The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum (Archive Board)
June 16, 2021, 07:12:37 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: This is our Read Only Archive Board (closed to posting July 2011). Join our new vBulletin board!
 
  Portal   Forum   Help Rules Search Chat (Mux) Articles Login Register   *

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
June 16, 2021, 07:12:37 am

Login with username, password and session length
Donate!
The Cauldron's server is expensive and requires monthly payments. Please become a Bronze, Silver or Gold Donor if you can. Donations are needed every month. Without member support, we can't afford the server.
TC Staff
Important Information about this Archive Board
This message board is The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum's SMF Archive Board. It is closed to new memberships and to posting, but there are over 250,000 messages here that you can still search and read -- many full of interesting and useful information. (This board was open from February 2007 through June 2011).

Our new vBulletin discussion board is located at http://www.ecauldron.com/forum/ -- if you would like to participate in discussions like those you see here, please visit our new vBulletin message board, register an account and join in our discussions. We hope you will find the information in this message archive useful and will consider joining us on our new board.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down
  Add bookmark  |  Print  
Author Topic: An unhealthy mixing of church and state?  (Read 11724 times)
Jenett
High Adept Member
******
Last Login:February 23, 2020, 06:56:44 pm
United States United States

Religion: Priestess in initiatory religious witchcraft tradition
Posts: 2506


Blog entries (1)

WWW

Ignore
« Reply #30: January 09, 2009, 09:30:58 pm »

------ Grin  The word wise comes from the word wick ( think of a light bulb over a caricature’s head. The image is one of a smart/wise idea- only they didn’t have light bulbs so they used candles. Think about it.) Most people know that the word witch comes from the word wise but few know the root of the word wise and it’s English link is in fact wic that part of the candle that carries the flame .

Sources, please? This (and the following) does not match up either with my own understanding (though I won't have handy access to the OED and some other notes about this until Sunday), nor with my understanding of the precursors to modern English (I do not read Anglo-Saxon, and can only puzzle through Old English - however, I read Middle English with moderate fluency when I'm in practice.) All the reliable sources I've seen trace 'wic' as plausibly deriving from the Indo-European root for 'to bend or shape' - but even that is not terribly clear, and is an educated guess at best.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=witch is reasonably close to my understanding of the derivations - there're a *lot* of badly done pseudo-derivations out there, most of them by people who have very little idea about the linguistic shifts going on in the English language between 1066 and the 16th century. (Me, I know enough to know what I don't know in this area.)

I will say that Wiccan, in my understanding, is a purely modern phrasing - and in particular, I seem to remember breaks a common grammar rule in Old English about how one forms plurals.

As for shoppe - by Middle English (around Chaucer's time, c. 12th century), it was used merely to indicate that the final e was pronounced (something that died out shortly thereafter). If you have an appropriate source for prior usage, I'd love to see it - my undergrad work included a major in Medieval and Renaissance studies, and my day job is as a librarian, so language use, historical and modern, is of great interest - but again, your statements go against what I recall (but cannot readily check at the moment, since I'm home after a long week of work, rather than at work where most of the useful resources for this are.)                                         
Logged

Blog: Thoughts from a threshold: http://gleewood.org/threshold
Info for seekers: http://gleewood.org/seeking
Pagan books and resources: http://gleewood.org/books

Welcome, Guest!
You will need to register and/or login to participate in our discussions.

Read our Rules and Policies and the Quoting Guidelines.

Help Fund Our Server? Donate to Lyricfox's Cancer Fund?

Koimichra
Cauldron Council
Senior Staff
Adept Member
****
Last Login:May 10, 2011, 05:22:53 pm
United States United States

Religion: Catholic
Posts: 825


Blog entries (0)


« Reply #31: January 09, 2009, 10:55:24 pm »

I'm glad I'm not the only one who noted the positive intent and understood the poster's intent perfectly well thefirst time round.

Perhaps you've not had the experience of someone saying "Oh, I don't let my children associate with those Arab kids. But don't think I'm a racist! I'm a Christian!"

Having experienced religion as a cover for bigotry on many occasions, I simply am incapable of reading the intent one way or the other into a statement like that, which is why I prefaced my statement with "I'm not trying to pick on you." I truly wasn't; I was trying to point out how IF the intent was to say, "I'm a good person," it was entirely ambiguous to me. I simply can't tell when people make a statement like that if they're saying "I'm a good person, I rely on my faith," or if they're saying, "I expect you to excuse my bigotry when I make an appeal to faith."

There's no automatic logical connection between the two thoughts (I'm religious -- I'm a good person) for me. And, worse, I've seen "I'm religious" used to cover "I'm a really crappy person" far too many times.
Logged
BGMarc
Adept Member
*****
Last Login:August 17, 2011, 09:57:32 pm
Australia Australia

Religion: Stoic (with declining druidic/wiccish hangovers and emergent Hellenic/Kemetic affiliations)
Posts: 1525


Blog entries (0)

Marc Larkin 6marc9
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #32: January 10, 2009, 12:27:59 am »

Perhaps you've not had the experience of someone saying "Oh, I don't let my children associate with those Arab kids. But don't think I'm a racist! I'm a Christian!"

Having experienced religion as a cover for bigotry on many occasions, I simply am incapable of reading the intent one way or the other into a statement like that, which is why I prefaced my statement with "I'm not trying to pick on you." I truly wasn't; I was trying to point out how IF the intent was to say, "I'm a good person," it was entirely ambiguous to me. I simply can't tell when people make a statement like that if they're saying "I'm a good person, I rely on my faith," or if they're saying, "I expect you to excuse my bigotry when I make an appeal to faith."

There's no automatic logical connection between the two thoughts (I'm religious -- I'm a good person) for me. And, worse, I've seen "I'm religious" used to cover "I'm a really crappy person" far too many times.

I appologise if any offense was caused. None was intended. Truth be told I was reacting against something that has for quite a long time been unsettling me. This thread was more 'the straw that broke the camel's back'. As I said earlier, I hadn't had caffeine when I posted. I'm not sure it should be allowed Smiley

For the body of your post, I couldn't agree more. I am predisposed to approach my interactions with an assumption that the person interacting with me believes that they are doing good. It's not always right, but it's a Stoic practice (although by no means exclusively or even originally) and it seems to get me better reactions and improve the quality of my interactions. When I approached people from other stances I probably avoided a few instances of 'harm' but the relatedness that was built by my interactions was a weak and sickly thing too often. Relatedness is very important to me. YMMV.
Logged

"If Michelangelo had been straight, the Sistine Chapel would have been wallpapered" Robin Tyler

It's the saddest thing in the world when you can only feel big by making others feel small. - UPG

Stupidity cannot be cured. Stupidity is the only universal capital crime. The sentence is death. There is no appeal and sentence is carried out automatically and without pity. Lazarus Long.

BGMarc at the Pub
Darkhawk
Chief Mux Wizard
Staff
Adept Member
***
*
Last Login:January 20, 2020, 08:24:45 pm
United States United States

Religion: Kemetic Feri Discordian
Posts: 2485

Blog entries (0)

WWW
« Reply #33: January 10, 2009, 01:56:41 am »

Sources, please? This (and the following) does not match up either with my own understanding (though I won't have handy access to the OED and some other notes about this until Sunday)

OED?  No problem.

Wise: OE. wis (cognate with similar words in OFris, OS, OHG, etc.) -> Old Teutonic *wisas -> pre-Teutonic *wittos -> IE weid- (see WIT v1)

The explanation of the IE root at WIT v1 is "Indo-Eur weid- is represented also by Sanskrit veda, knowledge, vitta, known, vittá, found, Greek "eidos" (I cannot be arsed doing the Greek letters right now, so those are in quoties), appearance, shape, "idea", form, "eidon", I saw, "aeidelos", invisible, "eidenai", to know, "idein" to see, OIr. fiada, witness, ....

... ngah, can't be arsed fishing the rest of this out of here, you get the idea. :}  I need a new magnifying glass for my OED, especially when my head hurts.
Logged

Kasmira
Adept Member
*****
Last Login:July 29, 2017, 12:05:31 pm
United States United States

Religion: Buddhist and Daoist inspired something
TCN ID: Kasmira
Posts: 1582


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #34: January 10, 2009, 06:24:07 am »

Truth be told I was reacting against something that has for quite a long time been unsettling me. This thread was more 'the straw that broke the camel's back'.

What I think you are referring to here is something which has also bugged me a little. It seems that text communication is so inherently imprecise and is a field in which so many people have trouble saying clearly what they mean that sometimes a simple apology that no offense was intended needs to be taken as just that and allowed to rest unless further instances of seeming bigotry arise. Heck I manage to offend people in instances when I had no intention to do so and was not attempting to say what it sounded like I said when addressing them in person, how is everyone supposed to be capable of avoiding this in text communication??
Logged


Flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss - Douglas Adams
To live is the rarest thing in the world. Most people exist, that is all - Oscar Wilde
The road to nowhere: My little foray into the blogoshpere
BGMarc
Adept Member
*****
Last Login:August 17, 2011, 09:57:32 pm
Australia Australia

Religion: Stoic (with declining druidic/wiccish hangovers and emergent Hellenic/Kemetic affiliations)
Posts: 1525


Blog entries (0)

Marc Larkin 6marc9
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #35: January 10, 2009, 06:28:26 am »

how is everyone supposed to be capable of avoiding this in text communication??

I choose to believe that a liberal dose of tolerence and an assumption of ignorance in favour of one of malice goes a long way. Together with being prepared to put the best possible spin on everything you read. I don't always manage it, but it's the ideal I strive for.
Logged

"If Michelangelo had been straight, the Sistine Chapel would have been wallpapered" Robin Tyler

It's the saddest thing in the world when you can only feel big by making others feel small. - UPG

Stupidity cannot be cured. Stupidity is the only universal capital crime. The sentence is death. There is no appeal and sentence is carried out automatically and without pity. Lazarus Long.

BGMarc at the Pub
SunflowerP
Staff
Grand Adept Member
***
Last Login:June 05, 2021, 02:13:46 am
Canada Canada

Religion: Eclectic Wicca-compatible religious Witch (Libertarian Witchcraft)
TCN ID: SunflowerP
Posts: 5485


Blog entries (0)

WWW
« Reply #36: January 10, 2009, 07:37:28 am »

(I do not read Anglo-Saxon, and can only puzzle through Old English - however, I read Middle English with moderate fluency when I'm in practice.)
I was under the impression that Anglo-Saxon was Old English.  What would be the distinctions between them? (This is just me being geeky and info-seeking, not relevant to the debate at hand.)

Quote
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=witch is reasonably close to my understanding of the derivations

And on the other side of the matter, the same source (the Online Etymological Dictionary) on the word "wick":
Quote
wick (1) "bundle of fiber in a lamp or candle," O.E. weoce, from W.Gmc. *weukon (cf. M.Du. wieke, Du. wiek, O.H.G. wiohha, Ger. Wieche), of unknown origin, with no known cognates beyond Gmc.
wick (2) "dairy farm," now surviving, if at all, as a localism in East Anglia or Essex, it was once the common O.E. wic "dwelling place, abode," then coming to mean "village, hamlet, town," and later "dairy farm" (e.g. Gatwick "Goat-farm"). Common in this latter sense 13c.-14c. The word is a general Gmc. borrowing from L. vicus "village, hamlet" (see vicinity). Cf. O.H.G. wih "village," Ger. Weichbild "municipal area," Du. wijk "quarter, district," O.Fris. wik, O.S. wic "village."
... neither of which has any etymological connection at all to "witch" and its root words.

Sunflower
Logged

Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs!
I do so have a life.  I just live part of it online.
“Selfishness is not living as one wishes to live, it is asking others
to live as one wishes to live.” - Oscar Wilde
My blog "If You Ain't Makin' Waves, You Ain't Kickin' Hard Enough", at Dreamwidth and LJ
Jenett
High Adept Member
******
Last Login:February 23, 2020, 06:56:44 pm
United States United States

Religion: Priestess in initiatory religious witchcraft tradition
Posts: 2506


Blog entries (1)

WWW

Ignore
« Reply #37: January 10, 2009, 10:18:11 am »

I was under the impression that Anglo-Saxon was Old English.  What would be the distinctions between them? (This is just me being geeky and info-seeking, not relevant to the debate at hand.)

Admittedly minimal and they're often used interchangeably - but for me, the Anglo-Saxon is the stuff I can't make much sense of, and the Old English is the stuff that if I peer at it long enough, I can partially decode. (More broadly, both terms cover about 7 centuries, which is a fairly large segment of language development all told, and the AS tendency is the earlier stuff, and the OE stuff is the later stuff, especially as you get post Norman Invasion when you get an increasing number of loan words from multiple sources - French, Latin, etc.) Have a book at work that I think will do a better description, and will snag it tomorrow.
Logged

Blog: Thoughts from a threshold: http://gleewood.org/threshold
Info for seekers: http://gleewood.org/seeking
Pagan books and resources: http://gleewood.org/books
Jenett
High Adept Member
******
Last Login:February 23, 2020, 06:56:44 pm
United States United States

Religion: Priestess in initiatory religious witchcraft tradition
Posts: 2506


Blog entries (1)

WWW

Ignore
« Reply #38: January 10, 2009, 10:20:04 am »

... ngah, can't be arsed fishing the rest of this out of here, you get the idea. :}  I need a new magnifying glass for my OED, especially when my head hurts.

See, this is why I like work, and the online subscription. (Also makes typing the things out much easier, since you just paste...)
Logged

Blog: Thoughts from a threshold: http://gleewood.org/threshold
Info for seekers: http://gleewood.org/seeking
Pagan books and resources: http://gleewood.org/books
Koimichra
Cauldron Council
Senior Staff
Adept Member
****
Last Login:May 10, 2011, 05:22:53 pm
United States United States

Religion: Catholic
Posts: 825


Blog entries (0)


« Reply #39: January 10, 2009, 11:02:08 am »

For the body of your post, I couldn't agree more. I am predisposed to approach my interactions with an assumption that the person interacting with me believes that they are doing good. It's not always right, but it's a Stoic practice (although by no means exclusively or even originally) and it seems to get me better reactions and improve the quality of my interactions.

I tend to read in a more literal, logically-connected way, which is a hazard of being a lawyer, so I have a difficult time when people AREN'T logically connecting their thoughts, or aren't doing it in a way that makes sense to me. I tend to err on the side of seeking clarification in those cases, even though sometimes people see that as attacky or nitpicky -- I just want to make sure I'm getting it right. (And sometimes getting it right is fastest if I explain what could be the WRONG, which gets some people's backs up, when really I"m just trying to get to clarity as fast as possible.)

My husband (also a lawyer) does it to ME constantly, so I'm probably not as sensitive to how annoying a mode of interaction it can be as I would be otherwise. Smiley
Logged
Black Witch
Apprentice
**
Last Login:January 11, 2009, 04:12:15 pm
United States United States

Posts: 38

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #40: January 10, 2009, 01:23:36 pm »

Sources, please? This (and the following) does not match up either with my own understanding (though I won't have handy access to the OED and some other notes about this until Sunday), nor with my understanding of the precursors to modern English (I do not read Anglo-Saxon, and can only puzzle through Old English - however, I read Middle English with moderate fluency when I'm in practice.) All the reliable sources I've seen trace 'wic' as plausibly deriving from the Indo-European root for 'to bend or shape' - but even that is not terribly clear, and is an educated guess at best.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=witch is reasonably close to my understanding of the derivations - there're a *lot* of badly done pseudo-derivations out there, most of them by people who have very little idea about the linguistic shifts going on in the English language between 1066 and the 16th century. (Me, I know enough to know what I don't know in this area.)

I will say that Wiccan, in my understanding, is a purely modern phrasing - and in particular, I seem to remember breaks a common grammar rule in Old English about how one forms plurals.

As for shoppe - by Middle English (around Chaucer's time, c. 12th century), it was used merely to indicate that the final e was pronounced (something that died out shortly thereafter). If you have an appropriate source for prior usage, I'd love to see it - my undergrad work included a major in Medieval and Renaissance studies, and my day job is as a librarian, so language use, historical and modern, is of great interest - but again, your statements go against what I recall (but cannot readily check at the moment, since I'm home after a long week of work, rather than at work where most of the useful resources for this are.)                                         
 

 Grin Grin Grin   Thank you for asking. I went to main library in Denver ~60s and found a large collection of encyclopedia that focused on word histories.
                                                                                                                                 [ Let me go off track for just a moment and confess that when I was ~21 the first word I looked up was “whore” and was surprised to discover that the word was sacred. The word w***e is linked to the word HOUR as in the dance of the hours performed by Priestess. “Priestess of the hour.” Furthermore, every demeaning word I could think of directed to women were SACRED in origin!!! ]

Today I happen to have on my little book shelve, “The Oxford Dictionary of Word Histories “on page 552 the word “witch [ Old English] Old English wicca ( masculine), wicce ( feminine) wiccian ( verb)…”

                                      Blessed Be  Smiley

Logged
Jenett
High Adept Member
******
Last Login:February 23, 2020, 06:56:44 pm
United States United States

Religion: Priestess in initiatory religious witchcraft tradition
Posts: 2506


Blog entries (1)

WWW

Ignore
« Reply #41: January 10, 2009, 01:45:27 pm »

Thank you for asking. I went to main library in Denver ~60s and found a large collection of encyclopedia that focused on word histories.

That's helpful - but I notice you mentioned this was in the 60s - a time when the modern uses of the term Wicca were just becoming public. As you know, words really do grow and change over time, and dictionaries will adapt and change based on that. We use many many words that have changed dramatically over the years - so why treat Wicca differently from words like mistress or clerk or a number of others.

Quote
Today I happen to have on my little book shelve, “The Oxford Dictionary of Word Histories “on page 552 the word “witch [ Old English] Old English wicca ( masculine), wicce ( feminine) wiccian ( verb)…”

Yes. I'm not arguing particularly with that etymology - and wasn't. (Though I note it's somewhat different than you were citing earlier: I notice that there's no note of wiccan as the plural, nor do you quote anything supporting 'wic' as being related to flames) But etymology tells us where the word came from - it doesn't tell us how the word is used now. That's why I intend to look at the full OED entry (with quotations and context) when I'm in at work tomorrow, and summarise here.
Logged

Blog: Thoughts from a threshold: http://gleewood.org/threshold
Info for seekers: http://gleewood.org/seeking
Pagan books and resources: http://gleewood.org/books
catja6
Board Staff
Staff
Adept Member
***
Last Login:November 28, 2020, 08:41:38 pm
Canada Canada

Religion: Hellenic Pagan
Posts: 1119


Blog entries (0)


« Reply #42: January 10, 2009, 01:57:01 pm »

 

So what?  I'm not sure what all this etymological maundering is supposed to argue or prove.  Many words that we have today derive from Old English/Anglo-Saxon, but they have changed somewhat, because *language evolves*.  "Wicca" is a word, derived from an Old English word, for a MODERN religion that was not around in the era in which people were speaking Old English.  I'm not sure why you're trying to proscribe modern usage of the word "Wicca," because the modern usage *clearly* is not intended to describe exactly the same thing as it did in Old English; why you're getting hung up on gender, rather than, say, the fact that the religion of Wicca itself didn't exist until the 20th century, is eluding me.  

Etymology may be interesting from a historical perspective, and is necessary for people doing linguistic studies.  But complaining that "omg words don't mean exactly the same thing as they did 1000 years ago!1!" or "We should ONLY use words in EXACTLY the way they were used 1000 years ago!1!" is completely unproductive, and disregards one of the basic facts of language -- that it *changes*.  
Logged
Black Witch
Apprentice
**
Last Login:January 11, 2009, 04:12:15 pm
United States United States

Posts: 38

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #43: January 10, 2009, 02:21:10 pm »

So what?  I'm not sure what all this etymological maundering is supposed to argue or prove.  Many words that we have today derive from Old English/Anglo-Saxon, but they have changed somewhat, because *language evolves*.  "Wicca" is a word, derived from an Old English word, for a MODERN religion that was not around in the era in which people were speaking Old English.  I'm not sure why you're trying to proscribe modern usage of the word "Wicca," because the modern usage *clearly* is not intended to describe exactly the same thing as it did in Old English; why you're getting hung up on gender, rather than, say, the fact that the religion of Wicca itself didn't exist until the 20th century, is eluding me.  

Etymology may be interesting from a historical perspective, and is necessary for people doing linguistic studies.  But complaining that "omg words don't mean exactly the same thing as they did 1000 years ago!1!" or "We should ONLY use words in EXACTLY the way they were used 1000 years ago!1!" is completely unproductive, and disregards one of the basic facts of language -- that it *changes*.  

  Thank you.  Cool I was unable to understan why so many intellegent people accepted Wicca when I thought it only refered to the male witch. Thanks again. I fully understand and will not question the use of "Wicca" again. Blessed Be.
Logged
BGMarc
Adept Member
*****
Last Login:August 17, 2011, 09:57:32 pm
Australia Australia

Religion: Stoic (with declining druidic/wiccish hangovers and emergent Hellenic/Kemetic affiliations)
Posts: 1525


Blog entries (0)

Marc Larkin 6marc9
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #44: January 10, 2009, 05:46:44 pm »

My husband (also a lawyer) does it to ME constantly, so I'm probably not as sensitive to how annoying a mode of interaction it can be as I would be otherwise.

I can well understand what you mean; I was originally trained as a lawyer, before following my current profession. Add copy editor and I can promise you I get under colleague's skin with the best of them Smiley I know work as a strategic and system's analyst, so asking questions that pull someone's world apart is what I'm paid to do. Socially (and truth-be-told professionally) it doesn't always endear people to you.

The underlying problem at a practical level for me is one of productivity; I'm not sure that whether it annoys people or not matters a lot to me. I tend to see their emotional response as largely their own choice (and their own problem if they find them unpleasant). It's more that (in these situations) I often find that the other person is trying to save face having unexpectedly and unpleasantly discovered in public that they don't know their arse from their elbow in an area they had felt quite secure in when they sat down. Continuing to seek clarification can push them into a defensive corner and then it just gets messy in ways that don't often seem to contribute productively to anyone's day.
Logged

"If Michelangelo had been straight, the Sistine Chapel would have been wallpapered" Robin Tyler

It's the saddest thing in the world when you can only feel big by making others feel small. - UPG

Stupidity cannot be cured. Stupidity is the only universal capital crime. The sentence is death. There is no appeal and sentence is carried out automatically and without pity. Lazarus Long.

BGMarc at the Pub

Donor Ad: Become a Silver or Gold Donor to get your ad here.

Tags:
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up
  Add bookmark  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  
  Portal   Forum   Help Rules Search Chat (Mux) Articles Login Register   *

* Share this topic...
In a forum
(BBCode)
In a site/blog
(HTML)


Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
Separation of Church and State? « 1 2 »
Political Discussions
Kasmira 21 5179 Last post September 09, 2007, 09:57:56 pm
by loneash
Apr 08 - Church/State Issues « 1 2 »
Non-Religious News
NewsPoster 21 5182 Last post April 29, 2008, 09:21:07 pm
by loneash
May 08 - Church/State Issues « 1 2 3 »
Non-Religious News
NewsPoster 33 7652 Last post June 01, 2008, 09:05:24 pm
by loneash
Aug 08 - Church/State Issues
Non-Religious News
NewsPoster 0 606 Last post August 01, 2008, 11:01:06 am
by NewsPoster
Oct 08 - Church/State Issues
Non-Religious News
NewsPoster 8 2632 Last post October 20, 2008, 06:48:27 pm
by LyricFox
EU Cookie Notice: This site uses cookies. By using this site you consent to their use.


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines
TinyPortal v0.9.8 © Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.091 seconds with 50 queries.