From: Alex Ferguson (alex@dcs.gla.ac.uk)
Date: Tue 17 May 1994 - 19:38:16 EEST
Me and Joerg, unusually enough:
> >> This low magic he learns from both the pantheistic offers of the Aeolian
> >> church
> > (After all, sorcery is sometimes taught in cults, even theistic cults.)
> > This is a very confusing way to describe sorcery, which isn't even theistic
> > in origin.
> Not in the God Learner sense of "theistic".
The religion of the Invisible God isn't theistic by anyone's use of the term as I've heard it applied to Glorantha. After all, the IG isn't manifest, initiatable to, reachable by worship, etc.
> Yet wizardry is tied firmly to the religion of the Invisible God.
Wizardry is sorcery with a funny hat, to anyone else but the Westerners. There is no objective way. or even one most people agree on, to tell the difference between a sorceror and a wizard. "Wizardry" is really only well-defined to mean "sorcery [in the RQ sense] which we approve of". Even "follows the commandments of the IG" is something which is open to interpretation, manipulation, and downright fraud, and isn't much like the (enforcible) requirements to belong to theistic cults.
> From my understanding, the spells granted from a deity to associates
> always covers one imortant aspect of the deity.
Not necessarily: more specifically, it's the use of the most "use" to that associate. The "most important" spell is likely to be one taught at (ordinary shrines).
> Call it heroquesting for an ability, if this sounds more RuneQuesty to you.
No, it doesn't. At the moment, it could be argued "heroquest" is a polite term for "no-one knows how this works". Anyway, making things sound "RuneQuesty" isn't something I'd advocate at all costs.
> (Sartar is sorcery-user friendly: look at Apple Lane. The TEB smith
> family lives without fear of pogromes.)
> > Well, I can't imagine _any_ Heortlander of "humble origins" doing so, I'm
> > not clear whether you'd have only Hendriki doing so. [speak of e.g. St.
> Chalana Arroy]
> If that's what the clergy has told them to say in the sermon, they will.
> Just as the Irish were quick to say St. Brigid instead of Goddess Brigid.
> > While some pagan deities have been co-opted as Saints, this is really a
> > way of permitting their worship to continue, but implicitly denying their
> > Godhead.
> I view it rather as defining various degrees of Godhead.
This is simply wrong, from the point of view of "modern" Christainity: ask your friendly neighbourhood Roman Catholic if he thinks St. Christopher is a god, in any sense. Can we at least agree you're not using the "usual" sense of the word "saint"? As far as I can see, the Western Churches also use the term in its "usual" sense.
> >> The Aeolians have a simple definition of Saint: an entity worshipped
> >> by the church and its members.
> > Okay, but to a theist, especially one who knows how the church in the
> > west uses the term, this is likely to sound like "Not-a-real-god,-honest
> > -guv Barntar".
> RuneQuest has a simple definition of a deity: an entity worshipped by
> cults and their members.
Alex.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:34:23 EEST