I love the way the theatricality of the christian churches is couched in the most soaring language. I guess it’s kinda comforting that these grand promises are accompanied by some of the most uplifting language available to us. Lay a Händel soundtrack behind it and it becomes utterly irresistible.

Nevertheless, just because my parents got sucked in, it doesn’t mean that the churches have any claim on me, or any right to determine my behaviour beyond the churchyard gate. You’re more than welcome to your grand words and your mystic madness. I promise to make no attempts to change you if you stop trying to tell me how I can behave.

Such certainty terrifies me, save me from those who are so sure their truth is the only truth.

Peter either forgets or does not know that the rituals he mentions pre-date Christianity by centuries. Both Baptism and the so-called Eucharist (drinking a god's blood and eating his flesh) were common at the time of Christ's birth. The original Pagan integrity of these rituals was corrupted by early Christians and wrapped in layers of Jewish and Hellenistic myth. Is it not fair, therefore if "post-modernists" again adapt these rituals to suit the "superstitions" of the time?
Of course, while we are on the subject, the myth of the dying-resurrecting god-man was also Pagan as was the son-of-god concept, virgin birth, being born in a cave, the 25th December birth date, dying on a cross to wash away sin and most of Christianity's borrowed mythology and concepts. Do these things ever remain static and unchanged. Well they haven't so far.

I totally agree that the church should not be influenced by the trends and fashions of a sinful world. This should include rituals although the primary objectives of the church are in upholding the Bible truth and the morals of God's law.

God's commandments are here to stay and the Bible tells us those who choose to follow them only as far as it suits their sinful nature will surely perish, along with those who invent excuses to ignore them completely.

"For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous" (1 John 5:3).

Priscillian says, "Peter either forgets or does not know that the rituals he mentions pre-date Christianity by centuries. Both Baptism and the so-called Eucharist (drinking a god's blood and eating his flesh) were common at the time of Christ's birth. The original Pagan integrity of these rituals was corrupted by early Christians and wrapped in layers of Jewish and Hellenistic myth. Is it not fair, therefore if "post-modernists" again adapt these rituals to suit the "superstitions" of the time? Of course, while we are on the subject, the myth of the dying-resurrecting god-man was also Pagan as was the son-of-god concept, virgin birth, being born in a cave, the 25th December birth date, dying on a cross to wash away sin and most of Christianity's borrowed mythology and concepts. Do these things ever remain static and unchanged. Well they haven't so far."

This is just a wild set of unsubstantiated words.

If Priscillian wants to be taken seriously he or she should try and take just one of these statements, quantify it and then we can compare with the Christian belief.

A more interesting issue is why pagan religion crumbled in the century before before Constantine declared Christianity to be the official religion of the Roman Empire. What was different about Christianity, persecuted sect that it was, that the pagans flocked to it in the 2nd and 3rd centuries?

"Similarly, when Russell Crowe can have his child “baptised” in his own private chapel, without the support of the faith community, presumably without ordained ministry - for what clergy would get involved ?...."

Whatever made you leap to such a conclusion ? I feel you owe a very public apology to the entire Crowe family. The baby was christened by the Anglican Bishop of Melbourne, Philip Huggins, who also married the couple in the chapel a year ago.
http://www.murphsplace.com/crowe/band/raewyn.html Scroll to bottom.