Re: More Glorantha vs. RW.

From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 19:00:24 GMT


Gian Gero, replying to me:
> Or worse, that ex-/lapsed Christians have, hrm?>>
>
> Why 'worse', I don't think the difference is substantial in most cases.

The worse was mostly facetious, but rooted in the thought the many of the 'worst offenders' are likely to be such. (No names, no pack drill

> The main difference is that Gloranthan Religions (all that I know) are
> contractualistic, "do ut des", I give you (deity) power/worship/obedience,
> you give me (initiate) power/magic/helpers.

I'm sure I already cited most forms of Malkionism as being 'exceptions' to this in a very similar way, if 'rule' it indeed is. It seems a considerable over-general statement to me: yes, in some sense everyone worships for some 'benefit', but certainly not necessarily the sort of 'material' benefit you imply, I don't think.

I don't want to over-simplify your point, at least not at the cost of distorting it, but is the nub of the distinction you have in mind between purely 'salvific' (to use a gratuitous Eliadism), and ones which are 'pragmatic', in the sense of being partly/wholly to do with one's day to day life?

Cheers,
Alex.


Powered by hypermail