Disputatio:Paganismus

Pagina huic coniuncta e conversione paginae “Paganism” sitūs en.wikipedia.org orta est.
Auctoribus illius paginae hic enumeratis gratias agimus.

Català

Aquesta pàgina es basa en una traducció de „Paganism“ a en.wikipedia.org. Podeu trobar la llista d'editors aquí.

Deutsch

Die angegliederte Seite basiert ursprünglich auf einer Übersetzung von „Paganism“ aus en.wikipedia.org. Eine Liste der Autoren ist hier verfügbar.

English language

English

The attached page originated as a translation from the page “Paganism” on the site en.wikipedia.org.
We are grateful to the authors of that page as listed here.

Esperanto

La apuda paĝo origine baziĝas sur traduko de “Paganism” el en.wikipedia.org. Listo de la ĝentilaj artikolverkintoj haveblas ĉi tie.

Definitio[fontem recensere]

I inserted the real historical origin of the word. Going back to Indo-European is misleading: the origin of this term is purely Latin.

I notice the first paragraph is translated from English. I haven't seen the Latin word "paganismus" used in all these senses, so I think we need sources on that. Lewis & Short gives only one citation, in which the word seems to have approximately its etymological sense (religions of the Roman countryside). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:12, 14 Novembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I added the reference to Augustine without reading your whole comment. Here's the Augustine quotation. I think here, given the Biblical referencs, it refers to more than just Roman paganism:

Si Dominus dimittendae coniugis solam causam fornicationis admittit, et paganum coniugium dimitti non prohibet, consequens est ut paganismus fornicatio deputetur. Solam autem fornicationis causam exceptam facere Dominum, cum de dimittenda coniuge loquitur in Evangelio, manifestum est.

Here are some other sources for our consideration:

Gesta Francorum: "Retro castrum stabant presbyteri, clerici, sacris uestibus induti, orantes et obsecrantes Deum ut suum defenderet populum, et Christianitatem exaltaret, ac paganismum deponeret."

^ referring to Muslims?

Legenda maior sancti regis Stephani: "Erat tunc princeps quartus ab illo, qui ingressionis Hungarorum in Pannoniam dux primus fuit nomine Gæiza, qui et credulus in Ihesum potentialiter agens in suos, misericors autem et liberalis in alienos et precipue in christianos, ritu paganismi licet obvolutus, tamen appropinquante spiritualis fulgore carismatis cum omnibus circumquaque positarum provinciarum vicinis de pace, cuius numquam antea fuerat amator, cepit attente tractare, ut iam in illo poscit agnosci, cuius filius desideraret fieri secundum dictum salvatoris nostri dicentisin ævangelio: 'beati pacifici, quoniam filii Dei vocabuntur'."

^ Hungarian pagans?

Martin of Braga: "Non liceat iniquas observationes agere Kalendarum et otiis vacare gentilibus neque lauro aut viriditate arborum cingere domos. Omnis haec observatio paganismi est."

^?

And some from Thomas of Aquinas, translating Chrysostomus, so maybe Greek pagans? Lesgles (disputatio) 04:46, 16 Novembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I couldn't have asked for better :) That being the case, we then have to decide what this article is about. I feel there is a topic, wanting a Vicipaedia article, something like "survivals of pre-Christian religions in Christian Europe". That seems to be what the German article is about, and quite a lot of the English article too, once you read beyond its ecumenical introduction. The use of "paganismus" was originally pejorative in this particular sense: see Peter Brown quoted in the English article. He regards "paganism" as a local POV synonym for "polytheism", which makes sense historically. But that's long ago, and we can surely treat it as non-POV now. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:55, 16 Novembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

De nexibus[fontem recensere]

Video hanc commentationem manualiter adnexam esse ad paganismum, quae commentatio Anglica invicem ad religionem Iovialem adnexa est, quae mea quidem opinione una cum religione Romana tractari debeat. Neander (disputatio) 13:04, 14 Novembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assentior ego. Formulam contributionis in religione Ioviali addidi atque intervicos refeci. Nunc videbimus utrum sintne appellationi "religio Iovialis" aliqui defensores. Lesgles (disputatio) 03:34, 16 Novembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Categoriam delevi[fontem recensere]

Since neither the creator (Iacobus) nor anyone else explained what definition at "Categoria:Paganismus" was intended, and this made the category useless for the time being, I deleted it. The preceding discussion is copied below Obviously the category could be reinstated if useful and if clearly defined. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:45, 29 Novembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Categoria:Paganismus": Significatio[fontem recensere]

Quam significationem "Paganismus" habet apud nos? An "religiones praeter Christianitatem omnes", aut "religiones praeter Iudaeochristomachometanas omnes", aut "polytheisticas omnes", aut ... ? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:55, 13 Novembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apud commentarium de paganismo legimus: " Sensu latiore, paganismus omnes religiones vulgares, ethnicas, et non Abrahamicas comprehendere habetur. Paganismus recens vel hodiernus, etiam neopaganismus appellatus, est grex novorum motuum religiosorum a variis Europaeae praemodernae fidibus religiosis paganis historicis motus vel deductus." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 16:40, 13 Novembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ita, mi amice, legi. Sed sicut categoriam quomodo uti vis (tu enim creavisti)? An religiones Romana, Etrusca, Graeca, Aegyptia, Celtica, Nordica, Hinduica, Sinica sub paganismo comprehenduntur? Nonne hic est conceptus Christianorum, punctum visús (POV) illorum recelans? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:58, 14 Novembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. Oh well. Delete it again if still controversial? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:02, 29 Iunii 2016 (UTC)[reply]