Conference hydra::dejavu

    Not exhausted - exhilirated!!
    
    
    Good Hallow's Eve to you all!    
    				      
    
    Tracy

    
    
    I hope something Terrifying beyond all your known beliefs 
    Scares the Hell Out of All yOu Dejavuers Tonight and you
    Shiver and Shake under the covers til the Sun rises 
    in the morning finding you with beads of fearful sweat bubbling
    on your brow.
    
    In the Spirit!
    (No smiley Pumpkin Faces for me...)
    -Arthur 
    
    Enjoy!                     
    
                       

          <<< REGENT::SYS$SYSDEVICE:[NOTES$LIBRARY]RELIGION.NOTE;1 >>>
                            -< Religion Conference >-
================================================================================
Note 230.38                 Thoughts About Hallowe'en                   38 of 38
NEXUS::MORGAN "Snazzy Personal Name Upon Request"    37 lines  31-OCT-1988 20:15
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Well folks, tonight is the night when all good witches are energeticlly
    wisking about on fadish secondhand Kerbys. 
    
    But the real star of the day is...  
    
    ...death.  
    
    It is a natural fact that life feeds upon life. From the food we eat to
    the petrol we consume some form of life benefits from some other form
    of life. 
    
    Samhain (pronounced Sow (as in Cow) an (as in ann)) is the festival
    that acknowledges that our lives are built upon the death of others.
    From the active life energy of our parents to the passive life energy
    of the grains we eat death is the conversion process that makes our
    lives what they are. 
    
    Tonight we honor death as a welcome fellow in the houses of the living.
    We honor those that have gone before us with soul cakes and wine by
    leaving an empty place set at out dinner and supper tables. We honor
    our deceased pets by leaving soul cakes (pet food) out for them in a
    readily accessable place. We honor ourselves when we expect that our
    children will do so for us. When the morning arrives we take the food
    out to the yard or field as an offering to the Mother whose bountiful
    store of energy sustains us through life and death processes. 

    For some death is a fearful thing. They attempt to scare it away
    by dressing fearfully or lighting bonfires to lure the dead away
    from their homes. But the simple truth is that death is always with
    us and will always be.
    
    And in honoring death with a festival we reremember that life always
    revolves into death and back into life. Our friend Death humbles
    and exalts us by transforming us into new life forms beneficial
    for all lifeforms living upon the Mother.
    
    Blessed Be!

RE: .3 (Mikie)

    >  Samhain (pronounced Sow (as in Cow) an (as in ann)) is the festival
    that acknowledges that our lives are built upon the death of others. < 


Then dammit, why not spell the word Sowann?   This is one thing about English
that will bug me to my GRAVE!


    >  From the active life energy of our parents to the passive life
    energy of the grains we eat death is the conversion process that makes
                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    our lives what they are. < 


You really know how to keep me from going on a tirade, Mikie.  ;-)


    >  We honor those that have gone before us with soul cakes and wine by
    leaving an empty place set at out dinner and supper tables.  < 


Wait a minute...  Joe-average-dead-person gets food AND wine on Halloween, but
Elija, a PROPHET, only gets a glass of wine at Passover?  Shows you where some
people's priorities are!


    >  We honor our deceased pets by leaving soul cakes (pet food) out for
    them in a readily accessible place.  < 


But Mikie, ANY place is "readily accessible" to a spirit!


    >  For some death is a fearful thing. They attempt to scare it away by
    dressing fearfully or lighting bonfires to lure the dead away from
    their homes.  < 


With the way I dress, I should live forever.


Hope y'all had a Happy Sow-ann.
                   
    
John M. who_is_obviously_bored

    re; .4
    -------
    
    	John, It may be interesting for you to know that Samhain
    	is , as far as I know, an ancient Gaelic word for "November".
    	Samhain is the time when people celebrate death on the night
    	of 31-october. The dead roam free that night, and can be greeted
    	by those wishing to befriend them. Another word of interest is
        "Bealtaine" ( pronounced B-OWL-TIN-A). Its a pre-Christian word
    	for "MAY-EVE" or the night of 30-April/1-May. This is the night
    	when fairy -forts may be seen by human eyes and those who dared.
    	Strange things happened on this night; Holy Waters would be
    	cast on fields and houses to keep them safe from the wandering
    	"pishogues" or Spirits.                 
    
    	These words ( which you have decided should all be spelled
        phonetically) reach back to a time beyond Christianity, and
    	even beyond the formation of United States Englishese...
    
    	Please , have respect for the past and its qualities. There
    	are many more things on Earth and in the World than we can
    	ever know about, never mind cheapen. Just because modern
    	materialist soceity has decided to be derisive and 
    	hysterical (and even phonetic!!) does not mean that we all
    	must toe the standard line...
    
    			PEACE, and then listen...
    
    			Tadhg Russell, Dublin 
    
    	

    A few secular thoughts about the day:
    
    1) It's now estimated to be the secondmost popular "holiday" among
    adults for dressing up and going out (topped only by New Years').
    
    2) The most popular costume for children was a California Raisin.
    
    3) The most popular mask for adults was Richard Nixon.  This was
    followed by George Bush.  (Nixon masks were also very popular when
    he was running for office, so one can make no political judgements,
    positive or negative, from that datum).
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    
    

    re: 6 
    
        Steve, and Topher,  I had a  very happy Halloween. Besides 
    doing a magic show in my town, I was also "married"  on Halloween
    evening.  The ceremony took place at my folks house after the show.
      I would have loved to attend "Topher's" Halloween party, but 
    maybe next year. Would like to hear any comments concerning my
    choice of day for getting married.                             
          
    
    Magically, 
    
    
    Paul 
    
    
    

    Reply to...
================================================================================
Note 900.4                      Happy Halloween!                          4 of 7
DECWET::MITCHELL "The Cosmic Anchovy"                47 lines   1-NOV-1988 01:29
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>Then dammit, why not spell the word Sowann?   This is one thing about English
>that will bug me to my GRAVE!
 
    But Johnnieeee, we like bugging you to the grave...
    

>Wait a minute...  Joe-average-dead-person gets food AND wine on Halloween, but
>Elija, a PROPHET, only gets a glass of wine at Passover?  Shows you where some
>people's priorities are!
 
    Sorry, not my problem. B^)
    

>    >  We honor our deceased pets by leaving soul cakes (pet food) out for
>    them in a readily accessible place.  < 
>
>
>But Mikie, ANY place is "readily accessible" to a spirit!
 
    Yeah but keeping the food in the frig is cheating...

re: .6
    
>    3) The most popular mask for adults was Richard Nixon.  This was
>    followed by George Bush.  (Nixon masks were also very popular when
    
Judging by this campaign, Bush will be a right proper successor to
Tricky.  We might as well get the Impeachment committe rolling now.

BTW, i was at my 20th high school reunion Saturday night, otherwise i
would've tried to make to Topher's.  Hope y'all had a good time!
							paul

Heard on the radio a day or two ago about a couple whose first child was
born this past Halloween.  Both of their birthdays are Halloween and so
was the delivering obstatrician.  

Terry

    Reply to .11, Andrews,
    
    I say that we need to be a little careful with the information we get
    from the church. Although your reply is well presented it could be that
    the clerics of that narrow time presented information skewed to prove
    their points.
    
    It's possible there was no pagan ritual transvestism as it is possible
    that witchcraft didn't exists before the church created it as a
    so-called hersey. We simply don't know and the church of that time was
    not above lying for political purposes.
    
    And with that outta' the way, transvestism is still very useful as a
    tool to remove the individual from mundane states of consciounsess.
                                           

�    I say that we need to be a little careful with the information we get
�    from the church.
    
    I think we need to be careful with all information;  there are
    few of us without bias, it's as easy to lie by omission as commission,
    and few of us have the time or inclination to present information
    that does not support whatever point we are trying to make...
    
    I also think that the church does not create  heresy, the church merely
    defines heresy...  why ban something that does not exist?  
    
    
    we now return to our regularly scheduled program...
    
    /bruce
    
    

    Re: <<< Note 900.14 by DLNVAX::ANDREWS "Hurry Sundown!" >>>
    
  >  > "it is possible that witchcraft didn't exist before the church
  >  created it as a so-called heresy."
    
   > Witchcraft existed long before Christian times. Surely you're
   > not disputing that. There is ample written commentary by pre-
   > Christian writers, notably Greek and Roman writers. I have
   > the feeling that i'm misunderstanding what you meant in 900.12.
    
    I disagree. Paganism of different forms, including Goddess based
    structures existed before the Christian religion. Witchcraft appears to
    be a modern _recreation_ of the Pagan religion Wicca, mixed with many
    modern and ancient metaphors. That's my view now. I'd really like to
    see some scholarly work work don on this.
    
    And we can't just paint Romany Gypseys as witches either. I wrote an
    article on this already. I think it's in ::Religion, topic 14.

    
      Reply to .13, Bruce,
  
   > I also think that the church does not create  heresy, the church merely
   > defines heresy...  why ban something that does not exist?  
    
      Sure it does. It creates the ecclestical crime by defining it.
 Why burn or hang people for an ecclestical crime which doesn't
 exist? For political purposes of course. And we should remember
 that heresy is always defined in _reference_ to a previously
 existing religious structure. If the previous structure didn't
 exist or didn't care there would be no hersey. 

      The structure defines and creates the crime. What if I were to
 define the crime of theft as "Bruce breathing my air." I defined
 the crime. I created the crime. Yet it is a non-existant crime.
 Stop breathing Bruce!! <Snicker>
    
   > we now return to our regularly scheduled program...
                
      Thank you. B^)

    
�      The structure defines and creates the crime. What if I were to
� define the crime of theft as "Bruce breathing my air." I defined
� the crime. I created the crime. Yet it is a non-existant crime.
� Stop breathing Bruce!! <Snicker>
    
    Bruce breathes air...     If it were not for the fact that
    Bruce breathes air, and that Mikie somehow finds that
    threatening, it would never occur to Mikie to declare
    that it is a crime for Bruce or anyone else to breathe
    [mikies] air...
    
    the church would have no occasion to declare as heresy
    acts which were not being performed...
    
    /bruce

    reply to .17, Bruce,
    
    It's not a rathole. It's very important. It's an issue of mind/body
    control. But your labeling it a "rathole," like the churches labeling
    paganism as "heresy" is interesting.
    
    The threatening (1) part is of a political/territorial nature, nothing
    spiritual. The church has EVERY occasion to declare as heresy
    _anything_ that suites their political purposes. Even to the point of
    creating new imaginary threats (1) to freeze peoples minds so that the
    new programs can be poured in.
                                  

    Bruce,
    
    Let's see if we can resolve this.
    
    You are saying that the Church wouldn't have called pagan religions
    heresy if they didn't perceive the pagans as a threat. In the YCYOR
    this is undoubtably true. But are the pagans comitting a real crime?
    No. Therefore the crime exists _only_ in the mind of those that created
    the crime and those who believe in those that invented the crime. These
    criminals then comitted another series of crimes starting with the
    creating of non-existant crimes, interferring with other peoples lives
    and murdering them for political purposes in the guise of spirituality.
    
    I will agree that the crime exists, but only in the minds of the ones
    who created the crime of heresy. And I insist on political reasons,
    not spiritual reasons.
    
    Just ask any of the 400,000 murdered Cathar Albigsinnians. (sp?)
    
    How does this relate to Halloween? Good question.
    
    Samhain is a perfectly reasonable Celtic fire festival related to the
    last harvests and culling of heards. In topic 14 of AITG::Religion
    Rowan Moonstone, a Georgian Highpriestess and close personal friend
    writes of Samhain, pronounced Sow-an, and it's meanings. The cultural
    slandering of Welsh women's hats, creation of dark meaning for Samhian
    and general trickstering of the Churches Halloween is completely
    different from it's Celtic meaning. Our Halloween is a parody of the
    Celtic Samhain.
    
    Of the Witches I know none refer to Samhain as Halloween or Yule as
    Christmas. None of us ride brooms or turn people into ugly worms.
    We're not interested in the Christian parody.
    
    However cultures will vary and one culture has vested interests in
    disavowing and diminishing another culture's religious propoerty.

    Mikie,
    
    I think you are missing my point...
    
    
�    It's possible there was no pagan ritual transvestism as it is possible
�    that witchcraft didn't exists before the church created it as a
�    so-called hersey. We simply don't know and the church of that time was
�    not above lying for political purposes.
    
    This statement suggests to me that you believe that people didn't
    engage in [certain behaviors] until the church defined these behaviors
    as heretical...
    
    i'm suggesting that people did engage in these behaviors, that the
    church found the behaviors threatening, and *then* declared these
    behaviors to be heresy...
    
    so i think it very likely that people engaged in "witchcraft"  
    before the church *defined* it as witchcraft...
    
    
    and i call this a rathole because it is tangential at best to the points
    put up for discussion by DLNVAX::ANDREWS in .10...

    Reply to .20, Bruce,
    
    Ok, what's .10 got to do with anything? So someone has a birthday on
    Oct 31th? Big deal. I think it's more unusual for a person to be born
    on Feb. 29th.
    
    Anyway I still doubt that 'witchcraft' existed before the church
    invented it. However I am not arguing that some pagan religious systems
    that look somthing like what they called witchcraft existed. The
    witchcraft the church refered to was their own invention.
    
    For instance did you know that Gerald Gardner created our present
    Gardnerian Witchcraft with the assistience of one Beast? Gardner called
    it the "Wicca Project". It was his perception of what he thought it
    _should_ be.
    
    And he caught hell for his creation too. It was close to but not the
    same as the partiarchal witchcraft forms of his British predecessors.
    It isn't even clear what his predecessors referrd to themselves as. We
    do know that the British forms were different from the European forms,
    which were different from the Romany forms, which are different from
    current American forms. Everyone creates their own form. Even
    solitaries do that.
    
    Yes, have a happy Halloween folks. For the same reasons some Christians
    won't celebrate a comerical Christmas I won't be celebrating it. It
    continues to _display_ to many negative sterotypes created by the
    Christian Churches. Ugly witches riding brooms, fearsom mosters
    prowling the darkness, visions of a Christian Hell.
    
    I have no candy to give the little ones. My house will be empty and
    dark when they come a callin'. 
    
    In short the fun is a denegrating type of fun.

    RE: <<< Note 900.14 by DLNVAX::ANDREWS "Hurry Sundown!" >>>
       
   > reply to .12 (Morgan - a good Welsh name!)
    
    Thanx. B^)
    
   > Witchcraft existed long before Christian times. Surely you're
   > not disputing that. There is ample written commentary by pre-
   > Christian writers, notably Greek and Roman writers. I have
   > the feeling that i'm misunderstanding what you meant in 900.12.
    
    Which sources were you refering too?
    
    BTW, I like this game. And I haven't seen traditional witches maintain
    such after exposure to rational criticism of the subject.
    
    Witchcraft seems to me to be a recent arrival. However village
    herbalists, shamans and ceremonional magicians are indeed ancient
    breeds.
    
    And I'm real sure that some, perhaps most, shamans and ceremonional
    magicians take exception to the term witch.

    Re: .15
    
>   > Witchcraft existed long before Christian times. Surely you're
>   > not disputing that. There is ample written commentary by pre-
>   > Christian writers, notably Greek and Roman writers. I have
>   > the feeling that i'm misunderstanding what you meant in 900.12.
>    
>    I disagree. Paganism of different forms, including Goddess based
>    structures existed before the Christian religion. Witchcraft appears to
>    be a modern _recreation_ of the Pagan religion Wicca, mixed with many

    Anyone out there with a big dictionary on their desk? Surely
    the word witch derives from the word Wicca? So if Wicca predates
    Christinity...

John.

    
    
    
    
    
    		H A P P Y    H A L L O W E E N   E V E R Y O N E!
    
    		Remember eye of newt...
    
    

    
    	What, exactly, was/is the significant of an "eye of a newt"
    	in Halloween lore?
    
    	Carla
    

      Reply to .23, John,
    
>>    I disagree. Paganism of different forms, including Goddess based
>>    structures existed before the Christian religion. Witchcraft appears to
>>    be a modern _recreation_ of the Pagan religion Wicca, mixed with many
>
>    Anyone out there with a big dictionary on their desk? Surely
>    the word witch derives from the word Wicca? So if Wicca predates
>    Christinity...

      From REAL MAGIC by P.E.I. Bonewits, the first person with a
 degree in majik from an accredited University... (This book is now
 back in print, get it if you can.)

      "The meaning of the word witch has changed several times
 throughout European history and there are numerous partisans
 around today to claim that each and every one of these varying
 meanings was and is the One True Right and Only Definition. My
 current conclusion is that word "witch" is utterly useless for
 communication without qualifying adjectives to indicate which of
 the different kinds of witches it is that one is talking about. In
 the following pages we will meet: Classic, Shamanic, Gothic,
 Familial or "Fam-Trad", Immigrant or "Imm-Trad", Neo-Pagan,
 Feminist, Neoclassic, Neogothic, Neoshamanic, Ethnic, and
 Anthropologic Witches."

      He goes on to say that WICCE (fem), WICCA (mas) and WICCAN
 (plur) from which the MODERN word witch derives (via the Middle
 English WYCCHE and WITCHE are based upon the O.E. root word WIC-.

      This in turn SEEMS to be based upon the Indo-European root
 WEIK, SOME of the meanings of which involve (a) magic, (b) bending,
 twisting and turning. "Which of these meanings is the true origin
 of WICCE(A) remains to be settled, but it is fairly obvious that
 those practicing WICCAN (or WIGLE) were considered to be magicians
 and/or benders of reality (or ones who could "turn aside" as in Old
 Norse VIKJA).

      Equally obvious is that WEIK is not related to WITAN (to know)
 involving knowledge or wisdom. The words wicca(e), wycche and witch
 never meant "wise one" as modern witches claim. That was WYS-ARD,
 from which we derive wizard. Not until the late middle ages was
 that word used to refer to male witches.

      When Wicca(e) was translated into other languages it usually
 meant one of these: sorcerer, magician, singer, healer, midwife,
 charmer, drugger and diviner. Although the Irish meanings did,
 almost none of the foreign terms had a religious meaning. 

      Beginning with the Feudal period, most European cultural
 patterns SEEMS to have has similar about those that Bonewits terms
 "Classical Witches". These were male and female functions which
 included midwifery, healing with magic and herbs, providing potions
 for love and poisons, weather prediction, blessings and cursings.

      But the witches of the Church were a different sort. Indeed
 since the Inquisitors ran out of victims to murder a new class of
 individual was chosen to feed the Churches fires. These were the
 local "Shamanistic" and "Classical" witches. THEY WERE TURNED INTO
 HERETICS by _inventing_ a new form of witchcraft that Bonewits
 terms Gothic Witchcraft. Gothic Witchcraft was pronounced a
 reversal of Roman Catholic doctrine in which those that worshiped
 Satan were granted powers to harm those around them.

      Further Bonewits says that Gardener (in the 30's and 40's) saw
 that British FamTrads were dying. So he began to use his
 anthropological skills to "restore" what HE THOUGHT was the original
 faith. "The result was a brand-new religion calling itself "Wicca",
 using a relatively new system of group magic (although the "Keys
 of Solomon" cribs are obvious in the earlier versions), and
 worshipping a Moon-Sea-Earth Goddess and a Horned God of the
 Hunt-Vegetation-Sun. Because this new religion bears more
 resemblance to the various "Neopagan" faiths invented in the 1960's
 than it does anything ancient, I refer to it as "Neopagan
 Witchcraft".

      Aidan Kelly has done a brilliant job of analyzing Gardener's
 papers and proved that 99% of "Wicca" was a creation of Gardener and
 Valiente. "THE REBIRTH OF WITCHCRAFT: TRADITION AND CREATIVITY IN
 THE GARDNERIAN REFORM" an unpublished manuscript, most scholarly
 examination of Neo-Pagan witchcraft ever done. Infact the magickal
 techniques were conscripted by Gardener, Valiente and Crowley from
 various secret societies. This is where I think modern witchcraft
 came from... Pagan members of the Rosecrucians and whatnot.

      This of course has no bearing upon Wicca's validity.
 Regardless of when it was created it is still valid. In fact since
 it is a late arrival I think it has a very good chance at enticing
 the hearts of modern people. And from this rich bed of religious
 energy come all the neo-forms of witchcraft.

    And I wonder about the ethics of persons who celebrate a holiday which
    is similar to a "white" celebration of a holiday wherein "Blacks" are
    _iconographed_ (black image on orange background) as lazy, poor people
    and "Jews" as rich and greedy hucksters. Wherein little children are
    _taught_ to _beg_ from their neighbors while dressed up as *witches*,
    ghosts, goblins and other icons/representations of previous or foreign
    religious systems.
    
    The imagery does not serve us well as a culture. It's purely bigotry at
    it's finest (except for the innocents who are then _programmed_ to be
    bigoted without their knowledge and permission). 
                      

RE: .27
 
    I believe it comes from MacBeth and the three wierd sisters and their
    magic potion.  "Eye of newt, toe of frog..."

    Terry

    re: Mikie...
    
    Well, actually, I think of "trick or treat" as sanctioned extortion...
    
    /bruce

    Re: <<< Note 900.29 by HYDRA::LARU "goin' to graceland" >>>
    
  >  Well, actually, I think of "trick or treat" as sanctioned extortion...
    
    Oh, you mean like taxes and tooth decay?? B^)

RE: .24
    
    It would seem that while this quote supports your claim that the modern
    "Witch" religion is a modern innovation -- at least in so far as
    Bonewits believes this also (as, I might add, do I), it contradicts
    your assertions that the church invented "witchcraft".
    
    It seems that you have been playing a game where you enforce have taken
    one meaning and pushed it on us as the "One True Right and Only
    Definition".  Bonewits claims that the church invented what he calls
    "Gothic Witches" (I think that he is only partially right), but that
    the term Witch can be quite properly applied to others which the
    church did *not* invent.
    
    Furthermore, nothing here contradicts the contention that various folk
    customs -- including those surrounding the celebration of Halloween --
    represent the survival of rituals -- now devoid of their religious
    significance -- which were part of celtic religions (at least some
    practioners of which are at least *now* referred to as witches) which
    predated the introduction of Christianity to Northern Europe and the
    British Isles.
    
    What this says is that these customs are legitimate survivals of
    religious practices that modern witches imagine that they are heir to.
    No slight is intended in the stereotyped images whose origin is
    probably elderly "Classical Witches", since there is no knowledge as
    to what the fictional image comes from.  I don't remember ever seeing
    any of the ethnically prejudicial costumes you mention in .25, unless
    you are forcing some costumes to fit your preconceptions.  If I did
    I would be scandalized, but would no more blame Halloween than I would
    blame all of literature for a specific bigoted book.
    
    						Topher
    

    Re: On the meaning of Halloween
    
    As far as I understand it, Halloween or Samhain is principly one of the
    eight "grove" festivals of European Paganism, the Quarter Days and the
    Cross Quarter Days.
    
    As is written in Margot Adler's book, 'Drawing Down The Moon':
    
    "The lesser four are the solstices and the equinoxes. The greater
    sabbats are: Samhain (Halloween or November Eve); the Celtic New Year,
    the day when the walls between the worlds were said to be thinnest and
    when contact with one's ancestors took place; Oimelc (February 1), the
    winter purification festival, the time of the beginning of spring
    movement; Beltane (May 1), the great fertility festival, the marriage
    of God and Goddess; Lughnasadh (August 1), the festival of first fruits
    and, in some traditions, the time of the fight between the bull and
    stag god for the Lady, or the death of the Sacred King. These are the
    briefest of descriptions, and different Craft traditions, following
    different myth cycles from different parts of Europe, treat the
    festivals in diverse ways. But almost all traditions at least celebrate
    Samhain and Beltane.
    
         These traditions renew a sense of living communion with natural
    cycles, with the changes of season and land."
    
    This excerpt from the book makes me come to two conclusions. One, that
    Halloween as a tradition symbolizes the "shape-change" or most
    transformational time of the year, and two, that the original focus was
    how it related to the natural changing of the season.
    
    In my humble opinion, as most things are in this country, the tradition
    of Halloween in the general public, has degenerated to that of a
    merchants holiday, where people buy costumes and candy. In many
    respects, when looked at Halloween in this perspective, the
    relationship of the transformational forces in the tradition obviously
    exist; as people dawn costumes, they shape-change into whatever they
    can imagine. But in other than Wiccan or Pagan circles, the aspect of
    the relationship of the natural changing of the season has been cast
    aside.
    
    Have a Happy Halloween folks! May you find your true spirit in the
    spirit of the season!
    
    Regards,
    
    Sergei

    Re:  <<< Note 900.31 by CADSYS::COOPER "Topher Cooper" >>>
    
  >  It would seem that while this quote supports your claim that the modern
  >  "Witch" religion is a modern innovation -- at least in so far as
  >  Bonewits believes this also (as, I might add, do I), it contradicts
  >  your assertions that the church invented "witchcraft".
  
    I think I said that it may not have existed, not that it did not. There
    is a difference. And I spoke to the idea that the Church fabricated
    it's own form of Witchcraft and layed it on new victims.
      
  >  It seems that you have been playing a game where you enforce have taken
  >  one meaning and pushed it on us as the "One True Right and Only
  >  Definition".  Bonewits claims that the church invented what he calls
  >  "Gothic Witches" (I think that he is only partially right), but that
  >  the term Witch can be quite properly applied to others which the
  >  church did *not* invent.
    
    I seem to remember that the Church predates Bonewits significantly. I
    doubt that village healers thought of themselves as witches. I doubt
    that rich ceremonional magicians thought of themselves as witches. I
    doubt that the village shamans thought of themselves as witches. I
    doubt that the common heathen thought of themselves a witches. Perhaps
    you get the point now.
    
    I have little doubt that the Church created the CRIME of witchcraft.
    And I have little doubt that the Church spread the feared and dreaded
    term "witch" all across Europe. And I have little doubt that had the
    church not perpretrated their crimes upon the public we would have a
    vastly different "emotional content" for the word today.
    
    And yes witches have a vested interest in maintaining their philosophy
    is ancient and unbroken. All of "witch" I doubt.  B^)
    
    However pagan survivals are another thing...
    
    

    re:  <<< Note 900.31 by CADSYS::COOPER "Topher Cooper" >>>
    
   > Furthermore, nothing here contradicts the contention that various folk
   > customs -- including those surrounding the celebration of Halloween --
   > represent the survival of rituals -- now devoid of their religious
   > significance -- which were part of celtic religions (at least some
   > practioners of which are at least *now* referred to as witches) which
   > predated the introduction of Christianity to Northern Europe and the
   > British Isles.
    
    I'd like to ask what impact the Church had upon the _creation_ of
    Halloween? Over time, between cultures, with a history of capital
    punsihments there was an affect. I presume that the Church, like it did
    the various Winter Solstices _created_ a new holiday to combat the
    Celtic New Year's Fire Festival--Samhain, perhaps All Souls Day, then
    Halloween over a period of time, sprung from between those two holidays.
    What do you think?
                                
   > What this says is that these customs are legitimate survivals of
   > religious practices that modern witches imagine that they are heir to.
   > No slight is intended in the stereotyped images whose origin is
   > probably elderly "Classical Witches", since there is no knowledge as
   > to what the fictional image comes from.  I don't remember ever seeing
   > any of the ethnically prejudicial costumes you mention in .25, unless
   > you are forcing some costumes to fit your preconceptions.  If I did
   > I would be scandalized, but would no more blame Halloween than I would
   > blame all of literature for a specific bigoted book.
    
    Perhaps you've forgotten that I am a modern witch, initiated over two
    years ago. My experience is that modern witches, like their
    counterparts, like to labor pridefully under some forms of
    misinformation. It natural for the human mind to attempt to do that.
    But I feel it serves us poorly to continue with the same traditions
    that our contemporary monotheistic religious systems do.
    
    After talking to my peers last night (Samhain) we decided there was a
    remarkable LACK of negative sterotyping _this_ Halloween. In Colorado
    Springs this may be the result of District 11 Schools systems
    prohibiting children from the wearing of witches and devils costumes.
    At first we though it was religious discrimination, we then agreed that
    there was some constitutional grounds (seperation of Church/State) and
    may write a letter of thanx to the District for their decisions.
    
    So while in past years we suffered (and I do mean suffered Topher, we
    peacefully confronted them them last year over some issues) from the
    presses' negative sterotyping, this Halloween is _different_ in
    Colorado Springs (even after all my bitching). B^)

                                            
    I started a new job on Monday (same organization, different group and
    building).  For Halloween I brought in my inflatable skeleton and put
    it in my chair.  My new manager promptly put a sign on it which said:
    
      	    "1st Day On The Job and Already Worked To The Bone!"
    
    It got lots of laughs.  (;^)  
    
    Cindy

    re .34 & al.:

    Mike, I understand what you're saying, but it bothers me. I think what
    bothers me is that while I sympathize with you and other modern
    witches, I don't really see that as a reason for fundamentalism. 

    I find it extremely annoying when fundamentalist Christians rail
    against Hallowe'en in their belief that it promotes Satanism, and do
    something that sounds very much like hiding within a persecution
    complex. I find their notion absurd. 

    However, I find it even more annoying when fundamentalist Wiccans rail
    against Hallowe'en with a similar stridency and a similar-sounding
    persecution complex. I find their notions just as absurd.

    Now mind you, I will admit that I am holding the fundamentalist Wiccans
    to a higher standard of behavior than I hold the fundamentalist
    Christians to, and I apologize for this. But not much.

    You see, I hold people I agree with to higher standards than I hold
    people I disagree with for the simple human reason that I think my
    friends shouldn't stoop to the level that some people will. I know it's
    unfair of me, and I'm sorry I'm unfair. But not a lot.

    I think that modern Hallowe'en is a secular children's holiday. I think
    it is no more Samhain than modern witches are Pictish shamans and no
    more Satanism than Jim Bakker is one of the Apostles. (On the other
    hand, there *are* times when I think he bears a more-than-passing
    resemblance to one Saul of Tarsus, but I mostly keep that opinion to
    myself, because I'm not sure which gentleman it slurs more. But I
    digress.)  This bothers me especially when I get the impression that I
    could turn the rants of one group into the the rants of the other with
    nothing more than a TPU macro that replaces "In His Name" with "Blessed
    Be." The reality-tunnels of both groups of fundies are so similar in
    some ways that it's almost funny. 

    Consequently, I frown at both groups of fundies, because it sounds to
    me like they're both trying to make it no fun to be a kid. From where I
    sit, as a Discordian militant moderate, these complaints are nothing
    less than quite literally stealing candy from babies, an activity I do
    not approve of. It's hard enough to have fun as a kid these days, what
    with the twin evils of violence in the streets and over-protective
    parents assailing them and forcing them to grow up too quickly.

    On top of it all, I know you're not like that. I've read your notes and
    know you've got a good head on your shoulders; this is probably just a
    hot button that's locked you into a particular tunnel, and we've all
    got hot buttons that do that to us. I find that re-reading Wilson helps
    a lot when I get like that.

    So I guess what I'm really trying to say is Blessed Be, Hail Eris, Hail
    Yale, Hail No, but whatever the hail you do, please cut us some Slack.
    Especially cut the kids some Slack; they get so little of it.

    	Jon

    
    
    Good writing -.1, better humour, great stuff!
    
    "We don't need no education, we don't need no thought control..."
    
    Pink Floyd
    
    luv it!
    
    l.

    Re: <<< Note 900.36 by ERIS::CALLAS "The Torturer's Apprentice" >>>
    
   > Mike, I understand what you're saying, but it bothers me. I think what
   > bothers me is that while I sympathize with you and other modern
   > witches, I don't really see that as a reason for fundamentalism. 

    I presume that you are using fundamentalism as is defined by RAW. Ok. I
    don't think I was doing that but perhaps one could find that in the
    text. So I'll play that game subroutine.
    
    Click, whir, clunk, spaff, spuuttt. Did that work? Nah. B^)
    
    Next try... 
   
   > I find it extremely annoying when fundamentalist Christians rail
   > against Hallowe'en in their belief that it promotes Satanism, and do
   > something that sounds very much like hiding within a persecution
   > complex. I find their notion absurd. 

    As it is.
    
   > However, I find it even more annoying when fundamentalist Wiccans rail
   > against Hallowe'en with a similar stridency and a similar-sounding
   > persecution complex. I find their notions just as absurd.

    Since I'm probably the only one "railing" that probably means me. B^)
    Recently, as in the last, say, 6 months or so, I begun to learn how to
    program the human mind. Rituals, holidays and various festivities also
    fall within the realm of programming human bio-computers. Almost
    everything does. And generally the most effective program is one that
    is unnoticed and FUN. Consequently we all have something to gain by
    taking a good look at what we participate in. And moreso our children,
    whose minds are more sensitive to adult programming. 

   > I think that modern Hallowe'en is a secular children's holiday. 

    I agree with that. But what about what's going into the childs mind?
    Please note that most parents don't know or refuse to know about their
    childrens drug and sexual habits. This points to the idea that parents
    have no idea what their kids are doing or learning.
    
    No one said not to have fun. I supported that idea that discrimination
    should not occur and should be recognized when it does. I attempted to
    support the idea that discrimination was inherent in the festival. Also
    I commented upon the ethics of teaching children to beg and threat
    (under the guise of fun). What is your perception?
    
    Most of my bitches did _not_ occur this year as they did in years past.
    Reports are that relatively few parents let their children out in the
    cold to beg. We found very little discrimination in advertizing. I'm
    reasonably satisfied for this year.

  >  So I guess what I'm really trying to say is Blessed Be, Hail Eris, Hail
  >  Yale, Hail No, but whatever the hail you do, please cut us some Slack.
  >  Especially cut the kids some Slack; they get so little of it.

    I think that parents have more invested in this holiday than they
    realize. Would it do to take a good look at it?
    
    	B*B Mikie?
    

    BTW, most of the children went to the malls. Right where the merchants
    wanted them. <Goulish laugh>

    ...what do you think, Mike, their parents wanted them there didn't
    they?
    
    ...sigh...