SCA-religion-msg – 6/30/15

Thoughts on religion within the SCA.

NOTE: See also the files: religion-msg, crusades-msg, Blue-Feather-msg, non-SCA-part-msg, SCA-gays-msg, heretics-msg, p-relig-tol-msg, Islam-msg.

************************************************************************
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 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.


From: Chris Zakes <dontivar at gmail.com>
Date: July 16, 2008 3:47:18 PM CDT
To: "Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc." <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>
Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Group Status Changes

At 07:56 AM 7/16/2008, you wrote:
<<< Thank you for pointing that out.  I often feel there is a prejudice in the SCA toward Christianity in any form.  I have been lectured because someone overheard a *private* conversation in which Biblical scripture was quoted, yet it is perfectly acceptable for a group to hold a pagan ceremony in the clearing down the road.  I'm all for their right to do so, please don't misunderstand, but I also know that an offer of a group Bible study at say, my campsite, would bring down the roof (separation of Church and  SCA). >>>

That *shouldn't* happen. The "seperation of church and SCA" rule primarily means that you can't have formal religious activities as part of official SCA events. For example, doing a Coronation ceremony that was heavily Christian-t or Pagan-themed would be considered Bad Form. But nobody blinks at clerical personae, someone wearing a cross or pentacle, or at folks having SCA weddings of whatever religious flavor suits them. Nor do people boggle at Twelfth Night or Candlemas (both Catholic holidays) or at "Beltane" or "Samhain" (Pagan high holy days.)

For that matter, at week-long SCA events like the Twentieth and Twenty-fifth Year celebrations, there were both Pagan and Christian religious gatherings on site in various camps.

        -Tivar Moondragon


From: SPaterson <sjpaterson at EASTLINK.CA>
Date: July 16, 2010 2:19:48 PM CDT
To: CALONTIR at listserv.unl.edu
Subject: Re: [CALONTIR] Kickstart; Was:  Is it just me?

<<< If my friend and I are a couple of Muslims who happen to play SCA, is my praying (especially necessary during Ramadan--and hey, during Ramadan in Calontir, there are several events--Bear Feast, The Tournament of the Virgin's Breasts, Cattle Raids, VALOR, and the Metal & Glassworker's Symposium) during a camping event going to unduly bother people? 
 
~Melisende >>>
 
My sister-in-law, who is Muslim, has attended events with Yesungge and myself when we lived in kingdom, she often took herself off to our shelter to pray at prayer times if they occurred at events. No one has ever made any negative mention of this I am proud to say :)
 
Bess

 
From: SPaterson <sjpaterson at EASTLINK.CA>
Date: July 16, 2010 7:06:50 PM CDT
To: CALONTIR at listserv.unl.edu
Subject: Re: [CALONTIR] Kickstart; Was:  Is it just me?

That's not true, Yesungge, we made up traditional 16th century stuff that Sandy researched on her own, The coolest one was the indigo abaya, as she found that dye lot was the 'norm' vs the black now worn.
 
Bess
----- Original Message -----
the only question or comment was people asking were she had got her great garb from. She was wearing her everyday clothing Hijab and abaya).
 
Yesungge


Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 15:49:37 +1000
From: Irina Lubomirska <ilubomirska at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Lochac] Saints' Days in Canon Lore
To: "The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list"
	<lochac at lochac.sca.org>

Oblio,

in my work as a lawyer, I often encounter people who I call "armchair
lawyers". They have very firm opinions about what the law says and allows
them to do, they will argue about it till they are blue in the face and they
are pretty much always completely wrong.

One of the usual reasons they are wrong is that they take the words that are
written in legislation and twist them and interpret them "creatively" until
those words say something that they want the words to say. Doesn't matter if
that involves straining of the language or departing from the intent of the
legislation. Anyone with any legal training knows that what the "armchair
lawyers" are saying is complete nonsense, but they always think they are
being clever and innovative. Before I learned how to interpret documents, I
often fell into the same error. It's a learned skill.

The remedy to this error is to always look at the words of the document. So
lets take the Corpora provision which you have helpfully set out. What does
it forbid? It forbids:

(1) the Society "establish[ing] [or] prohibit[ing] any system of belief
among its members" and.
(2) "perform[ing] any religious or magical ceremony at a Society event (or
in association with the name of the Society) in such a way as to imply that
the ceremony is authorized, sponsored, or promulgated by the Society or to
force anyone at a Society event, by direct or indirect pressure, to observe or join the ceremony."

So, take a look at those words and tell us, how would what Bat suggested
establish a system of belief in the society or amount to a performance of a
religious and magical ceremony? Is anyone forcing you to believe in a
particular god or particular saint? Is anyone forcing you to pray to that
saint? Is anyone even forcing you to celebrate that saint's day? Is anyone
holding any ritual or ceremony? Is anyone doing anything other than putting
a name placeholder on an unknown event.

I get that you don't like saints much (and I don't necessarily disagree with
you there!), but how does the proposal fall within what the plain words of
the prohibition *actually say*, rather than within what you personally
*want* the words to say?
The simple answer is it doesn't.
Also remember that most colleges in the SCA are named after various saints.
Quite a few events are too. It doesn't establish a religion, its just a
harmless practice which recognises the historical background.

Which brings me to the second part of the provision you extracted:

"However, this provision is in no way intended to discourage the study of
historical belief systems and their effects on the development of Western
culture."

Having a placeholder which in effect says "this event was held on this
saints day, as it was celebrated historically", does no more than educate
people about a religious practice. You don't have to believe it. I don't
have to believe it. No one is suggesting that you should believe it. That's
quite different to knowing about it and recognising its importance in the
historical context.

Finally, you're entitled to not like something. If that's the case, state
that you don't and state why. That is perfectly legitimate. But not
everything that you don't like is regulated by the Corpora. Most often it
will not be. Your argument will be much more persuasive if you can argue the
merits without trying to put an artificial and unpersuasive construction on
SCA legal documents. They are a bit like the Australian Constitution - they
just set out the basics. The rest is negotiable and open to a good,
persuasive argument. Don't undermine the good arguments you have by trying
to appeal to documents that don't support your case, no matter how much
you'd like them to.

Irina

On 31 May 2011 14:45, Oblio of Abertwidr <oblio.of.abertwidr at gmail.com>wrote:
I think that the aspect of whether it is "*unnecessarily* religious",
is not the issue.

I think that it institutionalises religion, and, in Corpora, on the
page numbered 5 of that document, is

"
F. Policy on Religion
Having no wish to recreate the religious conflicts of the period under
study, the Society shall neither establish nor prohibit any system of belief among its members. No one shall perform any religious or magical ceremony at a Society event (or in association with the name of the Society) in such a way as to imply that the ceremony is authorized, sponsored, or promulgated by the Society or to force anyone at a Society event, by direct or indirect pressure, to observe or join the ceremony. However, this provision is in no way intended to discourage the study of historical belief systems and their effects on
the development of Western culture. Except as provided herein, neither the Society nor any member acting in its name or that of any of its parts shall interfere with any person's lawful ceremonies, nor shall any member discriminate against another upon grounds related to either's system of belief."

I believe that the proposal, if it does not directly contravene the
SCA Corpora, either comes too close to contravening the SCA Corpora,
or, "is against the spirit of" the SCA Corpora.

Apart from which, the nature of some of the "sainted saints", is
questionable, and, from what I have read of the reason that one of the
saints, was sainted, makes the whole concept of sainthood, something
not worthy of respect.

I think that religion and politics are both supposed to be kept out of
the SCA, for the sake of, amongst other things, what harmony does
exist, or what harmony can be achieved, and, thus, religion and
politics should be kept out of the SCA.


Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 14:24:03 +1200
From: tamara at suncrow.com
Subject: Re: [Lochac] Mendicant Friar experience at Pennsic
To: "The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list"
	<lochac at lochac.sca.org>

On 2013-08-30 14:44, Christopher Anderton wrote:
<<< It is interesting that he notes the popularity of a pagan personality
among the SCA over a Christian one; >>>

In the US[1], the SCA -- like many of the various sub-cultures with 
which it overlaps -- is viewed/used by its participants as something of 
a retreat/escape from the "dominant" mundane culture.  It's a "safe" 
space where it's okay to be weird, geeky, pagan, gay, fancy, whatever it 
is you can't fully *be* in the outside world.  So having people 
apparently being forthrightly Christian at an SCA event can feel like a 
violation of that safe space. Like having cops at Burning Man, or white 
rednecks crashing a black club -- maybe they don't mean any harm, or 
maybe they're just rubbing your nose in their priviledge[2].  It's not 
always clear whether someone is dressing in Medieval Christian trappings 
because they are Christian, and bringing their religion into their 
Medievalism, or if they're a non-Christian dressing up as a Medieval 
Christian because it's accurate recreation.  When they start holding 
religious ceremonies at Court and demanding everyone participate, that's 
when Corpora can become a very real and necessary shield.

I don't think we have that sort of dynamic here, because Australia and 
New Zealand are both very secular.  Christianity doesn't have so much 
mundane priviledge to exploit, so that aspect is muted and we're free to 
express annoyance at all religions equally.  :^)  At least, that's sort 
of my take on it.  Thoughts ?

Some things I found interesting:

-- how sad it made him to see so many people really just not making the 
effort to dress period.  Makes me sad, too, but we have it so much 
better here in Lochac (I think).
-- I thought it was *fascinating* to read how very concerned he was, as 
a self-described athiest, to embody the "Christian" virtues of the role 
he was playing -- being humble and careful not to impose, helping 
whenever the opportunity presented itself, etc.  When he remarked that 
he wished more people would simply *help* when it looked like help was 
needed, I couldn't help but feel a bit proud, because people *do* that 
in Lochac as a matter of course.  But then there could be a bit of 
small-town/big-town effect going on there?

Anyway, yes, fascinating read.

Kazimira

[1]Caution: gross generalization inbound
[2]Christians in the SCA don't get the slack that someone doing 
Medieval Islam or Judaism would.  And for a couple decades there it was 
actually fashionable to be some flavor of pagan.  Maybe it still is, 
dunno.


Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2013 20:23:40 +1000
From: "Lynlee O'Keeffe" <lynleeok at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Lochac] Mendicant Friar experience at Pennsic
To: "The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list"
	<lochac at lochac.sca.org>

<<< Yes, which gets back to Yolande's recollection of a for-real Christian 
complaining about non-Christian SCAdians wearing crucifixes.  I would be 
just as hesitant to display any sort of vert religious trappings.... and 
yet, part of what we do, theoretically, is use persona and role-play to 
learn about how people lived in period, and religion was of course a 
part of that.  And yet, I can understand where the people who object are 
coming from. >>>

Religion is definitely strongly represented in extant records and as such to leave out all reference does mean our representation is quite a deviation. My personna would have had a religious aspect to her life, which I represent with Paternoster beads. In my mundane life I know nothing about their use and, while a cross may be quite applicable to my persona, I would not wear one on the beads as 1) I feel it would be hypocritical and 2) I would not want to transgress the overt religious thing. I MIGHT wear a cross or image of a cross if I were doing a replication of a specific extant picture.

I make this choice for me (and would make the same choice no matter what SCA Body Corpora rules said) and have had discussions as the whether a full set of prayer beads would be suitable for largess. I feel also that having beads which could just be a nice decoration is acceptable, but adding a cross is questionable. But why should that be when a Thors Hammer would be fine? Possibly because the chances of running into a Christian are very high and you are then risking misleading them. Chances of walking up to a person who believes you dedicate your life and values to Thor are more remote, therefore you are not really able to be perceived as deceptive. By the way, I in no way use my beads as a form of prayer, but they and their tassel do feel quite nice to stroke when my hands are idle, so please don't mistake this for overt religious observance - I would probably do the same with a fox tail or silk purse tassels. It is more hygienic than chewing fingernails :)

Claricia 		 	   		  


Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2013 12:09:36 +1000
From: Jenny Andersen <jla_mni at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Lochac] religious occurrences in the SCA
To: "The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list"
	<lochac at lochac.sca.org>

<< One reason that Friar and similar religious personas is
not done, is as he alluded to, concern about bringing offense to 
those who are current practitioners of the Christian religion. >>

<<< Yes, which gets back to Yolande's recollection of a for-real Christian 
complaining about non-Christian SCAdians wearing crucifixes.  I would be 
just as hesitant to display any sort of vert religious trappings.... >>>

Pfft. Those people would have to be having a bad day. Do they get 
offended when they watch a TV show/movie/play where an actor of one 
religion portrays that of another? And what about when that character is
someone in orders? So why should they in an SCA context? Because, 
speaking as a Catholic, there's no difference between the two. Frankly 
if anything, they should be getting more offended by people they know 
are Christian wearing the symbols of the pagan gods - because that's the
bit that's actually forbidden, you know: cast out all idols etc etc.

And
if they are that uptight, then tough. You're not wearing the cross as a
targeted strike at them, so you should not feel at all guilty of 
deliberately causing offence. Religion (of all kinds) was a big part of 
the life of the people that we are recreating - and they should know 
that. Whilst the SCA is cool with people making as little effort as possible, it's those that make the most effort that we hold in highest regard, so if you feel that the symbol is necessary to give an accurate representation of the era you like and are willing to wear it, even if you don't believe/have issues with the group behind the symbol, then good on you.

Jenny


Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 15:04:55 +1200
From: "katherine kerr" <vicki at webcentre.co.nz>
Subject: Re: [Lochac] Mendicant Friar experience at Pennsic
To: lochac at lochac.sca.org

<<< ~Gwalchavad

It is interesting that he notes the popularity of a pagan personality
among the SCA over a Christian one; is this something Lochac can
attest? >>>

The most uncomfortable "religious" encounter I have ever had at an SCA event was a play at a feast, which included a fair whack of comments along the lines of
"dumb/bloody/stupid/insert-insult-here" Christians.

I'm not a Christian, but I was standing next to a committed Anglican, and was saddened for its effect on her; dismayed by the apparent approval of general abuse of a minority group; miffed by the completely non-period nature of the abuse (bring on the Inquisition!); and disturbed that if someone tried abusing a non-Christian sect -- the play was allegedly honouring pagans -- in such a manner, there probably would have been some very public umbrage.

Within the SCA, my persona is a recusant Catholic, but I'm ambivalent about wearing a rosary. I have been to the Easter Mass at Festival, but I wouldn't take communion. I want to do some of the Compostela walk one day, but in homage to the culture, rather than the religion per se.

And I find the references to neo-pagan groups and practices within the SCA context as comparable to including square dancing, margherita skulling and KFC at feasts -- I know it happens, but I can still wish it didn't, otherwise we end up as an adult's dress-up club and I'd like the SCA to be better than that.

Thanks for the link to the journal -- a very interesting and thought-provoking read in many ways.

katherine kerr
=====================================
katherine kerr of the Hermitage, in the Crescent Isles,
Barony of Southron Gaard, Kingdom of Lochac
http://webcentre.co.nz/kk

<the end>
Edited by Mark S. Harris	SCA-religion-msg