From: ag1v+@andrew.cmu.edu (Andrea B. Gansley-Ortiz)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Pentacles (long winded, but hopefully useful)
Date: 9 Sep 92 19:02:49 GMT
Organization: Engineering Design Research Center, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Most worshipful people, I recommend me to you. I would like to 
apologize in advance for the amount of quoted material I'm about
to present. But I feel that it's necessary to keep things in
context. (and looking back, I also apologize for how long winded 
this turned out to be.)

On Sept 7th, Master Arval posted this:
= The following passage is quoted from the Board's ruling on the use of
= pentacles in SCA armory; if you like I will send you the entire ruling.  As
= you see, the ruling has nothing to do with religion or religious symbols;
= it has everything to do with whether or not the SCA, Inc. chooses to
= sanction the display of the pentacle, and the possibility of damage to the
= Society's reputation.
=  
=   The Board has a duty of care for the whole organization.  We heard from a
=   number of people who have had problems in the communities because of
=   perceptions of the SCA as not merely tolerating, but actively
=   encouraging, various anti-social activities.  Again, the rightness or
=   wrongness of their perceptions is not at issue; those perceptions are
=   simply part of the larger environment within which the SCA must operate.
=   We can reasonably expect that the SCA will come up against similar
=   perceptions in the future, and we cannot reasonably expect outsiders to
=   understand the subtleties of authority underlying 'registration,' which
=   to them will inevitably imply official recognition, approval, and
=   sanction. (quoted from the cover letter to the 4/91 Laurel Letter of 
=   Acceptances and Returns, which in turn quotes from a letter from the
=   Board of Directors)

On Sept. 8th Nicholas van Leyden writes:
] The SCA does not have any prejudice against your religous
] affiliation.  It has never said "we refuse to register pentacles
] because we don't believe they represent the true religion."  It
] has refused to register pentacles because registering them would
] violate the rules by which it registers arms.  

Lord Nicholas, your first statement is correct. The refusal to 
register pentacles has nothing to do with the religion of those
wishing to display them. And it is also true that it is presently
against the rules to register them through the most recent precedent
sent down from the BoD to the College of Heralds. And part of that 
is quoted above.

However, you also say:
] Pentacles are *modern*
] symbols of a *modern* religion, not part of the heraldric tradition
] of the era that we depict.  

This is incorrect. Arval did a great deal of research about the pentacle,
and not only was it found in period, but it was found in the arms
attributed to Sir Gawain in the story 'Sir Gawain and the Green Knight'.

The BoD is not concerned with religion except so that there is no
ceremony at an SCA event that would cause people to attend the 
ceremony (i.e. in the main area of an event which people cannot avoid,
or at an official function such as court, that people might have to
forgo attendance to stay in compliance with their religion, or to keep
from being offended), or cause people to believe that the ceremony has 
been given the official sanction of the SCA. 

The ruling by the BoD deals with protecting the reputation of the
SCA. Not keeping a certain religion from practicing any private
ceremonies, or keep them from displaying their religious symbol. It
simply keeps them from registering that symbol as part of a Coat
of Arms. This is a case where mundane considerations are overriding
historical accuracy, when dealing with what the SCA, Inc. *officially*
recognizes.

Also, on Sept 8th, Peter John Harrison (peterh@netcom.com) writes:
> If the SCA has concerns about their public image as pertains to a religious
> expression, it should restrict all such expressions.  Or put another way,
> if an individual with a strong Christian faith feels he is afforded a 
> "special blessing" when he bears weaponry with his religious icon on it, is
> it fair and chivalrous to prevent another individual with a strong Wiccan 
> belief his own "special blessing," just because his faith is less under- 
> stood by the populace at large?  

Milord Peter, there is nothing that prevents a Wiccan from putting an icon
of his faith anywhere. He simply can't register arms with it. I'm not sure
what you're talking about by a "special blessing". However, there is a 
rule either in the past or present, which charges people not to use 
religion or sorcery to gain an upper hand on the field of battle. I know
I'm misquoting what I remember. Can someone give a quotation or a more
accurate rendering?

So what is the purpose of this posting. Hopefully to show that the
BoD is not persecuting a certain religious group. Wiccans are not
forced not to display their religious symbol. They are not told they
are unwelcome at events. And they are not prevented from having
private ceremonies at events. This is the same consideration that
is supposedly given to all other individual's religions in the SCA.

The only thing the BoD has done is say that they won't give official
sanction to a particular symbol, the pentacle, which in much of present 
day American society, is viewed as a symbol of evil and Satanism. The
SCA, Inc. is not claiming this as the meaning of the symbol. 

Now I would guess that some people would still consider what the BoD
is doing as persecution. Well then I have a different definition of
persecution.

But it should be clear the Wiccans, or any other pagans, or anyone
else who likes to use a pentacle as an identifier, or religious 
icon, is not prevented from doing so by the BoD or the corporation.

One final note. Since I mentioned the pentacle as being on the
arms of Sir Gawain, it bears mentioning that at some point in 
the Middle Ages, the pentacle was a *Christian* symbol. And it
would be entirely appropriate for me, as a Christian (both medievally
and modernly) to think of those wearing pentacles in garb, to be
Christians.

Mind you, I have not yet been able to submerge myself in persona
so much, that I would be able to truly do such a thing. And personally,
there's no reason at all for me to comment on others religious symbols
while in garb. So from the standpoint of Esmeralda, the 15th cent.
Aragonese, this whole discussion is quite odd.

From the standpoint of Esmeralda, a pursuivant in the Knowne Worlde,
I find it sad that the BoD chose to rule this way on the pentacle,
but understandable, considering some of the societies in the United 
States.

Su segura servidora, 
 (I hope)

Esmeralda la Sabia