A Question To Pagans

[Lehnah]

Pagan is a catch all term to describe either religions worshipping deities other than the Abrahamic God (and as such, Hindus could rightly be called Pagans, as can a vast amount of other religions) or it describes the religions of ancient Europe, particularly the religions of the British Isles. Wicca is a form of Paganism in that it both involves the worship of non-abrahamic deities and because it is heavily inspired by classic European religions.
The term "Paganism" can be applied to Wicca, Kemetic Reconstructionism, Hellenic Reconstructionism, Heathenism/Asatru, Discordianism, Shamanism, Daemonolatry, Hinduism, Shinto, Druidism and even Diabolism. While the word "Pagan" can correctly be applied to all of these radically different belief systems, many people prefer to call themselves by whatever title they feel is a more accurate description of their beliefs or simply whichever title works for them (which is why I suggested the mirror excercise for you).

So, to put that in terms my feble brain can understand D) paganism is the "form/medium" and wicca is the "genre"? It's basically an umbrella term?

I'll have to research some of those religions you mention more closely as I don't have a great knowledge of some of them.

Thanks again, Shyanekh, you've given me more to think about.

 

[Erebus]

So, to put that in terms my feble brain can understand D) paganism is the "form/medium" and wicca is the "genre"? It's basically an umbrella term?

Exactly right

 

[Gentoo]

Again, that knowledge comes from the limited sources I have at my disposal. It's a shame, because I know there is so much to learn, I just don't have the sources to do so.

At the risk of sounding like an after school special, the best source you have at your disposal is yourself. I often tell people that what they've read should be a guideline for their own beliefs. Guidelines can give you boundaries and your imagination can fill in the blanks. Books are just another tool in your arsenal.

That is a damn good point, and not one that has occured to me before. It's moments liek thsi I realize how stooopid I am. :areyoucra

Hehe, I wouldn't worry too much about it. Hindsight is 20/20, and sometimes the most obvious things can be the most elusive.

 

[Lehnah]

At the risk of sounding like an after school special, the best source you have at your disposal is yourself. I often tell people that what they've read should be a guideline for their own beliefs. Guidelines can give you boundaries and your imagination can fill in the blanks. Books are just another tool in your arsenal.

Good advice, Gentoo.

 

[Metempsychosis]

If dharmic religions come under pagan,then I am Pagan too.

 

[Storm]

If dharmic religions come under pagan,then I am Pagan too.

Not really, sweetie.

 

[Metempsychosis]

Not really, sweetie.

I read the following from wiki

One group maintains paganism as a term that includes all non-Abrahamic religions. Another holds that Roman Catholicism has its roots in paganism.[citation needed] Another holds that paganism should refer solely to polytheistic religions, and the group so defined includes most of the Eastern religions, Native American religions and mythologies, as well as non-Abrahamic folk religions in general.

In the 20th century, with people actively beginning to describe themselves as being "pagans", a more precise definition largely developed. This was described by Prudence Jones and Nigel Pennick in their A History of Pagan Europe (1995), when they stated that pagan religions all share the following characteristics:
1)They are polytheistic, recognising a plurality of divine beings, which may or may not be avatars or other aspects of an underlying unity/duality/trinity etc.
2)They view Nature as a theophany, a manifestation of divinity, not as a 'fallen' creation of the latter.
3)They recognise the female divine principle, called the Goddess (with a capital 'G', to distinguish her from the many particular goddesses), as well as, or instead of, the male divine principle, the God.

Hence I think i am pagan.I am a panentheist pagan actually.

 

[Storm]

I read the following from wiki

One group maintains paganism as a term that includes all non-Abrahamic religions. Another holds that Roman Catholicism has its roots in paganism.[citation needed] Another holds that paganism should refer solely to polytheistic religions, and the group so defined includes most of the Eastern religions, Native American religions and mythologies, as well as non-Abrahamic folk religions in general.

In the 20th century, with people actively beginning to describe themselves as being "pagans", a more precise definition largely developed. This was described by Prudence Jones and Nigel Pennick in their A History of Pagan Europe (1995), when they stated that pagan religions all share the following characteristics:
1)They are polytheistic, recognising a plurality of divine beings, which may or may not be avatars or other aspects of an underlying unity/duality/trinity etc.
2)They view Nature as a theophany, a manifestation of divinity, not as a 'fallen' creation of the latter.
3)They recognise the female divine principle, called the Goddess (with a capital 'G', to distinguish her from the many particular goddesses), as well as, or instead of, the male divine principle, the God.

Hence I think i am pagan.I am a panentheist pagan actually.

Well, yes, some people do use it that way. However, there are more precise meanings to the word. As for purposes of this forum, they're kept separate (hence the separate DIRs).

 

[Vasilisa Jade]

I know no one else in my town who is pagan/ wiccan to ask for advice) my idea of magic is somewhat different to how it is viewed in Wicca.

Just a bit of advice here...

You are just as likely to find quacked out BS from a live human being speaking to you as you are to find it abounding on the web and in books. The only difference is that there are far fewer live people you can talk to in person to compare, whereas there is limiteless access to endless amounts of info on the web, so that you can compare, digest, analyse, and sift through the inconsistencies to isolate the BS. It is also much easier to make many knowledgable internet friends to ask for advice, in which you can also do the same thing, much much faster than working with people physically.

I don't feel that I can change (for lack of a better term) how the universe works so that I can get a job or whatever. The universe is too big for that. Sure, I can ask the God and Goddess to for a bit of help, but they aren't going to go moving stars so I can get a book published. No, for me the magic we as "ordinary" people perform is more "real." For example, creating an artwork from a blank sheet of paper, or music from strings and bow. Birth. Inspiring people. That is what I feel magic is.

You should have more confidence in yourself. Don't look upwards for the power you need to manefest what you need, look inward.

I recently finished reading Cunningham's Living Wicca and there where a few things in there I didn't agree with. Nothing huge, but enough to give me pause. One thing was Cunningham talks about spending time with the Gods each day, even if only for five minutes. He said to do things like smell flowers, touch grass etc. The bit that got me was he said that reading about Wicca (eg; studying) could not be considered giving your time to the Gods. I really, really have to disagree with that, especially if Wicca truly is a path of knowledge and self discovery. How is one supposed to gain knowledge if one does not study. Using Cunningham's reasoning suggests my seven years of art school have done nothing for my artistic abilities. I can tell you that is far from the case.

As you progress you might just see what I did. EVERYONE in Wicca has a different view of Wicca. Some feel that it is all light and happiness and do as you wish. Those are usually the ones who are more solitary and kind of... personalize thier methods unique to them. That is all that was, Cunninghams opinion. There is no concrete globaly accepted method of practicing Wicca that I ever could find. It's all just opinions and personal expereinces and methods that work right for them. You have to do what works right for you.

So I'm wondering if I should call myself wiccan or pagan. I know that, in the scheme of things, labels such as those don't matter. However, it is part of who I am and I'd like to be able to proudly say "I am INSETS TITLE HERE" without umming and arring over it. I also know that Wicca is a religion in which you can practice in the way that works for you, you don't need to adhere to any certain system (unless a coven dictates, but I'm solitary so I can please myself )

Still, I wonder if it in not better to simply be pagan, at least until I know for sure if I fit into wicca or not?

If it's bothering you, just wait until you finish your studies of Wicca and become completely comfortable with it. Call yourself a Student of Wicca, or Pagan or whatever. If it's bugging you I'd say it might just be because it doesn't completely fit yet.

 

[Moonstone]

I'm calling myself just Pagan for now because I'm so new, & haven't figured out all my beliefs yet.
-Dot

 

[EverChanging]

I consider myself neo-pagan, but at this point my path has become too unique and eclectic to really identify with a label, as can be seen from my chaotic and not-so-elegant religious label I've chosen for these forums: HUUmanistic (UU being for Unitarian Universalist) Neo-pagan Eclectic Atheist. I identify with all of the terms, but can find problems with each (except perhaps Unitarian Universalist).

I still have a lot to learn about paganism, but I do understand the basics and use neo-pagan rituals, prayers, and have observed the Sabbats for about three years, although now I'm celebrating as a solitary as well, when I can't meet up with my friends to do rituals and celebrations, so I suppose I can count myself as "pagan."

But I'm really all over the place and enjoy finding truth in all kinds of places, whether its Buddhism, or Christianity, or Humanism...I'm currently obsessed with studying consciousness (although had to put that on hold for school), I'm also really enjoying a philosophy of logic course, and so on....

So at this point I'm just letting the process unfold without judging it. I seem to be benefiting from it (slowly but surely), so I go with the flow....Labels are really not so important.

 

[Luminakisharblaze]

I have been referred to as pagan, witch, gypsy and many other things. I have come to label it as all paths that are walked for light and truth. It is the best definition. Pagan is an umbrella term for all of us who share basic similar beliefs in the workings of Nature and the Divine as they are one and many.

 

[tavthe]

I've come to call myself an Eclectic Pagan over the years because I am not Wiccan, and I do not practice a Recon faith(although am interested in what I can learn from Recon practitioners about historicity of ancient religion). Also I do not practice a syncretic faith such as Christian Wicca. I was raised as a Christian and adopted Paganism into my life many years ago, first starting with Wicca, and then eventually shedding it. My practice incorporates dark paganism, chaos, gnosticism, taoism, necromancy, shamanism, and witchcraft and probably other things I may not realize for another couple years.

I think for many of us there is no title, no label that encompasses all that we are and believe. So sometimes we have to make it up as we go along.