Send a Message
to Callisto_

Comments

115

Joined

Apr 20, 2011

Callisto_ Profile

Forums Owned

Recent Posts

Pagan/Wiccan

Back In The Broom Closet

That's not what my argument states at all. And "harm" is not typically associated with exorcism, rather the purpose is to banish. Blessings can, as you say, be a part of potions. Holy water, no matter who makes it or what they call it always requires blessings. Also when something is added to the water, it's typically for added (spiritual) purification, such as salt or fire. Potions are concoctions and elixirs, they are at least two, if not more, substances that have completely different attributes that are brought together for the given purpose. It's incorrect to classify holy water as potions. However, I'm always open to learning something new and as I mentioned in the post above, I am receptive to any scholarly material others might be able to recommend.  (Aug 23, 2012 | post #29)

Pagan/Wiccan

Back In The Broom Closet

Ingest means to internalize, does it not? You swallow something, where does it go? Inside the body. If something is absorbed through the skin or eyes or orifices, where does it go? Inside the body. That's why hazmat suits cover the entire body, not just one portion of the body. Quite literally potions are meant to be drank, thus the origin of the name. Potions are commonly used for inside the body, listing other secondary possibilities doesn't change that basic primary purpose. Citing variations only emphasizes the distinction between potions and holy water. They're not synonymous and holy water isn't a type of potion. Potions are elixirs and concoctions through out the history of medicine and magick. I also cannot think of a practice that has its version of sanctified (holy) water that classifies it as a potion, the latter often associated with magicians and (historical) witches rather than clergy. The ones that come to mind for me do not. Not the Catholics, or the Anglicans, Lutherans or Methodists, or Hindus; not the ancient Greeks (or today's Recons), nor (Trad) Wiccans. I don't recall seeing holy water associated with or classified in books on ancient medicine or ceremonial magic or alchemy. But if there is scholarly material you can point me to that shows otherwise, that would be great! :)  (Aug 23, 2012 | post #28)

Pagan/Wiccan

Back In The Broom Closet

<<A potion can enter one's system either by drinking it, if you prefer, topically.>> That should read "OR if you prefer"  (Aug 23, 2012 | post #25)

Pagan/Wiccan

Back In The Broom Closet

Actually, I'm correct. Ingest implies consuming, which is not just by the digestive tract. A potion can enter one's system either by drinking it, if you prefer, topically. Potions and holy water are simply not the same category of liquid.  (Aug 23, 2012 | post #24)

Pagan/Wiccan

Back In The Broom Closet

Perhaps I'm misreading the discussion, so bear with me... Are we talking about various colloquial uses of words, which may or may not be accurate or are we discussing, specifically, witchcraft and paganism, and how and what terms are most commonly applied in those fields? I can use "potion" as a colorful means of describing something mundane like mulled wine, which doesn't mean it's on par with how "potion" with alchemy or that it has somehow become a magick liquid because I used the word "potion. " The original assertion is that blessing makes holy water a potion. It doesn't. Blessings are neither primary or mandatory in the making of potions. Whereas it is essential to holy water. Potions can be used for healing or harming, holy water is not. Potions consist of liquids which are typically other than water for their respective properties and associations, whereas holy water is about being, specifically, water that has been sanctified.  (Aug 23, 2012 | post #23)

Pagan/Wiccan

Back In The Broom Closet

Which can be true but still does not make holy water a potion. "Holy water" and "potion" are neither synonyms or interchangeable. They are different fluids with different purposes and are utilized differently. Not only is a potion two or more liquids, the purpose is to ingest it. The word itself comes from the Greek poton "to drink". But that's beside the point as the discussion implies "holy water" as most commonly understood in the US. So while other practices might have different processes for sanctified water, the discussion is about holy water as understood per Catholicism in the US, the most commonly sold, thus my point of holy water being water alone. Holy water is not created with the purpose of being ingested, is not typically consumed. A potion is ingested as medicine or to cause harm. Clearly, holy water if it were consumed, would not be consumed as "medicine " but for "miraculous " properties and not likely ever given to be ingest for the purpose to harm. Potions are specifically most commonly ingested, holy water is commonly applied externally via asperging and anointing, sometimes dipping. The two liquids are simply not the same thing. Holy water is also unlike a potion as it requires being sanctified, a potion does not; nor does a blessing change water's composition to make it into a potion. And the argument was made that a blessing allegedly makes holy water a potion.  (Aug 22, 2012 | post #20)

Pagan/Wiccan

Back In The Broom Closet

By definition a potion consists of more than one liquid, with the imbuing of with blessings not necessary but optional, per its purpose. Holy water is purified water with no other substance, liquid or otherwise. Thus, not a potion. Adding a blessing does not make it a potion any more than blessing a crystal or salt would make them into potions. It's still a crystal, or salt, or water. :)  (Aug 22, 2012 | post #17)

Pagan/Wiccan

Back In The Broom Closet

Indeed, though I think there's far more fuss being made than the situation merits. Foremost, it's necessary to see _exactly_ *why* an object was banned, e.g., was it an ordinary tarot deck or did the seller indicate he had cast a spell upon it or claimed a certain result and *that's* why it was banned.  (Aug 22, 2012 | post #15)

Pagan/Wiccan

omens of dead animals

More often than not a dead animal is just a dead animal, not an omen. When there's more than one or even different species there's usually no great mystery when they seem intact and without injury -- there's a strong likelihood that either someone sat out poison which it then ate (or one ate another critter that had eaten the poison) or encountered some other human-made toxin. E.g., the bird someone mentions above that flew into the side of the house could have come in contact with an insecticide or herbicide someone was using in their yard.  (Aug 22, 2012 | post #96)

Pagan/Wiccan

What does religious freedom mean?

There's also the very simple fact that contraception (i.e., the pill) is NOT prescribed just for birth control reasons alone. It consists of one or more hormones (depending on the version) which are used to treat hormonal imbalances which can lead to secondary ailments including infertility and insulin resistance which can potentially result in Type II Diabetes. Denying someone a prescription can not only jeopardize their health regarding their main purpose for it but then cause increased health care costs across the board when another condition arises that must then be treated as well.  (Aug 22, 2012 | post #221)

Pagan/Wiccan

Back In The Broom Closet

Clicked "post" too soon. Holy water is not a potion. A potion is a mixture of two or more different liquids. And Catholics aren't the only ones who use some version of it. Hell, the Greeks were using it thousands of years before Christianity was even thought of (and the source of "cleanliness is next to godliness"). "Metaphysical " doesn't pertain just to Pagan but to all spiritual/ritual items. One of the biggest customers of Azure Green/Abyss (one of the largest, if not the largest of metaphysical wholesalers) is the Catholic Church.  (Aug 22, 2012 | post #13)

Pagan/Wiccan

Back In The Broom Closet

Christians are not the only ones who use holy water. So if there is any suspicion of religious bias it would be simple enough to test by selling another religion's version and seeing if they're both permitted or if one but not the other gets banned.  (Aug 22, 2012 | post #12)

Pagan/Wiccan

Back In The Broom Closet

I still sees no reason to believe these objects will be banned. Pagans are not the only ones who use these items, and some of them are used in completely secular, commercial capacity - e.g., a cauldron is nothing more than a cast iron pot, crystals are used in decor, art, jewelry, clothing etc., tarot cards can be collectibles. So if they were ban that doesn't inherently imply religious bias but that there have been sufficient buyer-seller disputes regarding certain items that merit them being banned. What has been clearly stated is that the alleged spell casting and services, such as sellers promising to bless, curse, or cast (intangibles) are now banned. Though, I can see an object being banned if the seller claims it's haunted, or that it contains a spell he's cast upon it. eBay is in the business of making money and if something is a money maker for them then it's not very likely they would cut into their own profit margin by removing it. The large volume of intangibles auctions indicate they do generate revenue. However eBay also has to handle disputes and when it comes to the intangible, more often than not, it's one party's word against the other as to whether the transaction was completed and satisfactory. Even if a seller is completely legit and the buyer is not, if there is no way to prove a service was given and what its results were, the seller would be forced to issue a refund. eBay takes a percentage on each sale so it makes money off of sellers, but it's the millions of customers that keep the money rolling in.  (Aug 22, 2012 | post #11)

Pagan/Wiccan

Back In The Broom Closet

I'm not seeing where people are getting the impression that items are being banned. What specific part of eBay's actual statement is giving people this impression?  (Aug 21, 2012 | post #7)

Pagan/Wiccan

Pagan Morals

Not surprising as it seems there is an ever decreasing effort at genuine studies, with lessening regard for knowing anything other than what one either "makes up as he goes along" and the regurgitated misinformation from forums and blogs. "Respecting another's right to practice" is erroneously equated with having to accept any amount of unfounded nonsense because someone sez so. And anyone who points such out there's a difference is just being "elitist and a hater." :\  (Aug 21, 2012 | post #11)