Re: "Don't mention the gyrda!"

From: donald_at_m1mV-1I6G5ez_8aadB41trNjsr8KX07rJQxNneoIKWFf3b-KtsPh8lB-8cSyFNSEZZSCJ
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 14:16:50 GMT

In message <> Peter Metcalfe writes:
>At 09:04 a.m. 23/07/2008, you wrote:
>>God-talker, being an English translation, can also be used for other
>>theistic religions such as Dara Happa.
>IMO God-talker is an Orlanthism and to call a Dara Happan Priest
>a God-talker sounds to me as false as calling a natural philosopher
>in Athens a wizard. God-talking conveys the impression of someone
>who talks to gods as he does with people whereas the relationship
>between a Dara Happan Priest and his deity is more like that of an
>unworthy servant who keeps silent in the divine presence unless
>spoken to.

I don't share that impression of the term god-talker but if so we should drop god-talker as well and just stick with priest and priestess.

>On the preceptor et al thing in ILH-2 which is a manifestation of
>a larger complaint, I think the wisest thing would be to simply
>the rules terminology so that instead of having practictioners,
>initiates and orderlies, you just had initiates and prefaced the
>words with animist etc. if that particular detail was necessary.
>The higher ranks of Shaman, Disciples, Devotees and Magus
>being more noteworthy would still have their own titles and rules.

That was my impression when I first read the HQ rules - why the different names? It took several readings to realise the fundamental differences between an initiate, a practictioner and an orderly. It would have taken even longer if the same name had been used because the wording would have mislead.

Donald Oddy


Powered by hypermail