SCA-religion-msg

SCA-religion-msg – 7/9/05

Thoughts on religion within the SCA.

************************************************************************

NOTICE -

This file is a collection of various messages having a common theme that I have collected from my reading of the various computer networks. Some messages date back to 1989, some may be as recent as yesterday.

This file is part of a collection of files called Stefan's Florilegium. These files are available on the Internet at: http://www.florilegium.org

I have done a limited amount of editing. Messages having to do with separate topics were sometimes split into different files and sometimes extraneous information was removed. For instance, the message IDs were removed to save space and remove clutter.

The comments made in these messages are not necessarily my viewpoints. I make no claims as to the accuracy of the information given by the individual authors.

Please respect the time and efforts of those who have written these messages. The copyright status of these messages is unclear at this time. If information is published from these messages, please give credit to the originator(s).

Thank you,

Mark S. Harris AKA: THLord Stefan li Rous

Stefan at florilegium.org

************************************************************************

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Jews in the SCA

From: david.razler at compudata.com (David Razler)

Date: Wed, 4 May 94 02:52:00 -0500

MS>I understand this position all too well, for it is very close to how I felt.

MS>However, after a very long (and sometimes heated) discussion with William

MS>DeCorbie over the nets more than a year ago, I was forced to come to a

MS>different conclusion.

MS>If you react as if exposure to other's religious beliefs and feelings of

MS>faith is an affront to you, you are acting more bigotted than you should.

MS>The solution to true tolerance is if everyone can do anything they like

MS>a religious practice in front of each other, with no ill effect.

MS>Mind you, I am no more pleased when forced to be around overt displays of

MS>religion than I used to be. It very strongly ain't my thing, and it makes

MS>me uncomfortable. But I no longer feel morally correct to expunge it from

MS>my

MS>surroundings.

Tibor:

The two issues that got intertwined here were 1)religion within the SCA

and 2) religion in government places.

I'll comment no further here about the second, for it affects us not in

our world.

As for #1, my comments were based on the utter tolerance of religion I

have seen within the SCA. At Pennsic, orthodox Jews place symbolic cords

around the entire site - thereby making all of Pennsic "within their walls"

allowing them to carry objects during their Sabbath. At the same war, as

usual, Sunday Mass was conducted on top of Hoard Hill. All manner of

religious services went on in out-of-the-way places (I don't personally

practice group prayer - but when I did I know I would rather have it in a

quiet spot than within the marketplace or battlefield.)

Also, I wanted to point out that it is very, very proper within SCA

guidelines to act out one's persona's religion, from Master Cariodoc's

constant and historically accurate references to Allah, to the comical

pardoner who sells indulgences and redemption for all sins, signed by the

Pope in Rome and the Pope in Avingion - a parody, but also something that

did happen in period, according to soources from Chaucer to Tuchman.

Beyond the persona - it is ALSO perfectly permitted within the bylaws (and

personally encouraged by myself and others) to perform medeval mystery plays

acting out Biblical tales, (see back issues of CA for scripts and details)

or give a lesson on how period Rosary beads were made. (I have no use for

the items themselves, but would love to learn the 500-year-old technology

that produced the stuning, detailed portraits of the Crucifiction, with

dozens upon dozens of figures and objects, all within a ball a few inches in

diameter.) I would love to discuss and learn more about religious practices

of the period because they were deeply ingrained into the lives we are

supposed to be re-creating.

The Society bylaws were written to prevent in-your-face insults of one

faith by another or allow one force modern religious practices on others at

a Society event. On the other hand, they were also written to allow any

group or individual with good, historical information to share to do so,

whether by telling tales, holding classes, performing, taking on a persona

from penetant to Pope to Dolcinian, and the wearing of religious attire as

long as it is proper to period.

Aleksandr the Traveller

[david.razler at compudata.com]

From: afn03234 at afn.org (Ronald L. Charlotte)

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: No religious insignia

Date: 12 Oct 1995 03:28:32 GMT

rudi3964 at utdallas.edu wrote:

: Malaclypse the Younger (m-halton at students.uiuc.edu) wrote:

: > Quietly asked from a dark corner of Wurmwald, "What happens if you really

: > are a bishop?..."

: Then you probably have other things to do on weekends.

Actually, I know at least one Catholic Priest, and one Greek Orthodox

Priest who are long-time and active members, one is in fact a Laurel.

al Thaalibi -- An Crosaire, Trimaris

Ron Charlotte -- Gainesville, FL

afn03234 at freenet.ufl.edu

From: djheydt at uclink.berkeley.edu (Dorothy J Heydt)

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Is SCA membership incompatible with Christianity?

Date: 15 Feb 1996 23:11:23 GMT

Organization: University of California at Berkeley

I can't imagine why it should be. I've been a practicing

Catholic and an SCA member since the Year I (1966AD), and the

only problem I've found is that it's darned difficult to get to

Mass and Peerage meetings on the same Sunday morning.

Dorothea of Caer-Myrddin Dorothy J. Heydt

Mists/Mists/West UC Berkeley

Argent, a cross forme'e sable djheydt at uclink.berkeley.edu

PRO DEO ET REGE

From: swmyers at aol.com (SWMyers)

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Is SCA membership incompatible with Christianity?

Date: 15 Feb 1996 14:07:07 -0500

Dear Wayne,

While it may sometimes appear that overt Christianity is frowned upon in

our modern society, that simply isn't the case in the S.C.A. Because of

our more liberal stance towards a wide range of religious identities, I

believe that non-Christian faiths feel a greater freedom to express

themselves within the S.C.A. This may create a false sense that the

S.C.A. is more inclined towards non-Christian ideas. However, as an

organization, the S.C.A., quite correctly, takes no stance regarding a

person's faith.

With regards to the fealty issue... I have been in the S.C.A. for twelve

years now and have sworn a variety of oaths of fealty. When first

squired, I swore to a Knight. And the same oath I swore when a I served

as a landed baron was used when I was made a peer. I take my oaths very

(sometimes ludicrously) seriously, yet they have never threatened nor

impinged upon my relationship with God. I am a Christian possessed of a

deep and abiding faith which, in many ways, I find the S.C.A. has

enhanced.

Put simply, membership in the Society is absolutely compatible with

Christianity if your faith is real.

Take care, BRAN TREFONNEN, Atlantia

From: Patricia Shanahan <Pshan at cris.com>

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Is SCA membership incompatible with Christianity?

Date: Sun, 18 Feb 1996 16:12:45 -0800

Arval d'Espas Nord wrote:

> If you find that the simple presence of these people makes it hard for you

> to participate in the Society, then I'm afraid you're going to have a

> problem. Tolerance is one of the Society's strongest ethical standards.

> We do not exclude anyone based on his religion; that goes for evangelical

> Christians as well as neo-pagans.

> ===========================================================================

> Arval d'Espas Nord mittle at panix.com

The SCA's basic rule on religion is to try to ensure that people can

fully participate in all the official aspects of an event without

participating in any religious ceremony. That does not necessarily mean,

for example, that all people will be comfortable in all campsites.

A good working rule for being considerate is, if you are considering some

religious activity at an event, think about how you would feel if a

follower of your least favorite religion wanted to do the equivalent

under similar circumstances. If the set up you are considering is such

that you could just choose to ignore it and still enjoy the event, it is

unlikely to be a problem.

I think, because of some combination of it being the dominant period

religion and the dominant modern mundane religion, Christianity is

somewhat favored in practice, though not in theory.

I am an atheist, and don't wish to participate in any religious ceremony

or prayer. I have several times had to decide what to do when, for

example, "God save the King and Queen" is used as a toast at a coronation

banquet. "Godess bless the King and Queen" would be equally offensive to

me, but has never come up as a practical problem.

[Agnes of Ilford, is, of course, a devout daughter of the church,

attending mass regularly and NEVER expressing any doubts. She also wants

to stay alive.]

Patricia Shanahan

Pshan at cris.com

Subject: ANST - Religious rights

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 98 15:32:58 MST

From: "Timothy A. McDaniel" <tmcd at crl.com>

To: ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG

I shoulda known it would come up. Start to discuss

religion in the SCA and someone raises the "freedom of

religion" business.

There is a distinction that needs to be made when discussing

discrimination in the SCA in the US.

It is quite possible to have a corporation in the US that

discriminates on the basis of religion. For example, most

churches do. It's even possible for those organizations to

be tax-exempt. For example, most churches are. Also

consider the Boy Scouts -- belief in some sort of god is

required for membership and authority.

The First Amendment as enacted applied only to the Federal

government -- note "Congress shall pass no law". The 14th

Amendment has been interpreted by the courts, based I think

on the discussion at the time of its enactment, to apply the

Bill of Rights to the states. There are some civil rights

laws that apply some rights further -- e.g., most businesses

cannot discriminate in employment based on religion.

However, these are *statute laws*, not Constitutional

rights. If you sue, it's based on the 1964 Civil Rights Act

as amended, say, not based on the First Amendment.

Furthermore, these laws cover only certain situations --

employment, public accomodations, and such -- and to certain

people and corporations. I don't think the 1964 CRA

applies, for example, to someone who rents living space to

fewer than 4 people. States may also make their own laws or

have their own constitutional rights and privileges,

expanding the range of rights that their inhabitants have.

All I'm saying is that First Amendment rights do not apply

to the SCA, since we're not a government. Certain legal

rights do apply in some cases, but check with a lawyer for

details.

I *suspect* that, if for some reason we wanted to, the SCA

could discriminate in some ways based on religion, as long

as it didn't affect paid employment, accomodations at

events, and probably some other categories. I would

*certainly* check with a lawyer first, and I would rather

juggle nitroglycerine rather than deal with the tidal wave

of condemnation I'd get from the populace! It would be

clean contrary to decades of our traditions.

If you want more info, I suspect ash-Sheyk Da'ud ibn Auda

would be a decent person to contact. He's not a lawyer, but

he's worked for some years in a law office where they deal

with discrimination issues all the time (in the clients,

mind you!). He had to consider religion discrimination

allegations with a case that arose while he was Laurel King

at Arms.

Daniel de Lincolia

Tim McDaniel. Reply to tmcd at crl.com; if that fail, tmcd at austin.ibm.com

is work account. tmcd at tmcd.austin.tx.us ... is wrong tool. Never use this.