals other than what it states. He naturally will express that in his posts, dispite how hard he may or may not try to. It also stresses the learning process and how it should be done. Agree with him or not it is a Hellenic Tradition and holds validity here.
Calisto has, or seems to have, a more freely thinking person that finds it different. That each person can and should do it how they want despite exact tradition, and should learn as they go how they see fit.
Neither way is wrong, its about preference. So I would advise that even in disagreeing we keep our personal bias out. We are all students, and all teachers in some respect, and it is important we keep it an intellectual discussion and not an ideological battle.

Thank you, Akhrēlos, for stepping in impartially and for contributing another voice.

Also, as I mentioned, feel free to create a new subject/thread — I just haven't been able to figure out a good way to do it.

_________________
"O Best of Gods, blest daimon crown'd with fire . . . hear, and from punishment my soul absolve, the punishment incurr'd by pristine guilt, thro' Lethe's darkness and terrene desire: and if for long-extended years I'm doom'd in these drear realms Heav'n's exile to remain, O grant me soon the necessary means to gain that good which solitude confers on souls emerging from the bitter waves of fraudful Hyle's black, impetuous flood!"
-Iulianic Hymn to Apollon-Helios, ll. 65-106

"Having come for punishment, one must be punished. One must not pull apart the god within oneself."
-Iamblichus, Vita Pythagorica

"Truth would you teach, or save a sinking land,
All hear, none aid you, and few understand."
-Alexander Pope


ΗΣΦ

Blog: eusebeis.wordpress.com
The Orphic Way: www.hellenicgods.org
avatar
Erodius
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 928
Join date : 2013-03-20
Age : 26

View user profile http://eusebeis.wordpress.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  Apollyon on Thu Aug 01, 2013 11:54 am

All things considered, I say do it. If it aids you in your faith, and is a serious approach to prayer, then why not? I recently made a band of wooden beads — 17 of them — to create an aid.

Christianity adopted many of the images, icons, ideas from others and wrapped them in the cloak of their religion...heck...just the other day I took a little metal golden prayer frame I found at a thrift shop, removed the saint, and inserted a picture of Augustus...he now has a spot in my lararium . . .

Wink good luck!
avatar
Apollyon
Junior Member
Junior Member

Posts : 40
Join date : 2013-03-24
Age : 32
Location : Indiana

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Using a rosary inappropriate?

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum