Josephine
Well for me religion is a more protean thing -
afterall couldn't we as easily say that "religious activity" involves
striving to understand and work with deity -
after all, noone has yet in this discussion adequately (IMO) defined
religion -
apart from in the negative - (ie magick is not religion) -
but adequate definition requires you say what it is -
and a lot of supposed argument is just "what i don't like" - hence
Ramsey Dukes
define religion as "right brain, non intuitive activity" -
purely I'd say because it suits his argument rather than any form of
sociology or anthropology of religious activity.
(btw I'm not having a go at Ramsey Dukes, in my own way I'm taking his
ideas seriously but I have questions)
By simply moving the decimal point, GD become a religion - not a very
big one but one just the same.
Some modern practitioners simply don't like the term religion - because
of its Latin and Catholic roots -
they have a taboo about the term - for understandable reasons.
So for example, who says a religion must by definition have a creed?
I'd say there must be examples of religious activity that lack any creed -
so if I were an anthropologist I might head off and test this out.
Personally I favour an approach that avoids essentialist definition and
looks instead at activities
that are common across groups. Anything else just seem illogical to me.
"Love and do what you will"
Mogg
>
> well yes, and no. The GD was not set up as a religion, but it did strive to understand Divinity and work with deity, but not in a religious structure. Where as the OTO mass that was quoted, and then subsequent creed was without question built as a religious expression.
>
> I also think it is important to differentiate between religion ( as a construct) and working with deities. The GD ( and Dion fortunes group) had no creed, and did not rely on faith. It was a method of ritual pattern making that was used for a variety of reasons including working with Deities.
>
> Im not saying that either is better than the other, just that there seems to be many different ways to approach magic, and I find that interesting. I may not agree with certain appraches, but that does not mean that I dont have an interest from a research, curiosity or learning point of view.
>
>
>
>
>> btw I assume discussion of (pagan) Theology is ok with the
>> moderators
>> for an academic list??>>>>>>>>>>
>>
>
> I should hope so Mogg, otherwise, what is the point of the list?
>
> Best wishes, Josephine
>
>
>
>
>
>
|