From: <dkpirolo@cts.com>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 23 Dec 1997 01:29:38 GMT
Organization: CTS Network Services
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf>
References: <34982F49.4F46D13@pepperdine.edu> <19971219024500.VAA21922@ladder02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wagasa.cts.com
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1162
Cache-Post-Path: wagasa.cts.com!unknown@209.68.198.46
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!news-xfer.siscom.net!WCG!news.oru.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!howland.erols.net!usc!newshub.cts.com!relief.cts.com!not-for-mail

Dear gentles:
I have been reading the SCA is not for children string for a while now and
am forced to speak.  I am a born again Chrisitian currently attending a
Christian college of which my husband is a graduate.  He plans on going
into the ministry.  We have three young children ages 9, 6,and 5.  And we
are in the SCA.  We take our young kids to events with us.  I do not let
them go to camps where I believe objectionable ( to me) diversions are
occurring.  My children are exposed to other world views.  This does not
lessen their beliefs it only re enforces them.  Not everyone is going to
think like I do but then if I only wanted my children to be exposed to what
I beleive in I would have to live on a compound in Montana.

P.S.  Religion does belong in the SCA because religion is just a fancy word
for how a person looks at the world around them.

######

From: iseultnel@aol.com (Iseultnel)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 23 Dec 1997 03:18:07 GMT
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf>
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!newsfeed.usit.net!news-dc-3.sprintlink.net!news-dc-1.sprintlink.net!news-east.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!howland.erols.net!portc02.blue.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail

>:
>I have been reading the SCA is not for children string for a while now and
>am forced to speak.  I am a born again Chrisitian currently attending a
>Christian college of which my husband is a graduate.  He plans on going
>into the ministry.  We have three young children ages 9, 6,and 5.  And we
>are in the SCA.  We take our young kids to events with us.  I do not let
>them go to camps where I believe objectionable ( to me) diversions are
>occurring.  My children are exposed to other world views.  This does not
>lessen their beliefs it only re enforces them.  Not everyone is going to
>think like I do but then if I only wanted my children to be exposed to what
>I beleive in I would have to live on a compound in Montana.
>
>P.S.  Religion does belong in the SCA because religion is just a fancy word
>for how a person looks at the world around them.
>
>

Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap
Clap Clap <<Brava>> Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap <<Well said, my lady>>
Countess Iseult nicElam, OP 

######

From: "Bryan J. Maloney" <bjm10@cornell.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 1997 17:38:12 -0500
Organization: Cornell University
Lines: 13
Sender: bjm10@cornell.edu (Verified)
Message-ID: <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: bjm10@cornell.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: cu-dialup-1304.cit.cornell.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I)
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!newsfeed.usit.net!news-dc-3.sprintlink.net!news-dc-1.sprintlink.net!news-east.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-xfer.netaxs.com!news-xfer.mccc.edu!news.lightlink.com!news.graphics.cornell.edu!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!usenet

> >P.S.  Religion does belong in the SCA because religion is just a fancy word
> >for how a person looks at the world around them.
> >
> >
> 
> Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap
> Clap Clap <<Brava>> Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap <<Well said, my lady>>
> Countess Iseult nicElam, OP


Tripe, tripe, tripe, tripe, tripe, tripe, tripe, further made
preposterous by applause for tripe.  Religion definitely has a place in
SCA, unless SCA has finally abandoned its stated mission.

######

From: Tigranes of Bezabde <tigranes@epix.net>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 1997 10:31:49 -0800
Organization: epix Internet Services
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <34A2A695.AA4@epix.net>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mtrs-244ppp64.epix.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E-KIT  (Win16; U)
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!atl-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-sea-19.sprintlink.net!news-in-west.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!199.224.117.12!news2.epix.net!news1.epix.net!not-for-mail

teekem@spamtrap.com wrote:
> 
> Nope. Religion has a place insofar as it has a place in ANY facet of
> life.... No more.

I disagree.  The role played by religion in our period was a great deal 
more significant than today.  To dismiss it as peripheral is 
narrowminded.

I'm not a religious person (Heck, I'm spending time online on Christmas) 
but I find the study of period religious practices greatly enhances the 
SCA experience.  

> 
> I am not interested in going to bible camp events.

As much as it pains me, I have to agree here with Mr. Maloney....that's 
tripe.  For anyone to believe that recognizing religion's role in 
period life would lead to "Bible camp events" is ludicrous.  IMO, that's 
a textbook definition of "knee-jerk reaction."

Open you mind, and find out how rich life in the SCA can be.  You can't 
seriously study the middle ages while blinding yourself to such a 
prominent aspect.

Tigranes of Bezabde,  Zoroastrian
AEthelmearc, Endless Hills

######

From: teekem@spamtrap.com
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 25 Dec 1997 20:40:34 GMT
Organization: Jump Point Communications, Inc.
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <67ugc2$69d$1@news.jumpnet.com>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <34A2A695.AA4@epix.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: serv1.jump.net
User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-971204 (UNIX) (SunOS/5.5.1 (sun4m))
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!su-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!newsgate.tandem.com!news.mpd!news-fw!jump.net!jumpnet.com!not-for-mail

Tigranes of Bezabde <tigranes@epix.net> wrote:
: teekem@spamtrap.com wrote:
:> 
:> Nope. Religion has a place insofar as it has a place in ANY facet of
:> life.... No more.

: I disagree.  The role played by religion in our period was a great deal 
: more significant than today.  To dismiss it as peripheral is 
: narrowminded.

I won't deny that it had a great deal of influence, but I severely doubt
the entertainment value of the Crusades.

We are to recreate the BEST parts of the periods we are interested in, and
we should make an attempt to see that they are enjoyed by all.

: I'm not a religious person (Heck, I'm spending time online on Christmas) 
: but I find the study of period religious practices greatly enhances the 
: SCA experience.

I find it doesn't. It enhances my knowledge and understanding of history,
but does not enhance my desire to reenact it any more than does the random
cholera epidemic.

:> I am not interested in going to bible camp events.

: As much as it pains me, I have to agree here with Mr. Maloney....that's 
: tripe.  For anyone to believe that recognizing religion's role in 

You're tripe. Anybody who resorts to simply insulting points of view other
than their own is a rather trivial individual in their own right.

: period life would lead to "Bible camp events" is ludicrous.  IMO, that's 
: a textbook definition of "knee-jerk reaction."

So how exactly would you bring religion into it? Whose religion would you
bring?

Bible camp.

: Open you mind, and find out how rich life in the SCA can be.  You can't 
: seriously study the middle ages while blinding yourself to such a 
: prominent aspect.

You know, the Inquisitions were a prominent aspect of historical
significance.... Should we recreate those, as well? What about rampant
anti-semitism?


I repeat that I do not go to SCA events to be preached to. I am fully
aware of the role of religion in history, and choose to ignore it while
playing at the SCA, just as I ignore any unpleasant aspect of history
while playing.

And while you may consider my characterization of religion as unpleasant
to be objectionable, I'd like to remind you that there are a great many
different people in the SCA with a great many different beliefs, and that
some of those beliefs grind unpleasantly against each other... Your
religious beliefs are indeed probably objectionable to others, and to
expose them unnecessarily to your beliefs will take away from their
enjoyment of the SCA. Do you really want to do that?



 : Tigranes of Bezabde,  Zoroastrian
: AEthelmearc, Endless Hills

######

From: bellatrix2@aol.com (Bellatrix2)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 26 Dec 1997 09:56:17 GMT
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <19971226095601.EAA22763@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
References: <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com>
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!portc02.blue.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail

Greetings,

>>:
>>I have been reading the SCA is not for children string for a while now and
>>am forced to speak.  I am a born again Chrisitian currently attending a
>>Christian college of which my husband is a graduate.  He plans on going
>>into the ministry.  We have three young children ages 9, 6,and 5.  And we
>>are in the SCA.  We take our young kids to events with us.  I do not let
>>them go to camps where I believe objectionable ( to me) diversions are
>>occurring.  My children are exposed to other world views.  This does not
>>lessen their beliefs it only re enforces them.  Not everyone is going to
>>think like I do but then if I only wanted my children to be exposed to what
>>I beleive in I would have to live on a compound in Montana.
>>
>>P.S.  Religion does belong in the SCA because religion is just a fancy word
>>for how a person looks at the world around them.
>>
>>
>
>Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap
>Clap
>Clap Clap <<Brava>> Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap <<Well said, my lady>>
>Countess Iseult nicElam, OP 

YUP

Stephan

######

From: bellatrix2@aol.com (Bellatrix2)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 26 Dec 1997 09:57:42 GMT
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <19971226095701.EAA20292@ladder02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder02.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
References: <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu>
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!newsfeed.usit.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!152.163.199.19!portc03.blue.aol.com!audrey02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail

Greetings,

>> >P.S.  Religion does belong in the SCA because religion is just a fancy
>word
>> >for how a person looks at the world around them.
>> >
>> >
>> 
>> Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap
>Clap
>> Clap Clap <<Brava>> Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap <<Well said, my lady>>
>> Countess Iseult nicElam, OP
>
>
>Tripe, tripe, tripe, tripe, tripe, tripe, tripe, further made
>preposterous by applause for tripe.  Religion definitely has a place in
>SCA, unless SCA has finally abandoned its stated mission.
>
>
And what mission are you speaking of?

Stephan

######

From: "Bryan J. Maloney" <bjm10@cornell.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 1997 00:02:03 -0500
Organization: Cornell University
Lines: 46
Sender: bjm10@cornell.edu (Verified)
Message-ID: <34A48BCB.4172@cornell.edu>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <34A2A695.AA4@epix.net> <67ugc2$69d$1@news.jumpnet.com>
Reply-To: bjm10@cornell.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: cu-dialup-0205.cit.cornell.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.03 (Win95; U)
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!news-xfer.siscom.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news3.spinne.com!news.spinne.com!news-xfer.mccc.edu!news.lightlink.com!news.graphics.cornell.edu!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!usenet

teekem@spamtrap.com wrote:

> I won't deny that it had a great deal of influence, but I severely doubt
> the entertainment value of the Crusades.

Typical ignorant crap.  Medieval religion is not equivalent to the
Crusades.  Ever contemplate a tryptych?  Ever hear an "Ave" written in
the 14th century?  

> We are to recreate the BEST parts of the periods we are interested in, and

Really?  Only the "BEST parts"?  Please, please, please do point out
upon which star in heaven this cosmic law is written?


> I find it doesn't. It enhances my knowledge and understanding of history,
> but does not enhance my desire to reenact it any more than does the random
> cholera epidemic.

Ah, yes, the typical knee-jerk straw man.


> So how exactly would you bring religion into it? Whose religion would you
> bring?

Gosh, how about bringing in the religions that were actually present in
the societies in question?  What a concept!  Actually working with
historical materials!  In the SCA, even!



> I repeat that I do not go to SCA events to be preached to. I am fully
> aware of the role of religion in history, and choose to ignore it while
> playing at the SCA, just as I ignore any unpleasant aspect of history
> while playing.

Narrow-minded, knee-jerk, typical bigot.  Since some religion has been
unpleasant, you condemn all religion as unpleasant.


> some of those beliefs grind unpleasantly against each other... Your
> religious beliefs are indeed probably objectionable to others, and to

A modern person's religious beliefs are immaterial.  What is appropriate
for SCA are the religious beliefs of the cultures appropriate for SCA
portrayal.

######

From: "Susan Carroll-Clark" <sclark@chass.utoronto.ca>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 1997 18:16:18 -0500
Organization: University of Toronto, Computing in the Humanities and Social Sciences
Lines: 78
Message-ID: <68431f$ue9$1@alpha.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <34A2A695.AA4@epix.net> <67ugc2$69d$1@news.jumpnet.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp17.chass.utoronto.ca
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cs.utexas.edu!utnut!alpha.chass.utoronto.ca!not-for-mail

Greetings!

>I won't deny that it had a great deal of influence, but I severely doubt
>the entertainment value of the Crusades.
>
>We are to recreate the BEST parts of the periods we are interested in, and
>we should make an attempt to see that they are enjoyed by all.

OK--I don't like going to court.  I don't enjoy it, or see its value as
recreation.  Does that mean the SCA should stop having courts just because
of me?

I'm also speaking here not as Nicolaa, but as Susan, a doctoral candidate in
medieval history who has expended a great amount of time attempting to learn
to understand medieval religion (primarily Christianity and Judaism, with a
little Norse and Russian paganism thrown in).   Just as there were "bad
parts" to all of these religions, there were also "good parts."  Any
institution staffed by humans will.
To understand a medieval person, you have to understand what motivated him
or her, even if you don't believe it or agree with it.  And religion, along
with the agricultural cycle, had a profound influence on daily life.

>I find it doesn't. It enhances my knowledge and understanding of history,
>but does not enhance my desire to reenact it any more than does the random
>cholera epidemic.

So don't.  But don't try to cast those of us who do as some kind of
religious nuts with a hidden agenda.  (I'm sure as heck not Catholic in the
modern world!)  My only agenda is understanding of medieval life.

>So how exactly would you bring religion into it? Whose religion would you
>bring?
>
>Bible camp.

Uh....historic ones?  Remember that bit about "recreating the good parts"?
Perhaps we could study those parts meaningful to everyday people, which
rarely had much to do with large-scale events like the Crusades?  Perhaps we
could learn a little about life in the Middle Ages without seeing a threat
or someone trying to proseltize behind every pillar.

>You know, the Inquisitions were a prominent aspect of historical
>significance.... Should we recreate those, as well? What about rampant
>anti-semitism?

They should be studied in order to understand why they happened.  But if
we're recreating the "best parts", there's no need for them to come to SCA
events.

>I repeat that I do not go to SCA events to be preached to. I am fully
>aware of the role of religion in history, and choose to ignore it while
>playing at the SCA, just as I ignore any unpleasant aspect of history
>while playing.

I repeat, I do no preaching when I recreate religion in the SCA, nor do I
preach when I teach classes on it.  It's hard to "preach" about something
you do not personally believe in.

>And while you may consider my characterization of religion as unpleasant
>to be objectionable, I'd like to remind you that there are a great many
>different people in the SCA with a great many different beliefs, and that
>some of those beliefs grind unpleasantly against each other... Your
>religious beliefs are indeed probably objectionable to others, and to
>expose them unnecessarily to your beliefs will take away from their
>enjoyment of the SCA. Do you really want to do that?

I repeat--I'm not talking about MY religious beliefs, because the beliefs my
persona espouses and my own are two very, very different things.  In the
name of historical research, I'm able to research those beliefs without
feeling threatened that somehow they'll turn me Catholic.   If a religious
expression bothers you, walk away.  If it offends you deeply, you're
probably better off not studying the Middle Ages at all.

Cheers--
Nicolaa de Bracton

######

Path: ccw.ch!usenet
From: Neil.Franklin.nospam@ccw.ch (remove .nospam)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 27 Dec 1997 23:24:36 +0100
Organization: My own Private Self
Lines: 103
Message-ID: <wwgqv2zf.fsf@chonsp.franklin.lugs.ch>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <34A2A695.AA4@epix.net> <67ugc2$69d$1@news.jumpnet.com>
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34

teekem@spamtrap.com wrote:
> Nope. Religion has a place insofar as it has a place in ANY facet of
> life.... No more.
Tigranes of Bezabde <tigranes@epix.net> wrote:
: I disagree.  The role played by religion in our period was a great deal 
: more significant than today.  To dismiss it as peripheral is 
: narrowminded.
teekem@spamtrap.com wrote:
>I won't deny that it had a great deal of influence, but I severely doubt
>the entertainment value of the Crusades.
>We are to recreate the BEST parts of the periods we are interested in, and
>we should make an attempt to see that they are enjoyed by all.

Hmmmm. So religion belongs entirely to the bad parts of period
society? I admit that Crusades and Inquisition etc were bad. But they
were also not all or even just representative of period religion.

Today many people associate period religion with them because they
were the spectacular (and therefore easyly remembered) bits, also the
behaviour of todays fundamentalists (see the beginning of this
thread:-)) helps upkeep this view.

But period religion (I am speaking of 400 to 1600 Europe, so that means
christianisty) also had its good sides. Such were:

- belief in purpose. So they had less disorientedness. Just look at
todays intellectual antics or wide spread of depression or amock
runners or similar for the effects of mundane society not having that.

- belief in afterlife. So they had less fears that death is the end of
everything. Just look at todays health food nuts or life at any price
medicine or cryonics or similar for the effects of losing that.

- belief in judgment after life. So they knew that wrongs would be
righted. Just look at todays "must set it right" or justice at any
price or similar for the effects of losing that.

Tigranes of Bezabde <tigranes@epix.net> wrote:
: I'm not a religious person (Heck, I'm spending time online on Christmas) 

Computers and networking are not anti-religious. I am religious (not
churchgoing variety), but went playing Quake against 8 friends (one of
them son of a priest) on christmas.

Tigranes of Bezabde <tigranes@epix.net> wrote:
: but I find the study of period religious practices greatly enhances the 
: SCA experience.
teekem@spamtrap.com wrote:
>I find it doesn't. It enhances my knowledge and understanding of history,
>but does not enhance my desire to reenact it any more than does the random
>cholera epidemic.

An knowledge and understanding which IMHO at least in religious stuff
is not very enhanced yet. Research and let it grow, they you may feel
a desire to recreate it.

Tigranes of Bezabde <tigranes@epix.net> wrote:
: period life would lead to "Bible camp events" is ludicrous.  IMO, that's 
: a textbook definition of "knee-jerk reaction."
teekem@spamtrap.com wrote:
>So how exactly would you bring religion into it? Whose religion would you
>bring?
>Bible camp.

How: the way it is done in the SCA: by acting your personas religion
Whose: the way it is done in the SCA: by acting your personas religion

It is unlikely that that would have been bible camp. More along the
line of:

- adapt their religiously motivated expressions (such as "if god so will")
- explain things to strangers in terms of their cosmogeny
- their items of garb, jewlry, decorations in your tent
- act their small rituals of everyday life (such as crossing yourself)

Tigranes of Bezabde <tigranes@epix.net> wrote:
: Open you mind, and find out how rich life in the SCA can be.  You can't 
: seriously study the middle ages while blinding yourself to such a 
: prominent aspect.
teekem@spamtrap.com wrote:
>You know, the Inquisitions were a prominent aspect of historical
>significance.... Should we recreate those, as well? What about rampant
>anti-semitism?

These don't belong to the best parts, nor the most prominent (from
a period point of view), so leave them. Just do the good ones.

teekem@spamtrap.com wrote:
>I repeat that I do not go to SCA events to be preached to.

But (I hope) you go to the CSA to recreate medieval society (at least
the better parts of it).


Now I hope this gets out to the net. My provider ist doing a "chrismas
special", adding to their normal "drop 5% of messages" policy a series
of crashes and "drop everything for a few days":-( They seem also to
believe in networking being nothing for christmas:-)

-- 
Neil.Franklin.nospam@ccw.ch (remove .nospam), http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/
  for Geek Code, Papernet, Voicenet, PGP public key see http:
Any computer, that is running optimally, is outdated; including my Cx486

######

From: ldcharls@swbell.net
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 1997 15:54:50 +0000
Organization: Southwestern Bell Internet Services, Richardson, TX
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <34A6764A.597C@swbell.net>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <34A2A695.AA4@epix.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-207-193-44-24.austtx.swbell.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: nnrp3.rcsntx.swbell.net 883345846 3268 (None) 207.193.44.24
X-Complaints-To: usenet@nnrp3.rcsntx.swbell.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01-C-SBMH (Macintosh; I; 68K)
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!atl-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-sea-19.sprintlink.net!news-in-west.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!151.164.1.34!swbell!not-for-mail

Tigranes of Bezabde wrote:
> 
> teekem@spamtrap.com wrote:
> > I am not interested in going to bible camp events.
> 
> As much as it pains me, I have to agree here with Mr. Maloney....that's
> tripe.  For anyone to believe that recognizing religion's role in
> period life would lead to "Bible camp events" is ludicrous.  IMO, that's
> a textbook definition of "knee-jerk reaction."
> 
> Open you mind, and find out how rich life in the SCA can be.  You can't
> seriously study the middle ages while blinding yourself to such a
> prominent aspect.
> 
> Tigranes of Bezabde,  Zoroastrian
> AEthelmearc, Endless Hills

Perhaps, Milord, you might allow Teekem his opinion without calling him
'narrow minded' just because he disagrees with you. He is quite aware of
the possibilities of SCA participation.
  While one cannot ignore the role played by religion in society, the
SCA is correct, IMO, to restrict the role played by religion at SCA
events. Just as I can read the Bible without forcing you to hear it, one
can study religion without forcing others to participate in it.
Otherwise, we leave the door open for silly religious squabbles at SCA
events. This is why the SCA took the non-religious stance it has. 
  We can understand religion in the medieval context without cramming
one particular religion down someone's throat. Then we all may have fun,
without ruining the game with silly squabbles.

Lord Charles MacKinnon
Barony of Bryn Gwlad
Kingdom of Ansteorra

######

From: teekem@spamtrap.com
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 29 Dec 1997 08:28:58 GMT
Organization: Jump Point Communications, Inc.
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <687n0a$q2i$3@news.jumpnet.com>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <34A2A695.AA4@epix.net> <67ugc2$69d$1@news.jumpnet.com> <34A48BCB.4172@cornell.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: serv1.jump.net
User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-971204 (UNIX) (SunOS/5.5.1 (sun4m))
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!atl-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news-in-east.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!204.238.120.130!jump.net!jumpnet.com!not-for-mail

Bryan J. Maloney <bjm10@cornell.edu> wrote:
: teekem@spamtrap.com wrote:

:> I won't deny that it had a great deal of influence, but I severely doubt
:> the entertainment value of the Crusades.

: Typical ignorant crap.  Medieval religion is not equivalent to the

Typical idiot response.

: Crusades.  Ever contemplate a tryptych?  Ever hear an "Ave" written in
: the 14th century?  

Your point?

:> We are to recreate the BEST parts of the periods we are interested in, and

: Really?  Only the "BEST parts"?  Please, please, please do point out
: upon which star in heaven this cosmic law is written?

I look forward to your death by cholera, then. 

:> I find it doesn't. It enhances my knowledge and understanding of history,
:> but does not enhance my desire to reenact it any more than does the random
:> cholera epidemic.

: Ah, yes, the typical knee-jerk straw man.

Typical response by an idiot with nothing to say.

Don't bandy about terms like 'straw man' unless you know what they mean.

:> So how exactly would you bring religion into it? Whose religion would you
:> bring?

: Gosh, how about bringing in the religions that were actually present in
: the societies in question?  What a concept!  Actually working with
: historical materials!  In the SCA, even!

And if other people take offence to those religions?

You gonna burn us at the stake for heresy, too? Torture us? That's period,
so GOSH we MUST do it.....

:> I repeat that I do not go to SCA events to be preached to. I am fully
:> aware of the role of religion in history, and choose to ignore it while
:> playing at the SCA, just as I ignore any unpleasant aspect of history
:> while playing.

: Narrow-minded, knee-jerk, typical bigot.  Since some religion has been

Typical idiotic response by someone with nothing to say.

You know, I could just make that a macro.

: unpleasant, you condemn all religion as unpleasant.

Where did I do this? Quote it back to me.

:> some of those beliefs grind unpleasantly against each other... Your
:> religious beliefs are indeed probably objectionable to others, and to

: A modern person's religious beliefs are immaterial.  What is appropriate

Bullshit. We must honor each other's beliefs no matter WHERE we are...
Even at an SCA event.

######

From: teekem@spamtrap.com
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 29 Dec 1997 08:58:40 GMT
Organization: Jump Point Communications, Inc.
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <687oo0$r0r$1@news.jumpnet.com>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <34A2A695.AA4@epix.net> <67ugc2$69d$1@news.jumpnet.com> <68431f$ue9$1@alpha.chass.utoronto.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: serv1.jump.net
User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-971204 (UNIX) (SunOS/5.5.1 (sun4m))
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!204.238.120.130!jump.net!jumpnet.com!not-for-mail

Susan Carroll-Clark <sclark@chass.utoronto.ca> wrote:
: Greetings!

:>I won't deny that it had a great deal of influence, but I severely doubt
:>the entertainment value of the Crusades.
:>
:>We are to recreate the BEST parts of the periods we are interested in, and
:>we should make an attempt to see that they are enjoyed by all.

: OK--I don't like going to court.  I don't enjoy it, or see its value as
: recreation.  Does that mean the SCA should stop having courts just because
: of me?

Court is an easily avoided event. It's also necessary for the running of
the society.

Religion is neither.

: I'm also speaking here not as Nicolaa, but as Susan, a doctoral candidate in
: medieval history who has expended a great amount of time attempting to learn
: to understand medieval religion (primarily Christianity and Judaism, with a
: little Norse and Russian paganism thrown in).   Just as there were "bad
: parts" to all of these religions, there were also "good parts."  Any
: institution staffed by humans will.

That's nice. It also has nothing to do with the topic.

: To understand a medieval person, you have to understand what motivated him
: or her, even if you don't believe it or agree with it.  And religion, along
: with the agricultural cycle, had a profound influence on daily life.

Fine. I'll start observing religious practices at the same event you bring
a plow and till the ground at.

:>You know, the Inquisitions were a prominent aspect of historical
:>significance.... Should we recreate those, as well? What about rampant
:>anti-semitism?

: They should be studied in order to understand why they happened.  But if
: we're recreating the "best parts", there's no need for them to come to SCA
: events.

Bingo.

######

From: "Susan Carroll-Clark" <sclark@chass.utoronto.ca>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 1997 12:28:52 -0500
Organization: University of Toronto, Computing in the Humanities and Social Sciences
Lines: 101
Message-ID: <688nek$6s4$1@alpha.chass.utoronto.ca>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <34A2A695.AA4@epix.net> <67ugc2$69d$1@news.jumpnet.com> <68431f$ue9$1@alpha.chass.utoronto.ca> <687oo0$r0r$1@news.jumpnet.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp30.chass.utoronto.ca
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.wildstar.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!newsfeed.internetmci.com!199.117.161.1!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!news.acsu.buffalo.edu!srv1.drenet.dnd.ca!crc-news.doc.ca!nott!utnut!alpha.chass.utoronto.ca!not-for-mail

Greetings!

>: I'm also speaking here not as Nicolaa, but as Susan, a doctoral candidate
in
>: medieval history who has expended a great amount of time attempting to
learn
>: to understand medieval religion (primarily Christianity and Judaism, with
a
>: little Norse and Russian paganism thrown in).   Just as there were "bad
>: parts" to all of these religions, there were also "good parts."  Any
>: institution staffed by humans will.
>
>That's nice. It also has nothing to do with the topic.

Oh, doesn't it?  I'm making the point that religion, like any other aspect
of medieval society, has good points and bad points.  The SCA generally
focuses on the good ones.  Your views of religion, despite what you say
about "respecting other peoples' religions", have focused ENTIRELY on the
bad points of religion, primarily Christianity.  OF COURSE we're not going
to recreate those!  But how about those who wish to have scholar personae in
an age when the universities were profoundly religious institutions--just to
use one example?  If you condemn all religion as unfit for recreation at SCA
events--even the everyday things ordinary people did--you're throwing out
the baby with the bathwater.  And missing the point entirely.

You don't seem to believe that one can study religion without believing it,
and that any attempt to study or recreate religion is preaching or
proseltyzing.    I've taught classes on Judaism in the Middle Ages.  I've
even taken part in a private medieval Seder.  By your logic, I'm preaching
Judaism.  And then, the next week, I turn around and talk about the
Crusades. Heavens--I must have converted in the past week or so!

I agree that religion should have no place in the official ceremonies of the
SCA, but outside that, what we choose to study and recreate is our own
business.  And no, before you bring up some farfetched example of
Inquisitions or witch hunts, we're also bound by Society customs to be
courteous to others and to respect each other.  No person seriously
interested in religion in the Middle Ages that I know of has ever proposed
an Inquisition.

You have shown a remarkable amount of discourtesy and disrespect to those of
us interested in studying religion.  You have repeatedly insisted that
because it bothers you or might bother someone else, it has no place
whatsoever in the SCA.  You have repeatedly used examples like the Crusades
to demonstrate why religion should have no part and turned a deaf ear every
time someone brings up a worthwhile aspect to medieval religion.  You have
repeatedly mistaken folks interested in studying an aspect of medieval
culture for religious nuts of some kind interested in turning the SCA into a
"Bible Camp."

I have no wish to force you to adhere or even learn about any religion.  I
respect your wishes, and were you at an event, I'd be sure not to fiddle
with my rosary beads in your presence.  Perhaps you could extend to me the
same kind of respect.

>: To understand a medieval person, you have to understand what motivated
him
>: or her, even if you don't believe it or agree with it.  And religion,
along
>: with the agricultural cycle, had a profound influence on daily life.
>
>Fine. I'll start observing religious practices at the same event you bring
>a plow and till the ground at.

Challenge accepted.  At an event in Ealdormere some time in the spring, I
will personally prepare the ground and plant a garden.  I don't have a plow,
but I can borrow period gardening tools from a friend I know who does this
extensively.   I've participated in a sheep shearing at an event, as well as
helped build a medieval building.  Perhaps you should look both ways before
you challenge someone.


>:>You know, the Inquisitions were a prominent aspect of historical
>:>significance.... Should we recreate those, as well? What about rampant
>:>anti-semitism?
>
>: They should be studied in order to understand why they happened.  But if
>: we're recreating the "best parts", there's no need for them to come to
SCA
>: events.
>
>Bingo.

OK, my "best parts" include the following:  religious music of all kinds
dating from the Middle Ages (of all faiths);  religious drama (like mystery
or passion plays),  and on a personal level,  studying and recreating
aspects of medieval religion that my persona might have found
important--this could include observances of feasts and fasts, use of
prayers, and wearing jewellery like saint's medals.   I will never force
anyone to participate in any of these observances, although if asked, I will
certainly explain.  And if you--or anyone else--tells me that what I am
doing is offensive, I'll do it across the room so you don't have to watch or
hear.  Just don't try to tell me I can't do it at all in an SCA context.

Nicolaa de Bracton

######

From: cpickeri@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu (clara l pickering)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 29 Dec 1997 14:21:23 GMT
Organization: Indiana University, Bloomington
Lines: 31
Sender: cpickeri@indiana.edu
Message-ID: <688bl3$kgp$1@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>
References: <34982F49.4F46D13@pepperdine.edu> <19971219024500.VAA21922@ladder02.news.aol.com> <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!ais.net!news1.chicago.iagnet.net!iagnet.net!news.indiana.edu!ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu!cpickeri

In article <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf>,  <dkpirolo@cts.com> wrote:
>Dear gentles:
>I have been reading the SCA is not for children string for a while now and
>am forced to speak.  I am a born again Chrisitian currently attending a
>Christian college of which my husband is a graduate.  He plans on going
>into the ministry.  We have three young children ages 9, 6,and 5.  And we
>are in the SCA.  We take our young kids to events with us.  I do not let
>them go to camps where I believe objectionable ( to me) diversions are
>occurring.  My children are exposed to other world views.  This does not
>lessen their beliefs it only re enforces them.  Not everyone is going to
>think like I do but then if I only wanted my children to be exposed to what
>I beleive in I would have to live on a compound in Montana.
>
>P.S.  Religion does belong in the SCA because religion is just a fancy word
>for how a person looks at the world around them.
>


Greetings,
Having read this string I must add my opinion into the matter.  I know 
personally several children who were broght up in the SCA and are still 
active.  These children have a better grasp on the so-called real world 
than many others of the same age I know.  They are more polite and treat 
their parents well.  One person I am thinking of is a 17 year old young 
man, he his courteus and helpful, polite and from what I can tell has 
never had a hard time distinguishing real from fantasy.  I have a 17 year 
brother, never been involved in the SCA who is not as nice.  As a parent 
and someone who enjoys the SCA, my husband and I are planning to raise 
our children in the SCA.

Clara

######

From: teekem@spamtrap.com
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 29 Dec 1997 21:14:14 GMT
Organization: Jump Point Communications, Inc.
Lines: 92
Message-ID: <6893r6$air$1@news.jumpnet.com>
References: <688nek$6s4$1@alpha.chass.utoronto.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: serv1.jump.net
User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-971204 (UNIX) (SunOS/5.5.1 (sun4m))
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!newsfeed.usit.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news-in-east.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!204.238.120.130!jump.net!jumpnet.com!not-for-mail

Susan Carroll-Clark <sclark@chass.utoronto.ca> wrote:
: Greetings!

:>: I'm also speaking here not as Nicolaa, but as Susan, a doctoral candidate
: in
:>: medieval history who has expended a great amount of time attempting to
: learn
:>: to understand medieval religion (primarily Christianity and Judaism, with
: a
:>: little Norse and Russian paganism thrown in).   Just as there were "bad
:>: parts" to all of these religions, there were also "good parts."  Any
:>: institution staffed by humans will.
:>
:>That's nice. It also has nothing to do with the topic.

: Oh, doesn't it?  I'm making the point that religion, like any other aspect
: of medieval society, has good points and bad points.  The SCA generally

And I'm making the point that it is just as necessary to understanding
medieval society as unsanitary conditions are.

: focuses on the good ones.  Your views of religion, despite what you say
: about "respecting other peoples' religions", have focused ENTIRELY on the
: bad points of religion, primarily Christianity.  OF COURSE we're not going

If I am to argue against something, I must demonstrate what is bad about
it, yes?

: to recreate those!  But how about those who wish to have scholar personae in
: an age when the universities were profoundly religious institutions--just to
: use one example?  If you condemn all religion as unfit for recreation at SCA

This is fine, and I don't think you'll find anything in my posts
condemning religious personas.

: You don't seem to believe that one can study religion without believing it,

I certainly DO believe that. Show me a quote from my past posts where I
said that I didn't.
 
: and that any attempt to study or recreate religion is preaching or
: proseltyzing.    I've taught classes on Judaism in the Middle Ages.  I've

What I've ACTUALLY said is that recreating religion is preaching. I said
nothing about studying.

: even taken part in a private medieval Seder.  By your logic, I'm preaching
: Judaism.  And then, the next week, I turn around and talk about the

Sorry, by the logic I know, you've built a nice strawman.

: I agree that religion should have no place in the official ceremonies of the
: SCA, but outside that, what we choose to study and recreate is our own

Hello? That's what I've been saying.... Hello?

: I have no wish to force you to adhere or even learn about any religion.  I
: respect your wishes, and were you at an event, I'd be sure not to fiddle
: with my rosary beads in your presence.  Perhaps you could extend to me the
: same kind of respect.

I am happy with that, and will be sure not to fiddle with rosaries in your
presence either.

:>Fine. I'll start observing religious practices at the same event you bring
:>a plow and till the ground at.

: Challenge accepted.  At an event in Ealdormere some time in the spring, I
: will personally prepare the ground and plant a garden.  I don't have a plow,
: but I can borrow period gardening tools from a friend I know who does this

eh... No. No plow, no religious practices.

The point was not for you to get to play with a little hand spade and
plant flowers.... I think you knew that already. The point was for you to
make a small scale attempt at making a living at it.

:>:>You know, the Inquisitions were a prominent aspect of historical
:>:>significance.... Should we recreate those, as well? What about rampant
:>:>anti-semitism?
:>
:>: They should be studied in order to understand why they happened.  But if
:>: we're recreating the "best parts", there's no need for them to come to
: SCA
:>: events.
:>
:>Bingo.

: OK, my "best parts" include the following:  religious music of all kinds
: dating from the Middle Ages (of all faiths);  religious drama (like mystery

Preaching. Perhaps unintentional, but preaching, nonetheless.

######

From: eliensis@webtv.net
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 11:15:21 -0500
Organization: WebTV Subscriber
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <68b6mp$q92$1@newsd-154.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
References: <6893r6$air$1@news.jumpnet.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.webtv.net
Mime-Version: 1.0 (WebTV)
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!atl-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!ais.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!webtv.net!not-for-mail

Are you serious?  Performing religious music is "preaching"?

For seven and a half years, I have conducted a small Baronial chorus
which exclusively peforms sacred music.  (Well, we sang a
frottola...once.)  Over the years our membership has included at least
four pagans (one a Druid priestess in mundane life), several other
non-Christians of varying kinds, and a Protestant minister who would
never have heard "Ave Regina Coelorum" at his own church.  

We have performed at numerous feasts, SCA demos, five peerage
elevations, and two Coronations.  Eight times the judges of our
KIngdom's Arts and Sciences Faire have awarded us first-place ratings.
Until today, we have >>never<< been accused of "preaching"--and that by
an individiual who has never heard us!

Good gentle, are you fluent in Latin?  Old French?  Gallician?  Middle
English?  Greek?  Unless you can understand the content of the texts we
are singing, you cannot accuse us of "preaching".  As we are performing
in a non-liturgical setting, I do not see how our music is different
from any other concert or SCA perfomance.

If you remove sacred music from the medieval repertoire, milord, you
will be left with very little.  Madrigals and dance tunes can be fun and
challenging to perform and listen to, but to delete all religious music
from the SCA on the spurious excuse of "preaching" is  bigoted and
narrow-minded.        

--Lady Elfrida Scholastica Eliensis,
precentrix, Musica della Fiamma  

No matter where you go, there you are.
            --Buckaroo Banza

######

From: panders2@bulldog1.d.umn.edu (patrick anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 30 Dec 1997 13:26:47 -0600
Organization: University of Minnesota, Duluth
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <68bhtn$7ig@bulldog1.d.umn.edu>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <E35D41A619167980.C34AEE27426F1C04.4A919AE2268AF61B@library-proxy.airnews.net> <34a8f0db.4789432@news2.bga.com> <68ba5k$jcf@corn.cso.niu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bulldog1.d.umn.edu
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!atl-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news-in-east.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!137.192.241.248!mr.net!newshub.tc.umn.edu!news.d.umn.edu!not-for-mail

In article <68ba5k$jcf@corn.cso.niu.edu>,
 <morphis@niuhep.physics.niu.edu> wrote:
>moondrgn@bga.com (Chris and Elisabeth Zakes) writes:

(I think I got the attributions right.)

>
>>And would
>>we recruit an ordained priest, or just "fake it"? (I don't know about
>>you, but the one time I was at a "mass" being done by a non-priest, I
>>was *very* uncomfortable with it.)
>
>This has been discussed in the past, I believe Bryan took part in the
>discussion.  His point was (I beleive) that if it was a re-creation of
>a mass, then it should be explicitly stated as such and the person
>leading it need not be a priest.
>

I have to comment on this. I have been studying RC and CoE (Roman
Catholic, Church of England)  theology for a bit here and well...If the
mass was to be sacrementally valid, ie: worthwhile to Catholics or
Anglicans, then regardless of whether or not it is a recreation, it must
be performed by a priest. (As an aside, we (my shire) and a Episcopal
priest friend are planning to do such a recreation in the future...FUN!)
If the mass is just to be a "showpiece", for lack of a better word, then
it doesn't matter if the officiant is a priest or not.

(I know this is getting extremely off topic...but I had to comment...I am
working my way through the discernment process in my church so that I can
go to seminary and be ordained and Episcopal priest :) )

pat

######

From: morphis@niuhep.physics.niu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 30 Dec 1997 17:14:28 GMT
Organization: N.Ill.U. Physics Dept.
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <68ba5k$jcf@corn.cso.niu.edu>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <680qaq$bsi@corn.cso.niu.edu> <687lv0$q2i$1@news.jumpnet.com> <E35D41A619167980.C34AEE27426F1C04.4A919AE2268AF61B@library-proxy.airnews.net> <34a8f0db.4789432@news2.bga.com>
Reply-To: morphis@niuhep.physics.niu.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: niuhep.physics.niu.edu
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!news-xfer.siscom.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!ais.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!corn.cso.niu.edu!niuhep.physics.niu.edu!MORPHIS

moondrgn@bga.com (Chris and Elisabeth Zakes) writes:
>tadhg@bigfoot.com (Tim of Angle) wrote:
>>teekam wrote: (deletia)

>>Irrelevant. The point is not that we don't re-create things that were central to
>>medieval life -- that's obvious; the point is that we OUGHT to be re-creating
>>them, and the fact that we don't is Just Another Indicator that the SCA is
>>merely an extended costume party, and not a re-creation group at all.

>Practically speaking, actually re-creating medieval religions would be
>difficult at best. Although I suspect there are more current-or-former
>Roman Catholics in the SCA than in the general population, I doubt
>that mandatory Sunday Mass at events would be that popular. 

I am not sure what exactly Tim's view on this is but Teekem's point
was that religion should not come into the SCA any more than in any
other modern activity.

I do believe that the vast majority of those opposing Teekem's position
would also oppose mandatory Mass.  They merely point out that that
religion does and should be a bigger part of the SCA than what Teekem
suggested.

>And would
>we recruit an ordained priest, or just "fake it"? (I don't know about
>you, but the one time I was at a "mass" being done by a non-priest, I
>was *very* uncomfortable with it.)

This has been discussed in the past, I believe Bryan took part in the
discussion.  His point was (I beleive) that if it was a re-creation of
a mass, then it should be explicitly stated as such and the person
leading it need not be a priest.

######

From: drafnlord@aol.com (Drafn Lord)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 30 Dec 1997 18:38:32 GMT
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <19971230183800.NAA03149@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
References: <68431f$ue9$1@alpha.chass.utoronto.ca>
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!atl-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!152.163.199.19!portc03.blue.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail

>(I'm sure as heck not Catholic in the
>modern world!) 

I assume you mean Roman. From a nolonger practicing Roman Catholic.  

Lady Jana

######

Path: ccw.ch!usenet
From: Neil.Franklin.nospam@ccw.ch (remove .nospam)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 30 Dec 1997 23:55:08 +0100
Organization: My own Private Self
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <4t3qmofn.fsf@chonsp.franklin.lugs.ch>
References: <688nek$6s4$1@alpha.chass.utoronto.ca> <6893r6$air$1@news.jumpnet.com>
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34

Susan Carroll-Clark <sclark@chass.utoronto.ca> wrote:
: focuses on the good ones.  Your views of religion, despite what you say
: about "respecting other peoples' religions", have focused ENTIRELY on the
: bad points of religion, primarily Christianity.  OF COURSE we're not going

teekem@spamtrap.com wrote:
>If I am to argue against something, I must demonstrate what is bad about
>it, yes?

Surely.

If this were a discussion in which someone had claimed that
medieval/christian religion was all good, then your pointing out the
bad sides would constitute an valid argument against their point.

But: First you need the appropriate type of discussion.

This is actually a discussion in which someone had claimed that
medieval/christian religion is not recreation-worthy because it was
all bad, Susan argued against that point, so your argument showing
only negative sides comes across as denying that there was any good in
it (at least to me and I suspect also to Susan).

I assume that you did not intend to say such and are surprised of her
reaction because of this. OTOH you may actually believe there was no
good in it, I have also seen that point stated by others.


Susan Carroll-Clark <sclark@chass.utoronto.ca> wrote:
: and that any attempt to study or recreate religion is preaching or
: proseltyzing.    I've taught classes on Judaism in the Middle Ages.  I've

teekem@spamtrap.com wrote:
>hat I've ACTUALLY said is that recreating religion is preaching. I said
>nothing about studying.

I just have to disagree on that one.

Preaching requires an active stepping into others life (such as
saying: you should do it so and so, or that and that is bad).

Recreating on the other hand can be as passive (such as garb, tent
decorations, phrases in your speach, crossing yourself).


-- 
Neil.Franklin.nospam@ccw.ch (remove .nospam), http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/
  for Geek Code, Papernet, Voicenet, PGP public key see http:
Any computer, that is running optimally, is outdated; including my Cx486

######

From: "Dennis O'Connor" <dmoc@primenet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 31 Dec 1997 10:14:01 -0700
Organization: Primenet Services for the Internet
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <68dugp$8go@nntp02.primenet.com>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <680qaq$bsi@corn.cso.niu.edu> <687lv0$q2i$1@news.jumpnet.com> <E35D41A619167980.C34AEE27426F1C04.4A919AE2268AF61B@library-proxy.airnews.net> <34a8f0db.4789432@news2.bga.com> <2517CADB29AF04B2.44D0920B56E222E3.463BCBE1016A2E4C@library-proxy.airnews.net>
X-Posted-By: @206.165.26.85 (dmoc)
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!atl-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!globalcenter0!news.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!not-for-mail

Tim of Angle wrote
:Odd that people have no problem pretending to a political system (monarchy)
that
:the majority of them wouldn't support in the real world, but choke on
pretending
:to a religious system that they in some cases do support in the real world.
:Guess there are just more anti-Christians than there are anti-monarchists in
the
:world ... certainly in the SCA.


Perhaps it is more that people get the "pretending" part mixed
up with the "really believing" stuff.  This happens with our "monarchy",
too, and is the source of some of our political problems.

It might also be interestig to speculate on whether a true believer
in The Divine Right of Kings (do any still exist ?) might be offended
and outraged at our pretense of believeing in that.  And couldn't
a devoutly religious person be offended is people just pretended
to conduct one of their holy ceremonies ?  Hmmm ... what do the
more devout religious sects think of movie/TV stagings of their rites ?
--
Dennis O'Connor                        dmoc@primenet.com
Vanity Web Page:    http://www.primenet.com/~dmoc/

######

From: Greg Shetler <shetler@rtis.ray.com>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 11:47:39 -0600
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <34AA853B.1DF498E1@rtis.ray.com>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <680qaq$bsi@corn.cso.niu.edu> <687lv0$q2i$1@news.jumpnet.com> <E35D41A619167980.C34AEE27426F1C04.4A919AE2268AF61B@library-proxy.airnews.net> <34a8f0db.4789432@news2.bga.com> <2517CADB29AF04B2.44D0920B56E222E3.463BCBE1016A2E4C@library-proxy.airnews.net> <68dugp$8go@nntp02.primenet.com>
Reply-To: shetler@rtis.ray.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: cna0199176.dseg.ti.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (WinNT; I)
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!news-xfer.siscom.net!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!enews.sgi.com!logbridge.uoregon.edu!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!atl-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!news.ti.com!news.dseg.ti.com!news 

> Tim of Angle wrote
> :Odd that people have no problem pretending to a political system
> (monarchy)
> that
> :the majority of them wouldn't support in the real world, but choke on
> pretending
> :to a religious system that they in some cases do support in the real
> world.
> :Guess there are just more anti-Christians than there are
> anti-monarchists in
> the
> :world ... certainly in the SCA.
> 

And Dennis O'Connor responded
> Perhaps it is more that people get the "pretending" part mixed
> up with the "really believing" stuff.  This happens with our
> "monarchy",
> too, and is the source of some of our political problems.
> 
> It might also be interestig to speculate on whether a true believer
> in The Divine Right of Kings (do any still exist ?) might be offended
> and outraged at our pretense of believeing in that.  And couldn't
> a devoutly religious person be offended is people just pretended
> to conduct one of their holy ceremonies ?  Hmmm ... what do the
> more devout religious sects think of movie/TV stagings of their rites
> ?

Dennis, I'm surprised you didn't pick up on Tim's apparent equation of
those who don't want to pretend to support medieval religion with
anti-Christians.  This is the sort of logical inconsistency that you are
normally quick to point out to those who present them.

Tim, why *do* you assume that everyone who does not want to make
religious practices a part of SCA events is anti-Christian?  Why not
anti-Jew, anti-Norse, anti-Celtic, anti-Roman, anti-Greek, anti-Islamic,
anti-Zoroastrian, anti-Druid, anti-Wiccan, anti-Buddhist, or
anti-Hindu?  After all, leaving the arguments about what is period
aside, we have people with personae that span the cultures that
practiced these religions.  I can think of many non-anti-Christians who
would be offended if a Pennsic were to be called to prayer by muezzins
shouting from towers every day.  And others who would prefer not to have
to deal with the sights/sounds/smells of animal sacrifices.

Mordock von Rugen

######

From: tadhg@bigfoot.com (Tim of Angle)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 15:38:14 GMT
Organization: EDS
Lines: 85
Message-ID: <2517CADB29AF04B2.44D0920B56E222E3.463BCBE1016A2E4C@library-proxy.airnews.net>
X-Orig-Message-ID: <34ab63c1.616252582@news.airmail.net>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <680qaq$bsi@corn.cso.niu.edu> <687lv0$q2i$1@news.jumpnet.com> <E35D41A619167980.C34AEE27426F1C04.4A919AE2268AF61B@library-proxy.airnews.net> <34a8f0db.4789432@news2.bga.com>
Reply-To: tadhg@bigfoot.com
NNTP-Proxy-Relay: library.airnews.net
NNTP-Posting-Time: Wed Dec 31 09:39:08 1997
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp03-8.ght.iadfw.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!news-xfer.siscom.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!news.alt.net!news.airnews.net!cabal11!thereisnocabal!news-f.iadfw.net!usenet

Scripsit moondrgn@bga.com (Chris and Elisabeth Zakes) :

 > > > As I've said before, there are MANY things that were central to medieval 
 > > > life that we don't re-create.
 > >
 > >Irrelevant. The point is not that we don't re-create things that were central to
 > >medieval life -- that's obvious; the point is that we OUGHT to be re-creating
 > >them, and the fact that we don't is Just Another Indicator that the SCA is
 > >merely an extended costume party, and not a re-creation group at all.
 > 
 > Practically speaking, actually re-creating medieval religions would be
 > difficult at best.

And that's certainly a valid argument for not doing it, just as the safety
considerations that impede the re-creation of actually-on-a-horse tourney combat
are a valid argument against re-creating that. However, that's not what is being
argued here.

 > Although I suspect there are more current-or-former
 > Roman Catholics in the SCA than in the general population, I doubt
 > that mandatory Sunday Mass at events would be that popular.

Odd that people have no problem pretending to a political system (monarchy) that
the majority of them wouldn't support in the real world, but choke on pretending
to a religious system that they in some cases do support in the real world.
Guess there are just more anti-Christians than there are anti-monarchists in the
world ... certainly in the SCA.

 > And would
 > we recruit an ordained priest, or just "fake it"?

Do we recruit actual Princes, Barons, Dukes, and Counts, or do we just "fake
it"? The question answers itself.

 > (I don't know about
 > you, but the one time I was at a "mass" being done by a non-priest, I
 > was *very* uncomfortable with it.)

Probably because it was as poorly done as most everything else in the SCA. I am
made equally uncomfortable with the Hollywood-style "courts" that are as common
as table salt in the SCA; that's one of the reasons I don't attend events any
more.

 > Devout Protestants would almost *have* to be late-period.

Nonsense. There is no heresy promulgated by any "Protestant" sect that wasn't
popular earlier on in Church history; the difference between "Unitarian" and
"Arian", for example, is merely one of historical nomenclature. And even
"Protestants" would have to specify what period they were from: Anglican's from
the reign of Henry VIII were Roman Catholics who had a jurisdictional dispute
with the Pope, while those of Edward VI's reign were arguably genuine
"Protestants" of a Calvinist bent.

 > And what
 > about the various pagan religions and *their* observances?

Certainly they're as accurately period as the common Kudzu Persona Story
character. 

 > I'd think
 > that animal sacrifices might get us into trouble, too.

So we can "fake" that as we "fake" our bloodless combat. 

 > I have no objection to private religious observances at events,
 > religious jewelry, or even religious personas. I *do* object to them
 > being included in things like Coronations or Baronial investitures.

Just Another Indicator that the SCA is merely a long-running costume party
rather than anything resembling an historical re-creation society.

 > >So why aren't you playing video games? The reason behind re-creating a
 > >historical period is presumably to experience at least a little bit of what life
 > >was like for people back then, and to exclude religion from such a re-creation
 > >is like playing golf with paint-ball guns: granted that you may be enjoying
 > >yourself, and granted that enjoying yourself may be your primary motivation, but
 > >it still isn't golf.
 > 
 > No, but it *does* conjure some interesting images. <G>

Certainly makes the caddy's role a lot more interesting....

================================================================================
Fra Tadhg Liath OFT                                            tadhg@bigfoot.com
The Grumpiest Pelican

######

From: tomansky <tomansky@gte.net>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 23:06:59 -0500
Organization: gte.net
Lines: 80
Message-ID: <68f4ov$ctr$6@gte2.gte.net>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <680qaq$bsi@corn.cso.niu.edu> <687lv0$q2i$1@news.jumpnet.com> <E35D41A619167980.C34AEE27426F1C04.4A919AE2268AF61B@library-proxy.airnews.net> <34a8f0db.4789432@news2.bga.com> <2517CADB29AF04B2.44D0920B56E222E3.463BCBE1016A2E4C@library-proxy.airnews.net> <68dugp$8go@nntp02.primenet.com> <34AA853B.1DF498E1@rtis.ray.com> <788E8097B260EDD1.DAEE404F81D76660.7EFE287C392726FA@library-proxy.airnews.net> <slrn6am0h1.tok.zebee@zipper.zip.com.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2cust4.tnt1.tampa.fl.gt.uu.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Auth: C2570B5581054F1A54D28496
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win16; I)
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!news-xfer.siscom.net!newsxfer.visi.net!newsfeed.gte.net!news.gte.net!not-for-mail

   That's a wonderful take on the situation.  I, for one, am a very devout pagan, yet
my persona is devoutly RC.  I know religion was a integral part of daily life in his
period, and I would like to see that re-created as well.
   OTOH, I will be be damned if I'll be the one to pioneer this kettle of fish. (I
just LOVE mixed/butchered metaphors.)  I certainly am NOT attending any ritual
sacrament given by a real priest.  No, I don't believe it's really the body and blood
of anybody, but about a billion other folks on this globe sure do, and I'm not about
to be in that pissing contest.  It's bad enough wearing a "dress" for a hobby.

David Levi

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

> On Thu, 01 Jan 1998 02:02:57 GMT, Tim of Angle <tadhg@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> >
> >They might be that, too, for all we know. But the majority of Western Europe
> >prior to 1600 was Christian, and so a resistance to re-creating that particular
> >aspect of period life, especially in light of the surprising *lack* of
> >resistance to "pretending" in the re-creation of other aspects of medieval life,
> >suggests itself rather strongly as being anti-Christian. This is a rebuttable
>
> Here's a rebuttal you might want to consider.
>
> I know about the importance of Christian life in the medieval
> period, I think it would add quite a lot to the atmosphere
> of SCA events. I don't want to re-create it because it is *still*
> important.
>
> I'm not a Christian.  Same as I'm not Muslim or Jewish or
> Buddhist or Pagan of any variety.
>
> But these religions are taken seriously by many, very seriously
> by some.  How then could I believably and sensibly and authentically
> recreate them?
>
> I think it's a rather different case to recreating the monarchy.  I'm
> a subject of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, who has been named Queen
> of Australia.  (Well for the moment I am).  But down here in
> the colonies, the monarchy is not a spiritual thing.  I don't think
> it is in the Mother Country either.  And it's certainly not in
> the USA!  There are Kings of Carnival, Kings of Pop...  But never
> an Archbishop for the day.
>
> Yes, as someone said earlier (was it Tadhg?) someone with a fervent belief
> in the Divine Right of Kings might find the SCA's playing at Royalty
> way too much.  But I think that such people are pretty thin on the
> ground and unlikely to be attracted to a group like the SCA
> anyway.  (Speculation)
>
> Devout believers in faiths that we may want to recreate are not
> lacking however.
>
> So how *do* we recreate something that is of utmost emotional and
> spritual importance to a not insignificant minority of our members?
> How do we hold a mass without a consecrated priest?  Should we
> have people who do not believe taking the scarament, swearing "sacred"
> oaths, even crossing themselves?  If it is possible to
> draw a line between things that can be recreated by unbelievers
> (or by believers who recreate it in this "pretend" context)
> where would that line be drawn?  Any believers out there care to
> say?
>
> I believe enough in the importance of sprituality that I say no.  I would
> no more cross myself in pretence than I would bow to Mecca in pretence.
> Not because I hate Christians or Muslims, but because I respect
> them.  I will not trivialise the importance of their rituals
> and beliefs by pretending to use them as part of my hobby.
>
> Do I trivialise the monarchy I am a subject of by calling some
> stick jock "your majesty"?  My gut feeling says no.  I respect
> the Queen both for her position and her undoubted sincerity and
> ability in it.  But the concept of "monarchy" is not sacred, anymore
> than the concept of "president" is - and every club has one of those.
>
> Silfren
>  - who, having been born here, has not had to swear allegiance to the
> Queen of Australia but would if asked.

######

From: tadhg@bigfoot.com (Tim of Angle)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 1998 02:02:57 GMT
Organization: EDS
Lines: 85
Message-ID: <788E8097B260EDD1.DAEE404F81D76660.7EFE287C392726FA@library-proxy.airnews.net>
X-Orig-Message-ID: <34acd946.10422006@news.airmail.net>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <680qaq$bsi@corn.cso.niu.edu> <687lv0$q2i$1@news.jumpnet.com> <E35D41A619167980.C34AEE27426F1C04.4A919AE2268AF61B@library-proxy.airnews.net> <34a8f0db.4789432@news2.bga.com> <2517CADB29AF04B2.44D0920B56E222E3.463BCBE1016A2E4C@library-proxy.airnews.net> <68dugp$8go@nntp02.primenet.com> <34AA853B.1DF498E1@rtis.ray.com>
Reply-To: tadhg@bigfoot.com
NNTP-Proxy-Relay: library.airnews.net
NNTP-Posting-Time: Wed Dec 31 20:03:51 1997
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp06-27.ght.iadfw.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!news-xfer.siscom.net!streamer1.cleveland.iagnet.net!iagnet.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.airnews.net!cabal10!news-f.iadfw.net!usenet

Scripsit Greg Shetler <shetler@rtis.ray.com> :

 > > Tim of Angle wrote
 > > :Odd that people have no problem pretending to a political system
 > > :(monarchy) that the majority of them wouldn't support in the real
 > > :world, but choke on pretending to a religious system that they in
 > > : some cases do support in the real world.
 > > :Guess there are just more anti-Christians than there are anti-
 > > :monarchists in the world ... certainly in the SCA.
 > 
 > And Dennis O'Connor responded
 > > Perhaps it is more that people get the "pretending" part mixed
 > > up with the "really believing" stuff.  This happens with our
 > > "monarchy",
 > > too, and is the source of some of our political problems.
 > > 
 > > It might also be interestig to speculate on whether a true believer
 > > in The Divine Right of Kings (do any still exist ?) might be offended
 > > and outraged at our pretense of believeing in that.  And couldn't
 > > a devoutly religious person be offended is people just pretended
 > > to conduct one of their holy ceremonies ?  Hmmm ... what do the
 > > more devout religious sects think of movie/TV stagings of their rites
 > > ?
 > 
 > Dennis, I'm surprised you didn't pick up on Tim's apparent equation of
 > those who don't want to pretend to support medieval religion with
 > anti-Christians.

That's just a supposition on my part regarding their motivation. Hence the use
of the term "guess".

 > This is the sort of logical inconsistency that you are
 > normally quick to point out to those who present them.

How is it "logically inconsistent"? There is no chain of reasoning involved; it
is merely a speculation. 

 > Tim, why *do* you assume that everyone who does not want to make
 > religious practices a part of SCA events is anti-Christian?

I don't. Why *do* you assume that my speculation regarding the motives of those
who object to re-creating one of the most central aspects of period life is
somehow an "assumption"?

 > Why not
 > anti-Jew, anti-Norse, anti-Celtic, anti-Roman, anti-Greek, anti-Islamic,
 > anti-Zoroastrian, anti-Druid, anti-Wiccan, anti-Buddhist, or
 > anti-Hindu?

They might be that, too, for all we know. But the majority of Western Europe
prior to 1600 was Christian, and so a resistance to re-creating that particular
aspect of period life, especially in light of the surprising *lack* of
resistance to "pretending" in the re-creation of other aspects of medieval life,
suggests itself rather strongly as being anti-Christian. This is a rebuttable
speculation, of course, but you might spend some time rebutting it rather than
criticizing me for speculating. (I think that the eagerness with which some of
the participants in this forum have spewed out their laundry-list indictments of
the medieval Church rather strongly supports the speculation, but that's merely
anecdotal evidence.)

 > After all, leaving the arguments about what is period
 > aside, we have people with personae that span the cultures that
 > practiced these religions.

And if they want to re-create any of these practices, I would have no objection.
(Actually, seeing some SCA people drink bull urine wouldn't surprise me all that
much....)

 > I can think of many non-anti-Christians who
 > would be offended if a Pennsic were to be called to prayer by muezzins
 > shouting from towers every day.

Although why they would find that offensive is beyond me ... other than the
natural resistance of SCA folk to get up before noon.

 > And others who would prefer not to have
 > to deal with the sights/sounds/smells of animal sacrifices.

Which nobody is suggesting, of course, any more than people expect SCA tourney
combat to involve horse droppings. Yet Another Army of Straw Men march down the
avenue....

================================================================================
Fra Tadhg Liath OFT                                            tadhg@bigfoot.com
The Grumpiest Pelican

######

From: zebee@zipper.zip.com.au (Zebee Johnstone)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 1 Jan 1998 02:40:33 GMT
Organization: Zip Internet Professionals Pty Ltd
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <slrn6am0h1.tok.zebee@zipper.zip.com.au>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <680qaq$bsi@corn.cso.niu.edu> <687lv0$q2i$1@news.jumpnet.com> <E35D41A619167980.C34AEE27426F1C04.4A919AE2268AF61B@library-proxy.airnews.net> <34a8f0db.4789432@news2.bga.com> <2517CADB29AF04B2.44D0920B56E222E3.463BCBE1016A2E4C@library-proxy.airnews.net> <68dugp$8go@nntp02.primenet.com> <34AA853B.1DF498E1@rtis.ray.com> <788E8097B260EDD1.DAEE404F81D76660.7EFE287C392726FA@library-proxy.airnews.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.12.97.1
X-Newsreader: slrn (0.9.0.0 (BETA) UNIX)
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.syd.connect.com.au!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.gte.net!nntp.flash.net!news.mira.net.au!news.mel.ausbone.net!news.syd.ausbone.net!the-fly.zip.com.au!zebee

On Thu, 01 Jan 1998 02:02:57 GMT, Tim of Angle <tadhg@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>They might be that, too, for all we know. But the majority of Western Europe
>prior to 1600 was Christian, and so a resistance to re-creating that particular
>aspect of period life, especially in light of the surprising *lack* of
>resistance to "pretending" in the re-creation of other aspects of medieval life,
>suggests itself rather strongly as being anti-Christian. This is a rebuttable

Here's a rebuttal you might want to consider.

I know about the importance of Christian life in the medieval
period, I think it would add quite a lot to the atmosphere
of SCA events. I don't want to re-create it because it is *still*
important.

I'm not a Christian.  Same as I'm not Muslim or Jewish or
Buddhist or Pagan of any variety.

But these religions are taken seriously by many, very seriously
by some.  How then could I believably and sensibly and authentically
recreate them?

I think it's a rather different case to recreating the monarchy.  I'm
a subject of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, who has been named Queen
of Australia.  (Well for the moment I am).  But down here in 
the colonies, the monarchy is not a spiritual thing.  I don't think
it is in the Mother Country either.  And it's certainly not in
the USA!  There are Kings of Carnival, Kings of Pop...  But never
an Archbishop for the day.

Yes, as someone said earlier (was it Tadhg?) someone with a fervent belief
in the Divine Right of Kings might find the SCA's playing at Royalty
way too much.  But I think that such people are pretty thin on the
ground and unlikely to be attracted to a group like the SCA
anyway.  (Speculation)

Devout believers in faiths that we may want to recreate are not
lacking however.  

So how *do* we recreate something that is of utmost emotional and
spritual importance to a not insignificant minority of our members?
How do we hold a mass without a consecrated priest?  Should we 
have people who do not believe taking the scarament, swearing "sacred"
oaths, even crossing themselves?  If it is possible to
draw a line between things that can be recreated by unbelievers
(or by believers who recreate it in this "pretend" context)
where would that line be drawn?  Any believers out there care to
say? 

I believe enough in the importance of sprituality that I say no.  I would
no more cross myself in pretence than I would bow to Mecca in pretence.
Not because I hate Christians or Muslims, but because I respect
them.  I will not trivialise the importance of their rituals
and beliefs by pretending to use them as part of my hobby.

Do I trivialise the monarchy I am a subject of by calling some
stick jock "your majesty"?  My gut feeling says no.  I respect
the Queen both for her position and her undoubted sincerity and
ability in it.  But the concept of "monarchy" is not sacred, anymore
than the concept of "president" is - and every club has one of those.

Silfren
 - who, having been born here, has not had to swear allegiance to the
Queen of Australia but would if asked.  

######

From: phefner@aol.com (Phefner)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 1 Jan 1998 08:14:48 GMT
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <19980101081401.DAA21947@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
References: <slrn6am0h1.tok.zebee@zipper.zip.com.au>
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!newsfeed.usit.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!howland.erols.net!portc02.blue.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail

>>aspect of period life, especially in light of the surprising *lack* of
>>resistance to "pretending" in the re-creation of other aspects of medieval
>life,
>>suggests itself rather strongly as being anti-Christian. This is a
>rebuttable
>
>

At one event in Meridies we had a spoof on the Inquisition. I'm mundanely
Catholic, and I thought it was hysterical.  I started a thread on the Meridian
listserver jokingly announcing that we had a claimant to the papacy of Meridies
after another gentle jokingly claimed he knew everything. We don't have to keep
anything smacking of any religion completely out of the SCA. I can't do that
and write about cultural and intellectual life in the mundane Middle Ages since
religion was a major deal in these aspects of life in general in the Middle
Ages.

Isabelle de Foix, AOA, CAM (scholars' order)
College of Misty Mere
Kingdom of Meridies

######

From: JHood <jhhood@execpc.com>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 1998 09:24:25 -0600
Organization: Exec-PC BBS Internet - Milwaukee, WI
Lines: 108
Message-ID: <68gcba$htu@newsops.execpc.com>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <34A2A695.AA4@epix.net> <67ugc2$69d$1@news.jumpnet.com> <68431f$ue9$1@alpha.chass.utoronto.ca> <687oo0$r0r$1@news.jumpnet.com> <688nek$6s4$1@alpha.chass.utoronto.ca>
Reply-To: jhhoodatexecpc.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: da-soocha-75.mdm.mke.execpc.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: gotham-globe.newsops.execpc.com 883668138 18366 (None) 169.207.81.203
X-Complaints-To: abuse@execpc.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04C-KIT  (Win95; I)
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!newsfeed.usit.net!news-dc-3.sprintlink.net!news-dc-1.sprintlink.net!news-east.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!newsfeeds.sol.net!newsops.execpc.com!posts.execpc.com!gotham-globe.newsops.execpc.com!usenet

Susan Carroll-Clark wrote:
> 
> Greetings!
> 
> >: I'm also speaking here not as Nicolaa, but as Susan, a doctoral candidate
> in
> >: medieval history who has expended a great amount of time attempting to
> learn
> >: to understand medieval religion (primarily Christianity and Judaism, with
> a
> >: little Norse and Russian paganism thrown in).   Just as there were "bad
> >: parts" to all of these religions, there were also "good parts."  Any
> >: institution staffed by humans will.
> >
> >That's nice. It also has nothing to do with the topic.
> 
> Oh, doesn't it?  I'm making the point that religion, like any other aspect
> of medieval society, has good points and bad points.  The SCA generally
> focuses on the good ones.  Your views of religion, despite what you say
> about "respecting other peoples' religions", have focused ENTIRELY on the
> bad points of religion, primarily Christianity.  OF COURSE we're not going
> to recreate those!  But how about those who wish to have scholar personae in
> an age when the universities were profoundly religious institutions--just to
> use one example?  If you condemn all religion as unfit for recreation at SCA
> events--even the everyday things ordinary people did--you're throwing out
> the baby with the bathwater.  And missing the point entirely.
> 
> You don't seem to believe that one can study religion without believing it,
> and that any attempt to study or recreate religion is preaching or
> proseltyzing.    I've taught classes on Judaism in the Middle Ages.  I've
> even taken part in a private medieval Seder.  By your logic, I'm preaching
> Judaism.  And then, the next week, I turn around and talk about the
> Crusades. Heavens--I must have converted in the past week or so!
> 
> I agree that religion should have no place in the official ceremonies of the
> SCA, but outside that, what we choose to study and recreate is our own
> business.  And no, before you bring up some farfetched example of
> Inquisitions or witch hunts, we're also bound by Society customs to be
> courteous to others and to respect each other.  No person seriously
> interested in religion in the Middle Ages that I know of has ever proposed
> an Inquisition.
> 
> You have shown a remarkable amount of discourtesy and disrespect to those of
> us interested in studying religion.  You have repeatedly insisted that
> because it bothers you or might bother someone else, it has no place
> whatsoever in the SCA.  You have repeatedly used examples like the Crusades
> to demonstrate why religion should have no part and turned a deaf ear every
> time someone brings up a worthwhile aspect to medieval religion.  You have
> repeatedly mistaken folks interested in studying an aspect of medieval
> culture for religious nuts of some kind interested in turning the SCA into a
> "Bible Camp."
> 
> I have no wish to force you to adhere or even learn about any religion.  I
> respect your wishes, and were you at an event, I'd be sure not to fiddle
> with my rosary beads in your presence.  Perhaps you could extend to me the
> same kind of respect.
> 
> >: To understand a medieval person, you have to understand what motivated
> him
> >: or her, even if you don't believe it or agree with it.  And religion,
> along
> >: with the agricultural cycle, had a profound influence on daily life.
> >
> >Fine. I'll start observing religious practices at the same event you bring
> >a plow and till the ground at.
> 
> Challenge accepted.  At an event in Ealdormere some time in the spring, I
> will personally prepare the ground and plant a garden.  I don't have a plow,
> but I can borrow period gardening tools from a friend I know who does this
> extensively.   I've participated in a sheep shearing at an event, as well as
> helped build a medieval building.  Perhaps you should look both ways before
> you challenge someone.
> 
> >:>You know, the Inquisitions were a prominent aspect of historical
> >:>significance.... Should we recreate those, as well? What about rampant
> >:>anti-semitism?
> >
> >: They should be studied in order to understand why they happened.  But if
> >: we're recreating the "best parts", there's no need for them to come to
> SCA
> >: events.
> >
> >Bingo.
> 
> OK, my "best parts" include the following:  religious music of all kinds
> dating from the Middle Ages (of all faiths);  religious drama (like mystery
> or passion plays),  and on a personal level,  studying and recreating
> aspects of medieval religion that my persona might have found
> important--this could include observances of feasts and fasts, use of
> prayers, and wearing jewellery like saint's medals.   I will never force
> anyone to participate in any of these observances, although if asked, I will
> certainly explain.  And if you--or anyone else--tells me that what I am
> doing is offensive, I'll do it across the room so you don't have to watch or
> hear.  Just don't try to tell me I can't do it at all in an SCA context.
> 
> Nicolaa de Bracton


I would also reinforce Nicolaa's words by saying that most of what we
know about the inquisition has been secondary sourse material.  The
primary source of which is a man (contemporary to the first part of the
inquisition) who was not only a dubious historian, but also a rabid
anti-Dominican.  Not exactly unbiased source material, I'd say.

	The archives of the Inquisition have only been opened in the past few
years, and are now being studied by scholers.

Ian

######

From: sclark@chass.utoronto.ca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 1998 11:41:19 -0600
Message-ID: <883671682.898170887@dejanews.com>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Organization: Deja News Posting Service
References: <68431f$ue9$1@alpha.chass.utoronto.ca> <19971230183800.NAA03149@ladder01.news.aol.com>
X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Jan 01 16:21:22 1998 GMT
X-Authenticated-Sender: sclark@chass.utoronto.ca
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.0; Windows 95)
X-Originating-IP-Addr: 128.100.160.140 (ppp20.chass.utoronto.ca)
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!newsfeed.usit.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp2.dejanews.com!grunt.dejanews.com!not-for-mail
Lines: 19

Greetings!

In article <19971230183800.NAA03149@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
  drafnlord@aol.com (Drafn Lord) wrote:
>
> >(I'm sure as heck not Catholic in the
> >modern world!)
>
> I assume you mean Roman. From a nolonger practicing Roman Catholic.
>
> Lady Jana

Actually, it's true in a wider sense as well.  I'm not Ukrainian Catholic
or Orthodox (of any species), either

Nicolaa de Bracton

-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
      http://www.dejanews.com/     Search, Read, Post to Usenet

######

From: sclark@chass.utoronto.ca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 1998 12:41:04 -0600
Message-ID: <883679666.1148256258@dejanews.com>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Organization: Deja News Posting Service
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <680qaq$bsi@corn.cso.niu.edu> <687lv0$q2i$1@news.jumpnet.com> <E35D41A619167980.C34AEE27426F1C04.4A919AE2268AF61B@library-proxy.airnews.net> <34a8f0db.4789432@news2.bga.com> <2517CADB29AF04B2.44D0920B56E222E3.463BCBE1016A2E4C@library-proxy.airnews.net> <68dugp$8go@nntp02.primenet.com> <34AA853B.1DF498E1@rtis.ray.com>
X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Jan 01 18:34:26 1998 GMT
X-Authenticated-Sender: sclark@chass.utoronto.ca
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.0; Windows 95)
X-Originating-IP-Addr: 128.100.160.158 (ppp38.chass.utoronto.ca)
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!newsfeed.usit.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp2.dejanews.com!grunt.dejanews.com!not-for-mail
Lines: 67

Greetings!

Mordock said,
> Tim, why *do* you assume that everyone who does not want to make
> religious practices a part of SCA events is anti-Christian?  Why not
> anti-Jew, anti-Norse, anti-Celtic, anti-Roman, anti-Greek, anti-Islamic,
> anti-Zoroastrian, anti-Druid, anti-Wiccan, anti-Buddhist, or
> anti-Hindu?  After all, leaving the arguments about what is period
> aside, we have people with personae that span the cultures that
> practiced these religions.  I can think of many non-anti-Christians who
> would be offended if a Pennsic were to be called to prayer by muezzins
> shouting from towers every day.  And others who would prefer not to have
> to deal with the sights/sounds/smells of animal sacrifices.

Good point.  However, in the context of this discussion, one poster
mentioned that including religion in the SCA would turn it into a "Bible
Camp", which implies Christianity.  Furthermore, this whole thread
started with a Christian- specific context (remember the original post,
which posited that children should not be in the SCA and cited a number
of books which leaned towards the fundamentalist side of Christianity?)

In North America, numbers-wise, the dominant religious background is
Christian.  That means that more kids are raised in a Christian
environment than in any other religion, and if they grow up and reject
their upbringing, it's more likely (just because of the numbers) to be
"Christianity" that they reject.  (We just don't hear as many tales of,
for instance, adult children who have rejected the Orthodox Jewish faith
of their parents--probably simply a matter of numbers).

The problem, of course, is that "Christianity" is not a single, organized
relgion.  Two people who call themselves Christians may deeply disagree
with each other.  Unfortunately, if you've had a bad experience with one
version of a faith, it's very easy to be wary of all versions of it. 
It's also very easy to utterly not want to hear about anything to do with
that faith, particularly if you've had a bad time with it.

This is where the problem occurs in the SCA.  Some of our members believe
very deeply that particular faiths are "wrong."  They see these faiths as
responsible for either hurting them or society deeply, and would rather
just not have to deal with them as a part of their hobby.

Unfortunately, we're a club that deals with medieval history.  Unlike
amateur astronomers or the gun club, we can't simply ignore religion,
because it's part of medieval history.	What we can do is keep it out of
our official ceremonies and observances.  But I've run into people who
want to take that further--who believe that we shouldn't recreate it at
all, even on a personal level, because someone might be offended;  that
we shouldn't even *refer* to religion at all.

That, unfortunately, takes it too far in the other direction, IMHO.  The
strange thing is that I've yet to meet anyone seriously attempting to
convert or proseltyze in the SCA through their persona's practices.  In
fact, all the folks I know who regularly "do" religious stuff (of any
religion) are exceedingly careful about it--careful both not to offend
modern adherants of that religion, and careful not to seem to be pushing
a viewpoint. Interestingly enough, at least half of the people who I know
who "do" religion "do" a different one (or at least a different variant)
than the one of their upbringing or current affiliation.  I know modern
Jews with Muslim personae, modern pagans who do Catholic personae, modern
Anglicans with Jewish personae, and so on.  Some of these folks are quite
serious and devout about their modern faith, yet they see no problem in
having a persona of a different faith.

Nicolaa de Bracton

-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
      http://www.dejanews.com/     Search, Read, Post to Usenet

######

From: tadhg@bigfoot.com (Tim of Angle)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 1998 16:40:12 GMT
Organization: EDS
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <B1BA1A7B80D465B4.772A763219416A28.BA88A00D5539AD13@library-proxy.airnews.net>
X-Orig-Message-ID: <34acc634.71084761@news.airmail.net>
References: <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <680qaq$bsi@corn.cso.niu.edu> <687lv0$q2i$1@news.jumpnet.com> <E35D41A619167980.C34AEE27426F1C04.4A919AE2268AF61B@library-proxy.airnews.net> <34a8f0db.4789432@news2.bga.com> <2517CADB29AF04B2.44D0920B56E222E3.463BCBE1016A2E4C@library-proxy.airnews.net> <68dugp$8go@nntp02.primenet.com> <34AA853B.1DF498E1@rtis.ray.com> <788E8097B260EDD1.DAEE404F81D76660.7EFE287C392726FA@library-proxy.airnews.net> <slrn6am0h1.tok.zebee@zipper.zip.com.au>
Reply-To: tadhg@bigfoot.com
NNTP-Proxy-Relay: library.airnews.net
NNTP-Posting-Time: Thu Jan  1 10:41:08 1998
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp14-14.ght.iadfw.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.wildstar.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!newsfeed.gte.net!nntp.flash.net!207.136.1.21.MISMATCH!thereisnocabal!news.airnews.net!cabal11!news-f.iadfw.net!usenet

Scripsit zebee@zipper.zip.com.au (Zebee Johnstone) :

 > >They might be that, too, for all we know. But the majority of Western Europe
 > >prior to 1600 was Christian, and so a resistance to re-creating that particular
 > >aspect of period life, especially in light of the surprising *lack* of
 > >resistance to "pretending" in the re-creation of other aspects of medieval life,
 > >suggests itself rather strongly as being anti-Christian. This is a rebuttable
 > 
 > Here's a rebuttal you might want to consider.
 > 
 > I know about the importance of Christian life in the medieval
 > period, I think it would add quite a lot to the atmosphere
 > of SCA events. I don't want to re-create it because it is *still*
 > important.

Oh, I see -- we can only re-create the parts of medieval life that aren't
important. Chivalry isn't important, courtesy isn't important, martial prowess
isn't important, honor isn't important, historical research isn't important, so
we'll spend our SCA lives recreating that. It's All Clear To Me Now.

Christianity is important, is it? Not according to the Supreme Court, nor to all
the highly-paid secular-humanism pimps in Washington. Better recalibrate your
importance meter, it seems to be giving you a false reading.

================================================================================
"When someone calls for diversity, he usually means his own opinions in a hall
 of mirrors."
          -- Stefan Kanfer
================================================================================
Tiomoid M. of Angle                                            tadhg@bigfoot.com

######

From: drafnlord@aol.com (Drafn Lord)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 1 Jan 1998 19:47:05 GMT
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <19980101194700.OAA07200@ladder02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder02.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
References: <slrn6am0h1.tok.zebee@zipper.zip.com.au>
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!news-xfer.siscom.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!howland.erols.net!portc02.blue.aol.com!portc03.blue.aol.com!audrey02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail

>But these religions are taken seriously by many, very seriously
>by some.  How then could I believably and sensibly and authentically
>recreate them?

What a wonderful point.  I am a christain (with a sense of humor0 and an ex
Roman Catholic.  But I would still be insulted if some one who had not a real
clue did a sign of the cross. Maybe insulted is not quite the right word, I am
not shure what is.  This paticular symbol is very important to Calholics of all
flavors and should not be taken lightly as should not any religous symbols or
practices from Jewdaism to Moslums to Pages to Christians.  

Lady Jana 

######

From: paximus@aol.com (PAXIMUS)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 1 Jan 1998 22:04:51 GMT
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <19980101220400.RAA26690@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
References: <19980101194700.OAA07200@ladder02.news.aol.com>
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!howland.erols.net!portc02.blue.aol.com!audrey02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail

Drafnlord responded to a post:

>Message-id: <19980101194700.OAA07200@ladder02.news.aol.com>
>
>>But these religions are taken seriously by many, very seriously
>>by some.  How then could I believably and sensibly and authentically
>recreate them?<<<

With this response
>
>What a wonderful point.  I am a christain (with a sense of humor0 and an ex
Roman Catholic.  But I would still be insulted if some one who had not a real
clue did a sign of the cross. Maybe insulted is not quite the right word, I am
not shure what is.  This paticular symbol is very important to Calholics ofall
flavors and should not be taken lightly as should not any religous symbols or
practices from Jewdaism to Moslums to Pages to Christians.  
>
>Lady Jana 
>
>,<<<<

The way I handled this was to study the Religion and how it is practiced then
and now.

 For instance the character I use to portray was an Ottoman Turk, a Sunni
Muslim and knowing how the majority of Americans perceive Moslems, I took the
time and effort to portray him as accurate as possible not for the Americans
but, most especially for the Moslems I knew would see and hear me perform. So I
found everything I could about Islam and especially about the Sunni's while at
the same time sprinkling in a bit about Sufism.

But, it is incredibly important that when you portray or enact another persons
Faith you do it with the upmost sincerity and raptness of attention, you must
give that Faith every bit as much personal and inner truth as you would when
you yourself go to your own Faiths services.

That means when you are Moslem you know in which direction Mecca lies when you
perform your Salat, when your a Catholic you know how to perform the sign of
the Cross and especially if your an Orthodox!! When I performed as my persona I
never drank alchol or even looked at pork because it went against "my"
teachings and Faith.

By doing this I have found a greater understanding and love for the Islamic
Faith and the Moslem people.

Give it a try it can only improve your personae and maybe even yourself.

Buona Fortuna!

Don Giulio d'Medici
G.M. Cavalieri Dell'Ordine de Santo Stefano
The Italians RPFS

######

From: <dkpirolo@cts.com>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 2 Jan 1998 02:36:07 GMT
Organization: CTS Network Services
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <01bd1600$b1b6cc00$b8c7d8cc@ughf>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wagasa.cts.com
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1162
Cache-Post-Path: wagasa.cts.com!unknown@psc11199184.cts.com
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!newsfeed.usit.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!howland.erols.net!usc!newshub.cts.com!relief.cts.com!not-for-mail



Bryan J. Maloney <bjm10@cornell.edu> wrote in article
<34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu>...
> > >P.S.  Religion does belong in the SCA because religion is just a fancy
word
> > >for how a person looks at the world around them.
> > >
> > >
> > 
> > Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap
Clap Clap
> > Clap Clap <<Brava>> Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap <<Well said, my lady>>
> > Countess Iseult nicElam, OP
> 
> 
> Tripe, tripe, tripe, tripe, tripe, tripe, tripe, further made
> preposterous by applause for tripe.  Religion definitely has a place in
> SCA, unless SCA has finally abandoned its stated mission.
> 
tripe, maybe, stomach?
I do feel honored that THE Bryan J. Maloney has responded in some small
(minded) way to my post.  He even agreed with me, in a back handed sort of
way, but it was agreement none the less.
Celestria

######

From: morphis@niuhep.physics.niu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 2 Jan 1998 17:24:03 GMT
Organization: N.Ill.U. Physics Dept.
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <68j7rj$e5c@corn.cso.niu.edu>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <E35D41A619167980.C34AEE27426F1C04.4A919AE2268AF61B@library-proxy.airnews.net> <34a8f0db.4789432@news2.bga.com> <68ba5k$jcf@corn.cso.niu.edu> <68bhtn$7ig@bulldog1.d.umn.edu>
Reply-To: morphis@niuhep.physics.niu.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: niuhep.physics.niu.edu
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!news2.chicago.iagnet.net!iagnet.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!corn.cso.niu.edu!niuhep.physics.niu.edu!MORPHIS

[posted and emailed]
panders2@bulldog1.d.umn.edu (patrick anderson) writes:
> <morphis@niuhep.physics.niu.edu> wrote:
>>moondrgn@bga.com (Chris and Elisabeth Zakes) writes:

>(I think I got the attributions right.)

>>>And would
>>>we recruit an ordained priest, or just "fake it"? (I don't know about
>>>you, but the one time I was at a "mass" being done by a non-priest, I
>>>was *very* uncomfortable with it.)

<snip of my stuff>

>If the mass was to be sacrementally valid, ie: worthwhile to Catholics or
>Anglicans, then regardless of whether or not it is a recreation, it must
>be performed by a priest.<snip>

>If the mass is just to be a "showpiece", for lack of a better word, then
>it doesn't matter if the officiant is a priest or not.

And if it is just a "showpiece" then it should be advertised as such.

Your wording is somewhat more clear on the subject than my own.

Robert the Pilegrim

######

From: sclark@chass.utoronto.ca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 1998 20:41:11 -0600
Message-ID: <883881118.1125777417@dejanews.com>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Organization: Deja News Posting Service
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <680qaq$bsi@corn.cso.niu.edu> <687lv0$q2i$1@news.jumpnet.com> <E35D41A619167980.C34AEE27426F1C04.4A919AE2268AF61B@library-proxy.airnews.net> <34a8f0db.4789432@news2.bga.com> <2517CADB29AF04B2.44D0920B56E222E3.463BCBE1016A2E4C@library-proxy.airnews.net> <68dugp$8go@nntp02.primenet.com> <34AA853B.1DF498E1@rtis.ray.com> <788E8097B260EDD1.DAEE404F81D76660.7EFE287C392726FA@library-proxy.airnews.net> <slrn6am0h1.tok.zebee@zipper.zip.com.au>
X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Jan 04 02:31:58 1998 GMT
X-Authenticated-Sender: sclark@chass.utoronto.ca
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.0; Windows 95)
X-Originating-IP-Addr: 128.100.160.137 (ppp17.chass.utoronto.ca)
Lines: 40
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp2.dejanews.com!grunt.dejanews.com!not-for-mail

Greetings--

Silfren, you've got a valid point there.  I'll try to answer based on
what I do and on what some other folks I know who recreate various
religious bits do.

The first thing to remember in recreating religion seriously is respect. 
Most religions which folks might want to research for their persona have
modern descendants.  This means a fair bit of background work.	If you're
going to "do" the same religion you practice in the modern world, you
still have to do that background work, because religions change over
time.

Second, you have to work out how it will mesh with your own religious
beliefs. I am a religious synthesist myself--a person who believes that
there is meaning and value in many religions.  For someone like me,
recreating the everyday practices of 13th century Catholicism are simply
another way of learning and understanding.  Now, if you are a devout
Muslim who believes wholeheartedly that that religion is "right", you're
probably going to have a harder time having a Catholic persona who does
religious "stuff."  You have to define that line. It'll likely be a
different place for everyone.  Some folks may find that they cannot
recreate any religious practices, even private ones, because of conflict
with one's modern sense of ethics or religion, and will restrict
themselves to study only.  Others may find their modern and medieval
religions wholly compatable.

This is something each person should think about and decide.  My outlook
on it may be totally wrong for you, and neither of us might agree with
the next person.  But at the very least, I think it's desirable to know
what kind of religious "stuff" your persona would have done, and the
place of religion in his or her daily life.  Whether you do more than
that has to be a personal decision, and you'd better give it a good deal
of thought.

Cheers--
Nicolaa de Bracton

-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
      http://www.dejanews.com/     Search, Read, Post to Usenet

######

Path: ccw.ch!usenet
From: Neil.Franklin@ccw.ch.nospam (remove .nospam)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 04 Jan 1998 05:19:01 +0100
Organization: My own Private Self
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <btxseuru.fsf@chonsp.franklin.lugs.ch>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <680qaq$bsi@corn.cso.niu.edu> <687lv0$q2i$1@news.jumpnet.com> <E35D41A619167980.C34AEE27426F1C04.4A919AE2268AF61B@library-proxy.airnews.net> <34a8f0db.4789432@news2.bga.com> <2517CADB29AF04B2.44D0920B56E222E3.463BCBE1016A2E4C@library-proxy.airnews.net> <68dugp$8go@nntp02.primenet.com> <34AA853B.1DF498E1@rtis.ray.com> <788E8097B260EDD1.DAEE404F81D76660.7EFE287C392726FA@library-proxy.airnews.net> <slrn6am0h1.tok.zebee@zipper.zip.com.au> <68f4ov$ctr$6@gte2.gte.net>
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34

tomansky <tomansky@gte.net> wrote:
> I certainly am NOT attending any ritual sacrament given by a real priest.

Well it obviously wouldn't be a _real_ priest, no more than whatever
king you stand before in court is a real king. Just think of an
marriage scene in a Hollywood/TV film, no real priest, and the actors
are not married as soon as the camera is off (the personas they play
are of course).

I am excepting the special case of an mundane priest who has chosen a
priest persona, because he would be "off duty" when performing as an
medieval priest in the SCA. BTW: said priest would actually have to
perform the medieval versions of the rituals, not those as defined in
present church liturgy. So the rituals would actually be either
invalid or he would be out of period.


tomansky <tomansky@gte.net> wrote:
> It's bad enough wearing a "dress" for a hobby.

Regarding men who wear dresses as queers is definitely out of period:-)


Oops, now I am sounding like an authenticy nazi;-)

-- 
Neil.Franklin@ccw.ch.nospam (remove .nospam), http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/
  for Geek Code, Papernet, Voicenet, PGP public key see http:

######

Path: ccw.ch!usenet
From: Neil.Franklin@ccw.ch.nospam (remove .nospam)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 04 Jan 1998 05:50:03 +0100
Organization: My own Private Self
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <afdcetc4.fsf@chonsp.franklin.lugs.ch>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <E35D41A619167980.C34AEE27426F1C04.4A919AE2268AF61B@library-proxy.airnews.net> <34a8f0db.4789432@news2.bga.com> <68ba5k$jcf@corn.cso.niu.edu> <68bhtn$7ig@bulldog1.d.umn.edu> <68j7rj$e5c@corn.cso.niu.edu>Reply-To: morphis@niuhep.physics.ni
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34

moondrgn@bga.com (Chris and Elisabeth Zakes) writes:
>And would
>we recruit an ordained priest, or just "fake it"? (I don't know about
>you, but the one time I was at a "mass" being done by a non-priest, I
>was *very* uncomfortable with it.)

This is actually one of the greatest difficulties in acting,
separating the actions of actor and persona.

T or A Moondragon shouldn't feel uncomfortable with _really_ going
to mass and C or E Zakes should not feel uncomfortable with _acting_
T or A Moondragon going to mass. C or E Zakes should feel
uncomfortable _going_ to mass, but that they didn't do.

An example: As an mundane Atheist I would feel ridiculous taking part
in an modern church service for real (I actually left my cousins
childs baptism, which my family attended, as soon as the baptism part
was finished, and did not take part in the actual church service
thereafter). OTOH in the SCA I would not feel ridiculous acting my RC
persona going to mass.

Real and acting are not the same thing.

panders2@bulldog1.d.umn.edu (patrick anderson) writes:
>If the mass was to be sacrementally valid, ie: worthwhile to Catholics or
>Anglicans, then regardless of whether or not it is a recreation, it must
>be performed by a priest.<snip>
>If the mass is just to be a "showpiece", for lack of a better word, then
>it doesn't matter if the officiant is a priest or not.

It would have to be a showpiece, just like SCA monarchies, courts,
tournaments, wars, etc are. All SCA is a show from the actors for
the actors. The priest would therefore have to be an actor playing
a priest persona, the same as kings are actors playing king personas,
not real kings.

morphis@niuhep.physics.niu.edu wrote:
>And if it is just a "showpiece" then it should be advertised as such.

No need to advertise it. "Show" is the default for anything in the
SCA. A _real_ mass held by a _real_ mundane priest in garb (say for
mundane christians who want a sunday service while at Pennsic) would
have to be marked as such, so that no one took it for play and took
part in it.

-- 
Neil.Franklin@ccw.ch.nospam (remove .nospam), http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/
  for Geek Code, Papernet, Voicenet, PGP public key see http:

######

From: tomansky <tomansky@gte.net>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: Sun, 04 Jan 1998 11:38:12 -0500
Organization: gte.net
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <68odto$55l$1@gte1.gte.net>
References: <01bd0e1b$c93d8540$2ec644d1@ughf> <19971223031800.WAA22164@ladder01.news.aol.com> <34A03D54.70B4@cornell.edu> <67sq9p$kki$1@news.jumpnet.com> <680qaq$bsi@corn.cso.niu.edu> <687lv0$q2i$1@news.jumpnet.com> <E35D41A619167980.C34AEE27426F1C04.4A919AE2268AF61B@library-proxy.airnews.net> <34a8f0db.4789432@news2.bga.com> <2517CADB29AF04B2.44D0920B56E222E3.463BCBE1016A2E4C@library-proxy.airnews.net> <68dugp$8go@nntp02.primenet.com> <34AA853B.1DF498E1@rtis.ray.com> <788E8097B260EDD1.DAEE404F81D76660.7EFE287C392726FA@library-proxy.airnews.net> <slrn6am0h1.tok.zebee@zipper.zip.com.au> <68f4ov$ctr$6@gte2.gte.net> <btxseuru.fsf@chonsp.franklin.lugs.ch>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2cust40.tnt1.tampa.fl.gt.uu.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Auth: C25782051A9CCFCC15CC8491
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win16; I)
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.syd.connect.com.au!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.gte.net!news.gte.net!not-for-mail

remove .nospam wrote:

> tomansky <tomansky@gte.net> wrote:
> > I certainly am NOT attending any ritual sacrament given by a real priest.
>
> Well it obviously wouldn't be a _real_ priest, no more than whatever
> king you stand before in court is a real king. Just think of an
> marriage scene in a Hollywood/TV film, no real priest, and the actors
> are not married as soon as the camera is off (the personas they play
> are of course).
>
> I am excepting the special case of an mundane priest who has chosen a
> priest persona, because he would be "off duty" when performing as an
> medieval priest in the SCA. BTW: said priest would actually have to
> perform the medieval versions of the rituals, not those as defined in
> present church liturgy. So the rituals would actually be either
> invalid or he would be out of period.

Alas, that is exactly what I am talking about.  Once a priest, always a priest.
In RC and Anglican, a priest cannot be "off-duty", etc. so the sacrament, modern
or medieval style is supposed to be valid.  I don't see it that way, but then, I
guess that's why I'm not RC.

David Levi

######

From: gyelle@aol.com (Gyelle)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA is not for children
Date: 5 Jan 1998 18:30:21 GMT
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <19980105183001.NAA00941@ladder02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder02.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
References: <6893r6$air$1@news.jumpnet.com>
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader
Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!news.onenet.net!news.oru.edu!newspeer.monmouth.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!152.163.199.19!portc03.blue.aol.com!audrey02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail

In article <6893r6$air$1@news.jumpnet.com>, teekem@spamtrap.com writes:

>: Oh, doesn't it?  I'm making the point that religion, like any other aspect
>: of medieval society, has good points and bad points.  The SCA generally
>
>And I'm making the point that it is just as necessary to understanding
>medieval society as unsanitary conditions are.

You seem to have missed the point here.  Understanding unsanitary conditions IS
necessary to understanding medieval society.

Gyelle