Re: Sikhs and Lords Spiritual (Was: The Importance of Caste (or Why Wizards Don't Rule))

From: Peter Metcalfe <metcalph_at_aOo9ELrT49EsTHmZSYJtKR3hMzPldnNJhYj0Hx_92gfuQaY6bExLxE2GQIOh1lHpjbx>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 20:14:34 +1300

On 2/10/2011 12:23 AM, Richard Hayes wrote:
> That or you take the Sikh option of saying all men are Kshatriya, and there are no priests ... Is there any movement in Malkionism which tried this (or still does this?),
The Perfecti of Loskalm, I think.

> Has the de-Christianisation of Malkionism led to either the abolition of the Lords Spiritual, or to the repositioning of these upper echelons of the churches within the Wizard caste?
I dunno. For the Loskalmi, the highest ecclessiastical positions may be within the Lords Caste but it makes little difference because Loskalmi Lords are also wizards. Seshnela with its emphasis on caste observance would probably say that the Bishops/Watchers are wizards. For other places, it could go either way.

> Does Malkionism have levels within the farmer caste between merchants, artisans and farmers?
I don't think so.

> Does Malkionism have a concept of "untouchables" (Are pagans "untouchable" in some Malkioni sects?)
I rather think Malkionism has a concept of "Tapables", people whom you can tap without condemnation but it differs from church to church.

--Peter Metcalfe