Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Karl Low <kwil@*********.COM>
Subject: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 10:51:55 -0600
From: Mark Ellis <mark@******.IDISCOVER.CO.UK>


>Honestly can't say I know what any of the saints were 'famous' for, so I'll
>keep zipped. Just as an aside though, since we dont want to get "that"
>thread started again, I always thought the wierdest thing about the Bible,
>was the conflict and smiting themes of the Old Testament suddenly giving way
>to the much more peaceful NewT. Oh well.


From what I've read/heard, it occurred because of the change in who was
writing the bible. The OT was written primarily by those of the Jewish faith,
the NewT was written by those of the Christian faith.

It's kind of interesting to note that as we go through history, the dominant
western religion has generally moved from more restrictive to less
restrictive. (In general. There've been a few burps along the way.)
ie, Orthodox Jewish, Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, Science, and now it seems
we're moving towards Wicca or Gaia worship. If the trend continues, I could
see the Church being fairly lax about magical use by 2059 or so.

>Back on SR, you touch on one of the shamanistic inconsistencies. Not all
>cultures/people see these animals or whatever the same way. For instance, go
>and ask your average Joe on the street what he thinks of bears. Chances are
>you'll get the big dangerous man-eater response rather than a great healing
>symbol.

Yeah, but again, the influx of wiccan or gaian philosophies will tend to
spread the native american knowledge.

Actually, what am I thinking.. the Great Ghost Dance alone would have caused a
massive upsurge of interest in Native American culture, folklore, etc.. I
could see it reaching one of those things where everybody just "knows" various
aspects of the Native American structure, including their totemic system.

-Karl
$0.02.. Australian no less.. : )
Message no. 2
From: Dvixen <dvixen@********.COM>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 12:54:55 -0700
Karl Low wrote:

> >From what I've read/heard, it occurred because of the change in who was
> writing the bible. The OT was written primarily by those of the Jewish faith,
> the NewT was written by those of the Christian faith.

Pretty much.

In the game with our previous GM, he played it as the Churches
excommunicated anyone who was magical. Metahumans were a touchy subject,
though I never cared to ask. ;)

I didn't entirely agree with that, especially since all through Judaic
history there were examples of Rabbi's who were magically active. (well,
they could create Golem, cast spells, you get the idea.) Rabbi were spikes,
imo. ;) Maybe even those pesky I.Elves.

Exact same applies for the Australian, American and South African native
cultures...

Hehe!

--
-Dvixen
ShadowRN GridSec: FAQ http://coastnet.com/~dvixen
"We break your fingers until you post properly or not at all."
Message no. 3
From: "Ubiratan P. Alberton" <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 16:20:52 -0300
Karl Low escreveu:
>
> From: Mark Ellis <mark@******.IDISCOVER.CO.UK>
>
>
>
>
>
> It's kind of interesting to note that as we go through history, the dominant
> western religion has generally moved from more restrictive to less
> restrictive. (In general. There've been a few burps along the way.)
> ie, Orthodox Jewish, Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, Science, and now it seems
> we're moving towards Wicca or Gaia worship. If the trend continues, I could
> see the Church being fairly lax about magical use by 2059 or so.
>

Why do you put science as a religion? Science is just science (with a
small "s"),
totally separate from religion form the most part... Nothing prevents
someone
from being a Catholic (for example) and still say 2+2 is 4...

Oh, yeah, and there's nothing to prevent the Church from changing its
point
of view towards magic so "fast"... Until the current Pope (don't know
his name in English...)
came up, the church didn't care about politics...

Ubiratan
Message no. 4
From: Nexx <nexx@********.NET>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 15:42:23 -0500
----------
> From: Ubiratan P. Alberton <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
> Why do you put science as a religion? Science is just science (with a
> small "s"),
> totally separate from religion form the most part... Nothing prevents
> someone
> from being a Catholic (for example) and still say 2+2 is 4...
Yes, but currently science is being substituted for religion in many
cases. People who put absolute faith in something because scientists say
it.

***************
Rev. Mark Hall, Bardagh
"Death by a sword lasts but a moment, but a bard's scorn
lasts forever"
aka Pope Nexx Many-Scars, PML FAQ Cop
"Discretion is the better part of honor.... and innuendo
the better part of humor."
aka Ellegon
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, mortal, for you are
crunchy and good with ketchup."
Message no. 5
From: Herbert Wolverson <hfw373s@***.SMSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 18:48:41 -0500
Hello again,

> Why do you put science as a religion? Science is just science (with a
> small "s"), totally separate from religion form the most part... Nothing
> prevents someone from being a Catholic (for example) and still say 2+2 is
4...

I think the point of naming "science" as a religion was to indicate that
a lot of people believe in the "laws of science", wheras belief in the
"1 true God" of Judeo/christian/moslem faiths has suffered something of
a decline. If you view religion as organised beliefs that explain the
unknown, then it works.

> Oh, yeah, and there's nothing to prevent the Church from changing its
> point of view towards magic so "fast"... Until the current Pope (don't
know
> his name in English...) came up, the church didn't care about politics...

The Catholic church does have a very long history of changing its mind
quickly. For example, the whole celebate priests thing arrived more or
less overnight in the 11th century. I would take issue with any statement
that the catholic church is somehow apolitical..... the "holy Roman empire"
was nothing if not a hotbed of politics, and its very difficult to
think of an era in which the Vatican hasn't made its voice heard
internationally in one way or another.

Take care,
Bracket.

---------------------------------------------------
Herbert "Bracket" Wolverson
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Lair/7269/
---------------------------------------------------
" This is your life, this is your time,
What if the flame won't last forever?"
- Dio, "This is your life"
Message no. 6
From: Geoff Morochnick <bodiam@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 21:11:09 -0400
> > Oh, yeah, and there's nothing to prevent the Church from changing its
> > point of view towards magic so "fast"... Until the current Pope (don't
> know
> > his name in English...) came up, the church didn't care about politics...
>
> The Catholic church does have a very long history of changing its mind
> quickly. For example, the whole celebate priests thing arrived more or
> less overnight in the 11th century. I would take issue with any statement
> that the catholic church is somehow apolitical..... the "holy Roman empire"
> was nothing if not a hotbed of politics, and its very difficult to
> think of an era in which the Vatican hasn't made its voice heard
> internationally in one way or another.
>

The Catholic Church definitely is a political organization and always has been,
it has controlled most of Italy, France and Germany at one time or another in
it's history. However, the Holy Roman Empire was an entirely different entity
from the Catholic Church, in fact, the wars between the H.R.E and the Papal
States were the reasons why Italy and Germany didn't unify until the 19th
century. More on topic, though, does anyone know if there have been any major
political upheavals or revolutions in Italy in the 21st Century?

> Bracket.
>

--
G.I. Morochnick
"You know what women are like... they've only got
one brain between the lot of 'em".
John Cleese
bodiam@**********.com
http://www.geocities.com/area51/corridor/8427
Message no. 7
From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.COM>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 11:09:53 +1000
Geoff Morochnick writes:
>The Catholic Church definitely is a political organization and always has
been,
>it has controlled most of Italy, France and Germany at one time or another
in
>it's history. However, the Holy Roman Empire was an entirely different
entity
>from the Catholic Church, in fact, the wars between the H.R.E and the Papal
>States were the reasons why Italy and Germany didn't unify until the 19th
>century. More on topic, though, does anyone know if there have been any
major
>political upheavals or revolutions in Italy in the 21st Century?


According to the London Sourcebook, Italy has broken up into a group of
city-states again. I'd imagine that the Pope would control Rome.

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons robert.watkins@******.com
Message no. 8
From: "Ubiratan P. Alberton" <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 22:37:01 -0300
Nexx escreveu:
>
> ----------
> > From: Ubiratan P. Alberton <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
> > Why do you put science as a religion? Science is just science (with a
> > small "s"),
> > totally separate from religion form the most part... Nothing prevents
> > someone
> > from being a Catholic (for example) and still say 2+2 is 4...
> Yes, but currently science is being substituted for religion in many
> cases. People who put absolute faith in something because scientists say
> it.
>

This is right, I just didn't think that comparison was quite
appropriate.
Science is not that "non-strict" since it doesn't allow individual
interpretations.

Ubiratan
Message no. 9
From: "Ubiratan P. Alberton" <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 22:42:33 -0300
Herbert Wolverson escreveu:
>
>
> > Oh, yeah, and there's nothing to prevent the Church from changing its
> > point of view towards magic so "fast"... Until the current Pope (don't
> know
> > his name in English...) came up, the church didn't care about politics...
>
> The Catholic church does have a very long history of changing its mind
> quickly. For example, the whole celebate priests thing arrived more or
> less overnight in the 11th century. I would take issue with any statement
> that the catholic church is somehow apolitical..... the "holy Roman empire"
> was nothing if not a hotbed of politics, and its very difficult to
> think of an era in which the Vatican hasn't made its voice heard
> internationally in one way or another.
>


Yeah, but the Pope (John Paul II, is that right?) is the first one th
actually
go to countries in crisis and make sermons with a clearly social and
politic slant.
He actually asked the USA to drop the boycott to Cuba when he went
there, recently.
He also is seeking harmony with other religions, wich I rhink is good.

Ubiratan
Message no. 10
From: "Ubiratan P. Alberton" <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 22:50:24 -0300
Geoff Morochnick escreveu:
>
>
> The Catholic Church definitely is a political organization and always has been,
> it has controlled most of Italy, France and Germany at one time or another in
> it's history. However, the Holy Roman Empire was an entirely different entity
> from the Catholic Church, in fact, the wars between the H.R.E and the Papal
> States were the reasons why Italy and Germany didn't unify until the 19th
> century. More on topic, though, does anyone know if there have been any major
> political upheavals or revolutions in Italy in the 21st Century?
>
>
>

I was talking 20th Century only in other posts... The Vatican stayed
a bit quiet after
it's formation. The Fascist government had conquered the Church's
territory, and it was a kind of
"exchange" (we give you some land back, you don't intervene in our
government).
They got really involved in world affairs again only after Mr. John Paul
became Pope.
As for Italy, the EuroWars would have left all of Europe in quite a
disorder, there might
have been something. I don't know about official FASA stuff, but then
again, I almost never use it.

Ubiratan
Message no. 11
From: Nexx <nexx@********.NET>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 22:22:52 -0500
----------
> From: Ubiratan P. Alberton <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>

> Science is not that "non-strict" since it doesn't allow individual
> interpretations.

Neither do a lot of religions... However, saying that science doesn't
allow individual interpretations is bullshit. While some theories are
more acceptable than others, anything that falls within the general
framework is often considered scientific (so long as it can be proven).
I've seen three studies that prove three different things about the same
data.
Message no. 12
From: Karl Low <kwil@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 10:24:26 -0600
From: Nexx <nexx@********.NET>


>----------
>> From: Ubiratan P. Alberton <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
>
>> Science is not that "non-strict" since it doesn't allow individual
>> interpretations.


From Nexx:
> Neither do a lot of religions... However, saying that science
doesn't
>allow individual interpretations is bullshit. While some theories are
>more acceptable than others, anything that falls within the general
>framework is often considered scientific (so long as it can be proven).
>I've seen three studies that prove three different things about the same
>data.

From Me:
I should have said "Western belief/ethics systems" rather than religions,
but it seemed more concise.

At any rate, I actually meant restrictive in both how you can interpret them,
and in what they allow you to do. Judaism, Catholicism, and Protestantism
generally allowed you to follow the rules of science and were more or less
restrictive in what they'd allow you to do under their ethics systems as well.

Science doesn't place restrictions on ethics at all.

Wicca et al doesn't place restrictions on ethics either (other than what goes
around comes around three-times as bad or soemthing like that) but also allows
you to (supposedly) supercede science.

-Karl
Message no. 13
From: John Vots <jvots@**.KO.COM>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 15:06:18 -0400
Herbert Wolverson escreveu:

>>I would take issue with any statement
>> that the catholic church is somehow apolitical..... the "holy Roman
empire"
>> was nothing if not a hotbed of politics, and its very difficult to
>> think of an era in which the Vatican hasn't made its voice heard
>> internationally in one way or another.

> Yeah, but the Pope (John Paul II, is that right?) is the first one th
>actually go to countries in crisis and make sermons with a clearly social
and
>politic slant.
> He actually asked the USA to drop the boycott to Cuba when he went
>there, recently. He also is seeking harmony with other religions, wich I
rhink >is good.

The Popes in general did not travel before because it was not feasible. I
forget when JPII came to the Papacy, but it was after WWII. There is
now quick and easy travel available which is very safe and reliable.
The reason Popes prior to this time period did not travel is in part
because of the difficulty and hazards that came along with travel,
especially in potentially hostile areas. He asked the USA to drop the
boycott on Cuba after what 30 years of it's existance. He did that as
a political gesture to Castro so that the Catholic Church would be
allowed to officially enter Cuba again. The Pope had no illusions to
the US response to that request. The boycott on Cuba whether good or
bad is a matter of policy now, the US has put up too much prestige on
the downfall of Cuba to drop it now and Castro will not let Cuba fall
to the US as long as he is alive. That is all pure Politics.

Back On Topic. While the Popes have always made pleas for the Public good,
many have been tinged with political ambitions. The current Papcy,
IMO, would be no different. The Papal Bull of 2024 (I still think it
was too early) was more likely an attempt to either swell dwindling
membership or to forestall the loss of membership. The reintroduction
of Magic would have been a great shock to everyone, especially to the
folks who have said for centuries that Magic and all it's trappings
are a quick, one way ticket straight to Hell.



That is of course all IMO.



Jester
Message no. 14
From: "Ubiratan P. Alberton" <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 18:30:40 -0300
Nexx escreveu:
>
>
>
> > Science is not that "non-strict" since it doesn't allow individual
> > interpretations.
>
> Neither do a lot of religions... However, saying that science doesn't
> allow individual interpretations is bullshit. While some theories are
> more acceptable than others, anything that falls within the general
> framework is often considered scientific (so long as it can be proven).
> I've seen three studies that prove three different things about the same
> data.

Well, with religion "strictness" varies wildly from place to place,
and even
person to person... And science is too large to be analyzed as a whole.
Cutting
edge research is based on individual interptetation, but the more
stabilished stuff
is, well, stablished :) . A friend of mine got blew a Physics test
because she tough
the result of a question "didn't seem right" to her. :)

Ubiratan
Message no. 15
From: Nexx <nexx@********.NET>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 17:02:46 -0500
----------
> From: Ubiratan P. Alberton <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>

> And science is too large to be analyzed as a whole. Cutting
> edge research is based on individual interptetation, but the more
> established stuff is, well, stablished :) . A friend of mine got blew a
Physics test
> because she tough the result of a question "didn't seem right" to her.
:)

Yes, but that the difference between "canon" (things about which the
church in question has set laws about, or the question on your friends
physics test), and "philosophical questioning" (just what someone asks
when they don't understand or are seeking clarification on a difficult
point, or that cutting edge research).

***************
Rev. Mark Hall, Bardagh
"Death by a sword lasts but a moment, but a bard's scorn
lasts forever"
aka Pope Nexx Many-Scars, PML FAQ Cop
"Discretion is the better part of honor.... and innuendo
the better part of humor."
aka Ellegon
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, mortal, for you are
crunchy and good with ketchup."
Message no. 16
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 23:30:35 +0100
And verily, did John Vots hastily scribble thusly...
|The Popes in general did not travel before because it was not feasible. I
| forget when JPII came to the Papacy, but it was after WWII.

Of course it was...
He was pretty old when he got the post.
It was the late 1970's, early 1980's, IIRC.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 17
From: John Vots <jvots@**.KO.COM>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 18:45:23 -0400
>Of course it was...
>He was pretty old when he got the post.
>It was the late 1970's, early 1980's, IIRC.

When did Pope John XXIII become Pope? He was the one right before JPII,
correct?

Wether or not he was JPII predacessor was a real geezer when compared to
JPII when he assumed the Papacy.

Can't keep alll these Pope straight in my head. Just way to many that have
John in part of their names. Man, be original guys, how about a good
old fashioned Ezekiel or Samuel or something.



Jester
Message no. 18
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 00:02:20 +0100
And verily, did John Vots hastily scribble thusly...
|
|>Of course it was...
|>He was pretty old when he got the post.
|>It was the late 1970's, early 1980's, IIRC.
|
|When did Pope John XXIII become Pope? He was the one right before JPII,
|correct?

Absolutely no idea.
The only reason I remember JPII getting it was because it was big on the
news at the time.


--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 19
From: Nexx <nexx@********.NET>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 18:00:58 -0500
----------
> From: John Vots <jvots@**.KO.COM>

> Can't keep alll these Pope straight in my head. Just way to many that
have
> John in part of their names. Man, be original guys, how about a
good
> old fashioned Ezekiel or Samuel or something.

Hell, why don't they even try "Peter: (the founder of the Roman Church),
or "Mark" or "Luke"?

Nexx, who is personally waiting for Pope Ringo I
Message no. 20
From: Michael Broadwater <neon@******.BACKBONE.OLEMISS.EDU>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 18:43:28 -0500
Hell, why don't they even try "Peter: (the founder of the Roman Church),
or "Mark" or "Luke"?

Nexx, who is personally waiting for Pope Ringo I

Remember, the Pope would be more popular is his name was
Pope John Paul George and Ringo :)

Mike Broadwater
http://www.olemiss.edu/~neon
"Everyone wants to be Cary Grant. Even I want to be Cary Grant."
-- Cary Grant
Message no. 21
From: "Ubiratan P. Alberton" <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 18:37:46 -0300
John Vots escreveu:
>
>
>
> The Popes in general did not travel before because it was not feasible. I
> forget when JPII came to the Papacy, but it was after WWII. There is
> now quick and easy travel available which is very safe and reliable.
> The reason Popes prior to this time period did not travel is in part
> because of the difficulty and hazards that came along with travel,
> especially in potentially hostile areas. He asked the USA to drop the
> boycott on Cuba after what 30 years of it's existance. He did that as
> a political gesture to Castro so that the Catholic Church would be
> allowed to officially enter Cuba again. The Pope had no illusions to
> the US response to that request. The boycott on Cuba whether good or
> bad is a matter of policy now, the US has put up too much prestige on
> the downfall of Cuba to drop it now and Castro will not let Cuba fall
> to the US as long as he is alive. That is all pure Politics.

This is my point, actually. I wanted to say he's making the Church
get involved
in politics again, making some political moves. Did you know he was
involved in the Polish
Resistance?

> Back On Topic. While the Popes have always made pleas for the Public good,
> many have been tinged with political ambitions. The current Papcy,
> IMO, would be no different. The Papal Bull of 2024 (I still think it
> was too early) was more likely an attempt to either swell dwindling
> membership or to forestall the loss of membership. The reintroduction
> of Magic would have been a great shock to everyone, especially to the
> folks who have said for centuries that Magic and all it's trappings
> are a quick, one way ticket straight to Hell.

That shock was probably the thing that caused the fast change...
Somewhere in the
Aztlan book it actually says that there's a "covert operative" group
working for the Church,
the New Company of Jesus (New Jesuits). Hope they do better than the
last bunch... :)

Ubiratan


> That is of course all IMO.
>
> Jester
Message no. 22
From: "Ubiratan P. Alberton" <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 20:44:36 -0300
John Vots escreveu:
>
> >Of course it was...
> >He was pretty old when he got the post.
> >It was the late 1970's, early 1980's, IIRC.
>
> When did Pope John XXIII become Pope? He was the one right before JPII,
> correct?
>
> Wether or not he was JPII predacessor was a real geezer when compared to
> JPII when he assumed the Papacy.
>
> Can't keep alll these Pope straight in my head. Just way to many that have
> John in part of their names. Man, be original guys, how about a good
> old fashioned Ezekiel or Samuel or something.
>
> Jester

There was one named Lion XXIII in 1863(I think) author of the
historical RERUM
NOVARUM bull...

Ubiratan
Message no. 23
From: "Ubiratan P. Alberton" <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 20:55:34 -0300
Nexx escreveu:
>
> ----------
> > From: Ubiratan P. Alberton <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
>
> > And science is too large to be analyzed as a whole. Cutting
> > edge research is based on individual interptetation, but the more
> > established stuff is, well, stablished :) . A friend of mine got blew a
> Physics test
> > because she tough the result of a question "didn't seem right" to her.
> :)
>
> Yes, but that the difference between "canon" (things about which the
> church in question has set laws about, or the question on your friends
> physics test), and "philosophical questioning" (just what someone asks
> when they don't understand or are seeking clarification on a difficult
> point, or that cutting edge research).


Agreed. Science does have a large number of canons them (whole areas
of study...).
Changing subjects a little, imagine one of those "giant wheels" (the
ones in
parks, you know, people sit at benches in the things edges and it spins
slowly) spinning
at a tangent speed of 50 km/h :) . That was the questions answer :) .

Ubiratan
Message no. 24
From: Nexx <nexx@********.NET>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 18:59:22 -0500
----------
> From: Michael Broadwater <neon@******.BACKBONE.OLEMISS.EDU>

> > Nexx, who is personally waiting for Pope Ringo I
>
> Remember, the Pope would be more popular is his name was
> Pope John Paul George and Ringo :)

'Course, I could point out that we're all Popes, anyway. Hail Eris!

***************
Rev. Mark Hall, Bardagh
"Death by a sword lasts but a moment, but a bard's scorn
lasts forever"
aka Pope Nexx Many-Scars, PML FAQ Cop
"Discretion is the better part of honor.... and innuendo
the better part of humor."
aka Ellegon
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, mortal, for you are
crunchy and good with ketchup."
Message no. 25
From: Czar Eggbert <czregbrt@*********.EDU>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 21:51:55 -0500
On Mon, 27 Apr 1998, John Vots wrote:
> Back On Topic. While the Popes have always made pleas for the Public good,
> many have been tinged with political ambitions. The current Papcy,
> IMO, would be no different. The Papal Bull of 2024 (I still think it
> was too early) was more likely an attempt to either swell dwindling
> membership or to forestall the loss of membership. The reintroduction
> of Magic would have been a great shock to everyone, especially to the
> folks who have said for centuries that Magic and all it's trappings
> are a quick, one way ticket straight to Hell.

You know, something occured to me as I was reading this post. The
Roman Catholic church has one of the most extensive Hermetic Librarys in
all the world TODAY! Durring the Crusades and the Spanish Inquision it was
common practice to Burn Heritical books, but it was also a common practice
to take a copy of them to Rome to be put in the Vatican Library, so that
it could be studied to learn how to "fight the herisy". Now imagin that
the Pope knew that this awakening would happen, just not when. Imagen that
they have been ready and waiting for the return of magic for 2000 years,
but as each generation passed the waiting changed till it almost was
forgotten by the time of the Awakening, except by a few scolars in, say,
the Jesuit Order. Now the first Pope, the one in office durring the
beginning of the Awakening and stated that it was all evil, didn't listen
to these Jesuits (or Dominicans, or Franscians, etc) but the second Pope
was more stable, and listened. Could make an interesting High Level run to
see just what the Vatican knows about the 4th world :)


-=>Czar



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Czar Eggbert
Ruler, Dark Side of the Moon.
homepage: http://travel.to/czareggbert.empire
mailto: czregbrt@*********.edu
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
"I lived my life in a ship in a bottle in a world in a glass jar..."
-Mike Fontaine

"CRACK! SMASH! SHATTER!"
-Helen Stunkard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Message no. 26
From: John Vots <jvots@**.KO.COM>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 18:27:08 -0400
> That shock was probably the thing that caused the fast change...
>Somewhere in the
>Aztlan book it actually says that there's a "covert operative" group
>working for the Church,
>the New Company of Jesus (New Jesuits). Hope they do better than the
>last bunch... :)

Shock tend to make people recoil not move forward. A great shock would (in
theory) cause most people to fall back on the things they know most
ardently. In this case, for the Church, that would be an even more
ferverant and adamant about Magic being very, very bad for you
(spiritually speaking).



I, alas, do not have Atzlan and cannot really afford any new purchases at
this time. There's a much more expensive habit I have than SR,
Warhammer 40K. Even that habit has been put on hold. I do not doubt
that there would be covert missionaries operating in Atzlan, Tir Nan
Og, Amazonia, Atlanta (o.k. maybe not Atlanta).

Define better, convert more people or keep from killing as many?



Jester
Message no. 27
From: "Ubiratan P. Alberton" <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church)
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 21:06:18 -0300
John Vots escreveu:
>
>
>
> Shock tend to make people recoil not move forward. A great shock would (in
> theory) cause most people to fall back on the things they know most
> ardently. In this case, for the Church, that would be an even more
> ferverant and adamant about Magic being very, very bad for you
> (spiritually speaking).


No one can predict a human's reaction with 100% accuracy...
Besides, that Bull came out in 2024, some 13 years after the Awakening.
They
would have had some time to analyze magic as a whole and see that at
least
the majority of it was not evil in itself. Some posts say the church
would be slower to
make the decision, but I don't think. The sudden change would've made
them devote a great
ammount of effort into the analysis.

> I, alas, do not have Atzlan and cannot really afford any new purchases at
> this time. There's a much more expensive habit I have than SR,
> Warhammer 40K. Even that habit has been put on hold. I do not doubt
> that there would be covert missionaries operating in Atzlan, Tir Nan
> Og, Amazonia, Atlanta (o.k. maybe not Atlanta).
>
> Define better, convert more people or keep from killing as many?
>

The original Jesuits promoted a wipeout of the native culture in
Brazil with
their mass convertion, disregarding the original customs as being sinful
and barbaric without examining them. The native culture was not erased,
but they
contributed in dimnishing the indian population a lot until they were
dissolved around
the 18th century. The Church has made many mistakes in the past, you
have to concede it's
a lot better than it was in the Middle Ages.

Ubiratan

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about (OT) OT v NT (was: Re: Magic and the Church), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!