Subject:	Posted in the Forum. Ludi Romani: Games Result
From:	SFP55@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 04:17:12 EDT

Subject:	YHVH
From:	Shawn Kelley discordianpirate@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 04:49:17 -0700 (PDT)

Actually...I had heard that YHVH was a Mesopotamian air elemental, and
the tribe that took this elemental as their patron claimed S/he/it to
be the one true God for political purposes...hmm...

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at <a href="http://mail.yahoo.com" target="_top" >http://mail.yahoo.com</a>

Subject:	Re: Ludi Romani games-- THANKS!!!
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 09:55:02 -0500 (CDT)

On 04/15/99 04:17:12 you wrote:
>
>From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=246157057089235135169082190036" >SFP55@--------</--------;
>
>>From Q. Fabius
>Salvete!
>The Roman games took place today at 12:00 Noon PDT. These Games constituted a
>sacrifice to Goddess Ceres whose Festival will last until April 19th
>(Cerealia). The date of April 14th was chosen by the Augurs as the most
>propitious date for the Games.
>Antonius Gryllus Graecus, Aedilis Plebis was Editor and sponsor.
>
>Quintus Fabius Maximus, one of the most honorable citizens of Nova Roma
>chose the gladiators.

And everyone concerned with this did an ASTOUNDING job! Graecus, you were a perfect choice for Pleb
Aedile -- you were most gracious to that bum, Flavis...uh, I mean, that worthy opponent..
That was the most fun I've had online in a LONG time. I really liked the audience participation, especially from
the bloodthirsty Consul Cincinnatus, who managed to yell a lot in Latin.

Plus I won a bundle betting on the Gaul.
>
>Twenty minutes into the fight, Acco stopped Flavis with a blow to the knee.
>The Aedilis Plebis spared Flavis' life because of his tenacious defense.
>Many noble Romans lost money, betting on Flavis.

heh, heh, heh....not ALL of us! (gloat, gloat, gloat!)

>Alas the Doctors report that Flavis will no longer be able to fight. Perhaps
>a school will pick him up as a trainer.

Actually...ya know what? We could sure use a handyman around the House of the Vestals. When he's out of the
hospital on Tiber Island, send him around.

>Acco of the Esulates tribe is a fast rising fighter. I expect to see more of
>him in the future.

I hope this means we can expect more games!

-- Flavia Claudia

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:02:38 EDT

In a message dated 4/15/99 10:32:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
<a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=194232192180194153138149203043129208071" >rmerullo@--------</a> writes:

<< The Romans most certainly did offer blood. The blood of a bull was offered
to Iuppiter Optimus Maximus during the inauguration of consuls, was it not?
>>

I was speaking in terms of only Nova Roma. To present there have been no
blood sacrifices in Nova Roma. I abhore the idea of a blood sacrifice. In
ancient times the sacrificed animal was used as a feast...the blood and bones
only being offered to the Deity (unlike in the Hebrew tradition which in my
humble opinion validates the more civilized practice of the ancient
Hellenic-Roman faiths when compared to the Hebrew. Why a god would demand
burnt flesh that could have fed hundreds is beyond me). But today we have
supermarkets...there is no need to "kill your own".

I believe our Deities have evolved beyond such requirements...a plate
offering of whatever you may be feasting on is appropriate. Of course this
is my own belief and a thread on this list a long time ago dealt with this
topic. I believe it was decided that if NR ever grew to the point where
public rites may involve a blood sacrifice that individual citizens would be
allowed to opt out of the ritual involvement.

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	MaNPaRoman@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:06:27 EDT

In a message dated 99-04-15 11:02:47 EDT, you write:

> But today we have
> supermarkets...there is no need to "kill your own".


Well, Don and his oldest son are going hunting for 'Boar' (Pigs, let's face
it <G>) and taking it to this place that will chop up the animal for you. I
don't know what they do with the blood, but I know what I will be doing with
the meat.........

If NR would like some sort of supply, I can see if they will give me the
blood from our pork.

Crys (and yes, I was serious)

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	"Antonio Grilo" amg@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 16:27:39 +0100

Salvete omnes

Concerning blood sacrifices I think that we have a good argument not to do
it, which can be imposed by our Collegium Pontificum. Lets honour the memory
of King Numa Pompilius by forbidding blood sacrifice in Nova Roma. This is
my proposal. As Dexippus says, todey we have supermarket... Unless we want
to ban supermarkets =).
Moreover I defend the thesis than simulation of blood sacrifices (or
gladiatorial combats) are as valid as actual sacrifices. Remember that in
Neoplatonist terms, the Gods only receive the 'Idea', the 'Archetype' of the
sacrifice.

Valete

Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Aedilis Plebis

Subject:	Re: Ludi Romani games-- THANKS!!!
From:	"Antonio Grilo" amg@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 16:31:46 +0100

Salvete

>And everyone concerned with this did an ASTOUNDING job! Graecus, you >were
a perfect choice for Pleb
>Aedile -- you were most gracious to that bum, Flavis...uh, I mean, that
worthy >opponent..
I get the opportunity to praise the wonderful work of citizen Quintus Fabius
Maximus and his friends.

>I hope this means we can expect more games!
Of course. I will build a page with historical background, rules... and the
program for the year 2051 AUC. More games shall be held in honour of the
Gods.

>Plus I won a bundle betting on the Gaul.
Be too. $5 which I have publicly offered to the NR treasury. =)

Valete

Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Aedilis Plebis

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:23:26 EDT

In a message dated 4/15/99 11:06:49 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
<--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=174166082206158174112154175101114253071048139" >M--------Rom--------...</--------; writes:

<< Well, Don and his oldest son are going hunting for 'Boar' (Pigs, let's
face
it <G>) and taking it to this place that will chop up the animal for you. I
don't know what they do with the blood, but I know what I will be doing with
the meat.........

If NR would like some sort of supply, I can see if they will give me the
blood from our pork.

Crys (and yes, I was serious) >>


Oh I believe you are serious! And I don't believe there is anything wrong
with hunting as long as you do not torture the animal before killing it, that
you have respect for the life you are taking, and that you utilize the kill
for food rather than just a trophy.

But you get these freakies who wanna be pagans and all go out and get their
hands on a goat or chicken or puppy...torture the poor animal...spill its
blood on a fire or burn its carcus and say "there...a sacrifice!".

Turns my stomach!

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" jkbloch@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:28:32 -0400

Salve,

>From: "Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a>
>
>Salvete omnes
>
>Concerning blood sacrifices I think that we have a good argument not to do
>it, which can be imposed by our Collegium Pontificum. Lets honour the
memory
>of King Numa Pompilius by forbidding blood sacrifice in Nova Roma. This is
>my proposal. As Dexippus says, todey we have supermarket... Unless we want
>to ban supermarkets =).


Actually, you can buy beef and pork blood in supermarkets around here. :-)
Properly consecrated, that's what I use to "redden the hörg" (granted,
that's Ásatrú and not Religio Romana, but the principle is the same).
Personally, although I know I would never be able to perform an animal
sacrifice myself, I have nothing against it conceptually, and I wouldn't
want to see a total ban on such things in Nova Roma.

Vale,

Germanicus

PS: Just to clarify: not all Ásatrúar use blood in their rituals; most use
mead in the same capacity (and I do too, when it's appropriate).

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	"Antonio Grilo" amg@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 16:48:09 +0100

Salvete

>Personally, although I know I would never be able to perform an animal
>sacrifice myself, I have nothing against it conceptually, and I wouldn't
>want to see a total ban on such things in Nova Roma.
>Vale,
>Germanicus
Then at least, I think the Collegium should not support killing animals for
sacrifice. They could recomment other offerings as more pleasant to the
Gods. After all, humans are not more than another product of Creation. And
nothing guarantees us that in the Universe there are not other species more
rational than us... Lets be modest... Lets be humans. I remind you that,
biologically speaking, we are just Homo Sapiens Sapiens. Maybe one day we
find the Homo Sapiens Sapiens Sapiens and I hope they do not sacrifice Homo
Sapiens Sapiens to their Gods.

Valete omnes

Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Aedilis Plebis, sed Homo

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:40:16 EDT

In a message dated 4/15/99 11:31:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
<a hr--------/post/novaroma?prot--------D=045202250078193194170218163036129208" >jkbloch@--------</a> writ--------br>
<< Actually, you can buy beef and pork blood in supermarkets around here. :-)
Properly consecrated, that's what I use to "redden the hörg" (granted,
that's Ásatrú and not Religio Romana, but the principle is the same).
Personally, although I know I would never be able to perform an animal
sacrifice myself, I have nothing against it conceptually, and I wouldn't
want to see a total ban on such things in Nova Roma. >>

Yes...and it, like all, should be left up to the individual. I just feel
that unless you are doing the "killing", blood is naught...for there are
supposedly pre-ritual preparations for the animal before slitting its throat
upon the altar. IMHO, simply buying blood at the supermarket is no greater a
sacrifice than offering an apple from your refrigerator.

But again...to each his own.

--Dexippus
The Renegad Wiccan strikes again! LOL

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	MaNPaRoman@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:40:56 EDT

In a message dated 99-04-15 11:23:44 EDT, you write:

> Oh I believe you are serious! And I don't believe there is anything wrong
> with hunting as long as you do not torture the animal before killing it,
> that
> you have respect for the life you are taking, and that you utilize the
kill
> for food rather than just a trophy.
>
> But you get these freakies who wanna be pagans and all go out and get
their
> hands on a goat or chicken or puppy...torture the poor animal...spill its
> blood on a fire or burn its carcus and say "there...a sacrifice!".
>
> Turns my stomach!
>
> --Dexippus

I agree wholeheartedly my dear!!!

Crys (kinda hoping I can get to go on the hunt myself)

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	MaNPaRoman@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 12:11:42 EDT

In a message dated 99-04-15 12:11:05 EDT, you write:

> From: Pythia <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=200176234108158116015132190036129" >kingan@--------</a>
>
> Well, I don't think we need the blood, but a smoked shoulder would be
nice! ;
> -)
>
>
> Pythia


Left or right? <G>

Crys

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	Cassius622@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 13:09:14 EDT

In a message dated 99-04-15 10:32:51 EDT, Gaius Marius Merullus writes:

Merullus:
<< The Romans most certainly did offer blood. The blood of a bull was offered
to Iuppiter Optimus Maximus during the inauguration of consuls, was it not?

Cassius:
Yes. The ancient Romans performed blood sacrifice on a continuing basis. Not
only was it offered during the inaugerations of Consuls, but also on a daily
basis in temple offerings, augeries, etc. The animals used for blood
sacrifice included bulls, sheep, rams, and likely a few other animals sacred
to specific deities.

The topic of blood sacrifice in relation to Nova Roma *has* been discussed
several times before...

Merullus:
> I would think that animal sacrifice would be a natural element of
reconstructed Religio Romana (I have no idea to what extent other religions
that you mention make use of sacrifice). Why wouldn't Minerva or Mars be
satisfied, more satisfied at that, with an offering of an animal's life?

Cassius:
A very firm decision has been made NOT to include blood sacrifice in the
officially reconstructed Religio Romana. This policy has been instated for
several reasons such as:

1. Animal sacrifice for religious purposes is generally considered to be
abhorrant in the modern world. The largest modern religions all agree that
deity does NOT need the life-force of animals in order to survive, but are
rather *sources* of universal power that bring positive energy to the world.
Ancient tradition or no, we have no desire to make the Roman gods look like
bloodsucking demons in comparison to Allah, the Buddha, Jesus, etc.

2. Blood sacrifice was by NO means the only method of making offering to the
gods in the ancient world. The Roman gods also recieved offerings of incense,
wine, milk, flowers, spelt cakes, grain and other foodstuffs, money,
religious artifacts, devotional altars, etc., etc. A major *point* of
sacrifice in the ancient world was to offer something that held value to the
giver, rather than just give life energy. Sacrifice really IS what the word
says... making a personal sacrifice and giving up something that you want for
yourself. A part of the reason why animals were sacrificed was simply that
they were so valuable; a bullock or sheep was a big time investment to most
people. Such a gift was an easy way to prove a worshipper's sincerity.

3. Nova Roma has no facilities whatsoever for the sacrifice of animals. Even
if we desired to do this sort of thing it would be nearly impossible to
achieve. Building a proper temple/site where such a complex offering could be
received by the gods would only be the first step. You'd actually have to
obtain live animals, not so easy these days. The priesthood would have to be
trained as butchers, (ack!) so the sacrifice could be done cleanly and
properly, and the appropriate cuts of meat delivered as offering. THEN you'd
get into all sorts of local ordinance violations, cruelty to animals laws,
major problems with public health codes, people picketing for animal rights
and the gods know what else. The intent might be traditional ancient worship
but the result would more likely be arrests, years of bad press, contempt by
the general public, and major monetary expenses better spent elsewhere.

Merullus:
>Religio Romana is not unusual in employing animal sacrifice: the Hebrew
religion also made use of it, at least up to the time of the destruction of
the Great Temple by Roman legions in the 1st century CE.

Cassius:
While most religions have an *ancient tradition* of sacrifice at some point
in their historical timeline, almost none have continued that practice to the
present. Those religions who *do* practice it in the modern world (i.e. some
African based faiths) are pretty much considered to be backwards cults by the
Western world at this point. Fair or unfair a double standard exists in the
major nations of today: it's considered acceptable to kill animals for food,
but NOT to kill animals for religious purposes even if the bodies of the
animals are consumed afterward.

Since it is perfectly possible to continue the Religio Romana *without*
animal sacrifice, (see the other historical types of offering listed above)
we've simply chosen to consider live sacrifice a part of the ancient past
that has basically no place in today's world. There is little point in
undertaking huge amounts of effort and expense just so that we can offend
most of the civilized world and bring the Religio under attack on a number of
legal/ethical fronts.

And, personally, as a member of the priesthood with no desire to go to school
to learn how to be a professional butcher, I'm happy with things that way. I
know that at OUR household, offerings of spelt cakes, wine and flowers seem
to please the gods just fine... and the animals around the place end up as
pampered pets rather than altar fodder. ;)

Merullus:
> Maybe you meant human sacrifice? Or that you personally and others who
follow a similar path don't make blood sacrifices?

Cassius:
I believe that Rome "officially" outlawed human sacrifice during the time of
Gaius Marius, in the late Republic. However, there hadn't actually been a
Roman human sacrifice for something like 300 years before that time. It's an
interesting fact that one Roman festival involved making small wicker "people
figures" and throwing them into water. It seems that sometime early on the
Romans replaced live human sacrifice with a *representation* of such
sacrifice. They realized that the very ancient times of human sacrifice were
past, and just adjusted their rites accordingly.

In past discussions on this topic it has been suggested that Nova Roma take a
cue from ancient Rome, and offer animal sacrifice only in a symbolic way if
we're intent on keeping such ancient forms. Just as the Romans began to use
wicker people in rites, surely we could just as easily take the time to
create a wicker or straw figure of an animal and burn THAT at an altar in
place of a live creature. In that way the ancient forms could be held,
without getting the ritual participants in trouble with the general public
and the authorities.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Pontifex Maximus

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 13:36:21 EDT

In a message dated 4/15/99 12:10:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time, <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=200176234108158116015132190036129" >kingan@--------</a>
writes:

<< No Dex...they did eat the sacrificial animals...It was a big feast, and
like the
Hellenes you were'nt allowed to leave anything over. The "burnt flesh refers
to
the cooking! lol
>>

Really? I always thought it was among the Hebrews that the lamb was to be
burnt upon the altar but the bones and fat were to be discarded and that
eating of it was prohibited because it then belonged to god.

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 13:51:05 EDT

In a message dated 4/15/99 1:10:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
<--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=137166066112082162090021200165114253071048139" >C--------us622@--------</--------; writes:

<< Since it is perfectly possible to continue the Religio Romana *without*
animal sacrifice, (see the other historical types of offering listed above)
we've simply chosen to consider live sacrifice a part of the ancient past
that has basically no place in today's world. There is little point in
undertaking huge amounts of effort and expense just so that we can offend
most of the civilized world and bring the Religio under attack on a number
of
legal/ethical fronts. >>

The Pontifex Maximus has spoken!

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	Cassius622@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 14:01:23 EDT

In a message dated 99-04-15 13:53:34 EDT, Dexippus writes:

<<
The Pontifex Maximus has spoken!
>>

Um, yeah. Just in case, I do want to point out that the Pontificial College
is the guiding body as far as the Religio Romana goes. The previously posted
bit on sacrifice was the result of issues previously discussed by the
Collegia, rather than some pronouncement by me personally.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Pontifex Maximus

Subject:	Texans
From:	MaNPaRoman@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 14:13:38 EDT

Salvete,

I can't remember who originally brought it up, so I'm bringing it to the list.

Someone mentioned a little gathering involving the TX NR (or maybe just the 3
or 4 of us that I know of). When?? Where?? This is a big state. I would
like somewhere in the middle -- say Houston <G>.

Anybody game??

Crys

Subject:	spelt cakes
From:	Andrew Campbell brightwave@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 11:36:08 -0700 (PDT)

::NR-friendly non-citizen delurks::

Would anyone care to share their recipe for spelt
cakes, or point me toward an appropriate web page?

Blessings,
Bear

===
Andrew (Bear) Campbell ***** <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=014212020108042134028098029077114164071048139" >brightwave@--------</a>
<a href="http://members.aol.com/brandrew/" target="_top" >http://members.aol.com/brandrew/</a>
Follow the 'Twig & Pebble' link for info on the Pagan-Clergy
list, an Open Letter to Dr. Laura, and more.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at <a href="http://mail.yahoo.com" target="_top" >http://mail.yahoo.com</a>

Subject:	Re: Texans
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 14:06:16 -0500 (CDT)

On 04/15/99 14:13:38 you wrote:
>
>From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=174166082206158174112154175101114253071048139" >M--------Rom--------...</--------;
>
>Salvete,
>
>I can't remember who originally brought it up, so I'm bringing it to the list.
>
>Someone mentioned a little gathering involving the TX NR (or maybe just the 3
>or 4 of us that I know of). When?? Where?? This is a big state. I would
>like somewhere in the middle -- say Houston <G>.

You Texas folk should get together on April 21.
A significant date for Texas (Independence Day!) and for Rome (founding!)

You could serve BarBQ with Garum. Yum.

--Flavia Claudia

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 15:16:45 EDT

In a message dated 4/15/99 2:02:11 PM Eastern Daylight Time, <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=200176234108158116015132190036129" >kingan@--------</a>
writes:

<< One of the funny/sad things about being Jewish is listening to everyone
else
interpret our stuff for us! If it isn't the born again Christians telling us
alot
of BS about our own trads its the Pagans!! lol. >>

Well of course, doll...I'm the all knowing Divus Maximus Extremus! LOL

Thanks for the education. I am only going by what I know of Hebrew tradition
which is sadly only from reading the "old testament" and what I learned in my
comparative religions courses in college. So I will not attest to being an
expert.

Thanks for being patient with me and not going all ballistic! : )

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	"RMerullo" rmerullo@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 15:17:15 -0400

Salvete Antoni Grylle et alii



>From: "Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a>
>
>
>Concerning blood sacrifices I think that we have a good argument not to do
>it, which can be imposed by our Collegium Pontificum. Lets honour the
memory
>of King Numa Pompilius by forbidding blood sacrifice in Nova Roma.

Please forgive my ignorance Graece. Can you explain the connection between
King Numa Pompilius and blood sacrifice? I know nothing about it.

This is
>my proposal. As Dexippus says, todey we have supermarket... Unless we want
>to ban supermarkets =).

Well, I would be in a tough spot without supermarkets :). But, on the other
hand, I do have some experience raising (and slaughtering) animals for my
and family's consumption. I must admit, that when I first had to do it, I
found it very unpleasant, but it is the sort of thing to which one can
become accustomed.

I have been thinking of undertaking raising animals again (not this year,
but just maybe next) and, if I do, I'll be using the supermarket that much
less (it is definitely easier to go the supermarket, but better quality can
be achieved, and much more control over what one ultimately consumes, by
private farming). And I would be spilling blood occasionally.

And so, it is still possible, and rational, to raise animals for one's own
use (sorry, Vegetarians) despite the existence of the supermarkets.

>Moreover I defend the thesis than simulation of blood sacrifices (or
>gladiatorial combats) are as valid as actual sacrifices. Remember that in
>Neoplatonist terms, the Gods only receive the 'Idea', the 'Archetype' of
the
>sacrifice.

That may be, but I offer the hypothesis that the Gods are like people in
that they appreciate the Idea but like the Real Thing better.
>
>Valete
>
>Antonius Gryllus Graecus
>Aedilis Plebis


Valete

Gaius Marius Merullus

Subject:	Re: The Name Game
From:	Michael Cessna clinkerbuilt2@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 13:12:29 -0700 (PDT)

> From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=132056131009152219130232203140129208071" >Dexippus@--------</--------;
>
> In a message dated 4/14/99 3:26:06 PM EST,
> <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=219128020185221198218171228026247222123098100046209130" >clinkerbuilt2@--------</a> writes:
>
> << >>
> ...Does that include the lemon?..... ;-P~ >>
>
> Lime sweetie! Always a lime!
>
> --Dexippus
> <<shaken not stirred!>>
>
>>
I should've known---you're such a tart!!! 8^P~

Gn Marius
>>
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at <a href="http://mail.yahoo.com" target="_top" >http://mail.yahoo.com</a>

Subject:	Re: Spelt Cakes
From:	Cassius622@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 17:08:19 EDT

In a message dated 99-04-15 14:35:45 EDT, Andrew Campbell
<a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=014212020108042134028098029077114164071048139" >brightwave@--------</a> writes

> ::NR-friendly non-citizen delurks::

>Would anyone care to share their recipe for spelt
cakes, or point me toward an appropriate web page?

We'll hopefully be putting that info on the Religio Romana pages on the NR
site fairly soon! In the meantime, the directions are pretty simple. The
spelt cakes used as offering are "unleavened" cakes, so they're basically a
mixture of flower & water...

1. Obviously, you'll need spelt flower to make spelt cakes! ;) Spelt flower
is available at pretty much any healthfood store. A little spelt flower goes
a long way as far as offering cakes, so get the smallest package you can.

2. To make somewhat under a dozen small offering cakes, place three
tablespoons of spelt flower into a bowl. Start adding SMALL quantities of
water into the flower with a spoon, until you get a thick paste with no dry
lumps left. Make sure not to add too much water. You want as thick a paste as
possible.

3. Take a small non-stick cookie pan (make sure it's as non-stick as
possible) and glob small half or quarter-teaspoon size lumps of spelt paste
onto it. Keep the lumps well separated.

4. With a finger, gently press each lump of spelt paste into a (fairly) round
disc, about the thickness of a communion wafer. Thin is best with these
things, since you'll probably be buring them on a small incense burner
indoors. Just make sure that you don't press the past so thin that you can
see through it when it's wet; it will be so thin when it dries it'll just
crumble.

5. While the wafers are still wet, sprinkle a very small amount of
non-iodized salt or sea salt on the top. Let the wafers dry. This will
probably take a couple of hours.

Once the wafers are dry, just pry them carefully from the cookie sheet with a
spatula. Use the spelt cakes as offering cakes along with incense... just
place on the top of a piece of charcoal in your incense burner.

Good luck!

Vale,

Marcus Cassius Julianus

Subject:	Re: Texans
From:	legion6@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 17:03:53 -0500 (CDT)

Salve, Amethystia--and welcome to the Regio!

That was me. I posted a notice about a Southwest Gathering on the
Bulletin Board. We are hoping to Establish a Roman Presence at the
Hawkwood Fantasy Fest north of Ft. Worth, which runs between mid-August
and end of September. (We'd have to settle on a weekend.) Marius
Asiaticus and I will be there, and Titus Labienus is also planning to
attend; also Michael Christy, a Citizen-prospect who has attended the
Texas Renaissance Festival (near Houston!) as craftsman Quintus
Aurelius Alastrus for many years. Other Texans may also be in
attendance, and I've extended an invite to any SouthEasters and others
who want to make the trip. Camping is available on-site. Roman garb
is encouraged but not mandatory; the important thing is that we get a
chance to meet each other face-to-face (and maybe pick up some new
recruits)!

Hope to see ya there...and that goes for anyone else who wants to come!
---
__________ _<~) __________
<-\\\\@@@@@) /##\ (@@@@@////-> Mria Villarroel <a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=034056178009193116148218000036129208" >legion6@--------</a>
<-\\\@@@@(#####@@@@///-> Historical Re-Creationist
<-\\\*##*///-> and Citizen of Rome
o---<<<<||SPQR||>>>>---o Latin lessons, History lectures
///\\\ Role-playing Games, too!

aka Lucius Marius Fimbria on the weekends

Subject:	Re: Texans
From:	MaNPaRoman@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 18:08:36 EDT

In a message dated 99-04-15 18:04:06 EDT, you write:

> (We'd have to settle on a weekend.)

Depends on how many of you you want to meet. If your talking just the 4 of
us then it would be alternate weekends from meeting the 7 of us (plus then
we'd have to borrow the van from the ex). I'd be more interested in all 7 of
us I think, but I'll talk to Don and the 3 older kids and see if they are
interested.

Vale for now,

Crys

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	BenBorgo@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 20:58:54 EDT

In --------ss--------d-------- 4/15/99 8:02:49 AM P--------ic D--------ght Time, <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=132056131009152219130232203140129208071" >Dexippus@--------</--------;
writes:


Greetings to all Romans!

<< I abhore the idea of a blood sacrifice>>

To hate the taking of life is quite understandable, but in sacrifices that
are correctly performed, we are only doing what the supermarket does for us.
What is the differance if we eat an animal that was slaughtered for us or if
we slaughter it ourselves? Why is it more moral for us to eat animals that
have been killed for us than it is to eat an animal that we kill. Its like
saying its OK to steal a dead mans possesions because you didn't kill him.
Anyway you cut it, there's a loss of life involved. I am giving to the Gods a
part of the material that sustains me, in hopes that it will sustain my Gods
as well. When one sacrifices a living animal to his/her Gods, They are
expressing the 'idea' that they would be willing to give up the life of
anything (even themselves) if it would please that particular diety. When one
sacrifices he is saying to his chosen God ' take this life, this priceless
and irreplaceable life, as a symbol of my devotion. I offer you life, for you
gave me mine. I offer only to please you, should it be your fancy that the
knife I sacrifice with should turn unto me, I would gladly do so for your
happiness and well being.' It is symbolic of one offering the most valuable
possesion known to man. I believe that we are not offering death to the gods,
but that very gift which they gave unto us, our life.


<>

The deities which I worship, I believe to be eternal in the truest sense of
the word, without begginning and without end. This obviusly would exclude
evolution of such beings. Can we truly be so vain to assume that any God
would evolve with us? I believe that we should strive to bring ourselves up
to the Gods, not to bring them down with us.
Blood sacrifice should most certainly NOT be an official practise Nova Roma,
that has already been decided & I would have it no other way. The current
political situation in most parts of the world will not allow it, and
furthermore it is seen, by a vast majority of people, as barbaric and is
completly unacceptable. The last thing Nova Roma wishes to do is cause anger
and panic amongst any people outside (or inside) its citizenry. But it was a
part of ancient Rome, & there may be some of us who still believe that this
is our duty as followers of our respectable paths. Just as Nova Roma smiles
on peoples of all relegions, races, etc. etc., those who wish to perform
'blood sacrifices' should never be discriminated against or harrased in any
way, that would be a breach of our Constitution. However I have met a few
"pagans" who sacrifice only out of their thirst for blood and the pleasure
they take from cruelty. This is undeniably wrong. They are using their 'gods'
as an excuse to commit a foul crime. These people are (as someone else
mentioned earlier) juvenile and immature and I don't believe there is any
place for them in any world but that of Dis. These people do not represent
sacrifice, they represent cruelty and butchery. In order to understand
'blood' sacrifice, one must look past the killing of the animal, and see the
sacrificial aspects instead of the bloody ones. One can be exceptionally
kind, generous, and caring and still practise 'blood' sacrifice. It doesn't
make someone an evil or even malicious person to perform these pious acts, in
fact one could be totally shocked as the personality of he who devotes
himself so vehemently to acts which some call 'murder' but others call
Relegion. It would be close-minded & truly ignorant for anyone to actively
critisize those who choose to follow this path. I fear (just a guess)Nova
Roma would lose some of its most devoted and honorable citizens if we were to
cease accepting those who choose this route of worship. If ones virtues stand
out, should they be critisized for believing in the rituals those same Romans
left us?

Lastly I'd like to say that these are MY OPINIONS only. They do not represent
fact but faith. I hope I don't disturbe anyone with this short post.

It seems goodness is in the eye of the beholder
Most Dearly Yours,
G.Tarquinius Caesar

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	Steven Robinson amgunn@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 21:41:13 -0500

Salvate Omnes:

In a case about 5 or 6 years ago, involving animal sacrifice by
practitioners of Santeria, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it is a
protected religious practice.

That being said, the taking of the life of an other being, for food or for
protection, is the most awful one any human can make.

I have made it many times in the harvesting of animals for my larder. I
still have a bit of a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach every time I
kill an animal. If I lose that feeling, I shall stop hunting. I do not
want to EVER enjoy the slaying of an animal. I have given honor to the
spirit of every animal I have slain. This is a matter of course, something
I sensed was owed the spirit of the creature, even before my re-awakening to
Kinship with the Holy Ones of the North.

I have had to make the protective decision. I would kill again in similar
circumstances, enough on that.

I am acquainted with devote Heathens who have performed Blood Sacrifice. It
is a devotional practice fraught with great energies. If performed for the
wrong reasons or in the wrong state of mind for right reasons, the energies
raised will backlash. It takes a lot of spiritual, mental and physical
preparation. It is a sacrifice which is to be undertaken with greatest
solemnity, and regard for the animal messanger. A frightened, hurting
animal is as bad, or worse, than wrong heart - wrong mind.

Unless I am honoring the shade of the animal whose carcass will provide me
with food, I stick with mead, ale or other such in my devotions. I am not
strong enough, in Spirit or Lore, to be the hand that guides the animal
messanger on its way.

mea sententiae - Venator aka Piparskegg UllRsson, an Asatru Gothi

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 22:57:17 EDT

In a message dated 4/15/99 9:01:53 PM EST, <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=200176234108158116015132190036129" >kingan@--------</a> writes:

<< Thank-you SO much for saying this! I though I might be the one who was
miffed at
the idea that the Gods "evolve"!! >>

Probably as miffed as I would be of the thought that they did not.

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 22:55:41 EDT

In --------ss--------d-------- 4/15/99 8:01:09 PM EST, <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=023056234037193209048149203140129208071" >BenBorgo@--------</--------; writes:

<< To hate the taking of life is quite understandable, but in sacrifices that
are correctly performed, we are only doing what the supermarket does for us.
What is the differance if we eat an animal that was slaughtered for us or if
we slaughter it ourselves? Why is it more moral for us to eat animals that
have been killed for us than it is to eat an animal that we kill. >>

It is only reflective in the fact that most of us do not have the skill,
knowlege, or proper equipment to kill our own food. To do so while a neat
little supermarket is down the street is insane. However, for those who were
brought up in such arts as hunters and/or butchers and have the means of
doing so, I see nothing fully wrong with doing so as long as the animal is
not meant to suffer.

<<When one
sacrifices he is saying to his chosen God ' take this life, this priceless
and irreplaceable life, as a symbol of my devotion. I offer you life, for you
gave me mine. I offer only to please you, should it be your fancy that the
knife I sacrifice with should turn unto me, I would gladly do so for your
happiness and well being.' It is symbolic of one offering the most valuable
possesion known to man. I believe that we are not offering death to the gods,
but that very gift which they gave unto us, our life. >>

But this raises the philosophical question...what gives you the right to
offer that life? It is not your life. And to offer a life which was freely
given by the Gods back to the Gods may be construed as an insult, not a gift.
The only life you have a right to offer is your own. Slit thy own throat
upon thy own altar. (I'm not directing this direclty to you Ceasar...it's a
general "you").

<<The deities which I worship, I believe to be eternal in the truest sense of
the word, without begginning and without end. This obviusly would exclude
evolution of such beings. Can we truly be so vain to assume that any God
would evolve with us? I believe that we should strive to bring ourselves up
to the Gods, not to bring them down with us. >>

Again...there are different schools of thought on this...neither one being
above the other. One school teaches that the Gods are seperate and a part
from us and we need to bring ourselves up to them. They don't need us, but
we must rely on them.

Another school of thought teaches that the Gods need us as much as we need
them. That our worship (our prayers, our incense) is their nourishment and
in return they reward us with sunshine, rain, food, and life.

I personally agree with the later. For you ask "Can we truly be so vain to
assume that any God would evolve with us?" To this I answer that in nature,
that which does not change (evolve) dies. And I would venture to proclaim
the occult axim "As Above So Below". For if the deities do not evolve with
humanity, then they too will die. Again, this is a philosophical point of
view -- one which I personally hold to. For one of my biggest problems with
the monotheistic viewpoint is their insistence that "god is the same today as
he was yesterday". For even Buddha was so wise as to proclaim "the young
branch bends in the wind and therefore survives the storm. The rigid branch
stands firm and is broken and dies".

<<Just as Nova Roma smiles
on peoples of all relegions, races, etc. etc., those who wish to perform
'blood sacrifices' should never be discriminated against or harrased in any
way, that would be a breach of our Constitution. >>

No one is or will be harrassed. But the official proclamation is that it is
against our Religio Romana.

<>

I doubt anyone would leave on the basis of denying blood sacrifice in public
worship. What you do on your own time in your own home is your business
until the police get there. If you are truly skilled in such practice and
are doing so within the confines of your local laws, then you are fine. If
not, you have more to fear than Nova Roma. : )

<<It seems goodness is in the eye of the beholder>>

Yes it is.

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 23:08:01 EDT

In a message dated 4/15/99 9:42:08 PM EST, <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=243232178182078116015056190036129" >amgunn@--------</a> wr--------:

<< That being said, the taking of the life of an other being, for food or for
protection, is the most awful one any human can make. >>

For that matter I believe the taking of a life for any reason is awful.
Humans are omnivores and do not have to eat meat except by choice or in
certain health related circumstances. Americans for the most part consume
way too much meat to begin with.

I once attended a Santeria rite with a friend in Chicago. I asked
specifically if they were going to kill an animal at which he said "no".
Then when I got there they led out a goat. I quickly picked myself up and
marched out of there to the anger of the people involved. I wanted no part
of it. And no...they didn't hex me!!!! I personally do not see the need to
kill an animal for its flesh when down the street was a Jewel-Osco (and I
personally don't like goat meat).

To clarify, I am not a vegetarian. By doctors orders I have to consume a
complete amino acid source (i.e. meat) at least a few times a week. I do
make a practice of honoring the spirit of the animal who'se flesh I am about
to consume. So I do not believe there is anything wrong with flesh or blood
consumption.

So again...if you were brought up to hunt and can do so for the purpose of
feeding yourself or are a butcher and can prepare the animal appropriately
after slitting its throat...do what you must. But I envision such people
living in rural areas and not on Main Street USA.

Perhaps a personal bias...

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: No blood? was Re: What's in a Name?
From:	Steven Robinson amgunn@--------
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 23:10:07 -0500

Avete Omnes -

Venator wrote:
>
> That being said, the taking of the life of an other being, for food or for protection, is the most awful one any human can make.

For the sake of clarity: I meant awful in its sense of being filled with
awe at the power and attendant responsibility contained in the life taking
act.

Valete - Venator