Pagan Journeys
Pagan Journeys => Pagan Chat => Topic started by: kiara on February 03, 2012, 03:02:21 PM
-
I didn't know where exactly to put this post but I though it worked here because it was a pretty general question. Anyways, when I started my religious journey, there were many unfamiliar words that came up in my research, the main one being "Pagan"(or any variation of the word). I was confused because some sources said it was a classification of a religion, like monotheism or polytheism, and that there were many religions belonging to that class. Others said it was a religion with different sects,like Christianity being a tree and Catholicism and Baptists being two of the many branches. And then to finish it off, if you Google the definition of paganism it would say, " any of various religions other than Christianity or Judaism or Islamism". Which is difficult because there are religions that aren't Christianity, Judaism, or Islamism that one would think of as Pagan. :confused:
With all those different answers, it's a struggle for me to decide what to believe.
So my question is to you all:
1. What does the word "Pagan" mean to you?(meaning is it more of a classification or religion to you)
2. Why do you feel that way?
3. Do you ever find people that disagree with your interpretation of "Pagan"? What is their view and argument for it?
I know many of you say it doesn't matter because it's just a word but I think words are crucial in any situation. Thanks to any one who decides to read and/or answer my questions. I hope you all have a great day!
-
With all those different answers, it's a struggle for me to decide what to believe.
So my question is to you all:
1. What does the word "Pagan" mean to you?(meaning is it more of a classification or religion to you)
2. Why do you feel that way?
3. Do you ever find people that disagree with your interpretation of "Pagan"? What is their view and argument for it?
Ain't gonna be great, my typing sucks tonight. I'd gladly answer, though!
1. The word "pagan" to me means two things. One is the snippy comment I read somewhere that said "No matter what Christians think, "pagan gods" aren't simply gods that aren't the Christian one, but are gods that are older than him."
The real deal, though, means someone who believes in multiple deities, in my case, all, or simply just multiple deities with old origin.
2. I feel that way because... Well, I believe in all gods. The world is complex place, makes sense that it took more than one god to create it and keep it intact. Also, the bible does kind of admit the existence of other gods in few places. Also, I know what I feel, and I do not feel close to the Christian God, but do feel close to deities. Anyway, what makes me feel this way is just... Intuition. It's our greatest tool; Intuition is the "whisper of the soul", as a famous spiritualist in Bulgaria used to say, and we pagans are all about spirituality, and thus, what the soul tells us. So, why I feel this way? Because I am supposed to, I guess.
3. Now that I think of it, I think there will be people who may agree that "pagan" just means believing in gods who are older than the Christian one of origin, or maybe believing that the majority of gods exists, but not all like I do, etc, etc. But honestly, I don't know any real pagans in real life. Some people with mixed believes whom I helped get on pagan-like-path, but besides them, I haven't had enough discussions with pagans to get to argue.
Yes, I am lonely.
-
When I use the word pagan, I generally use it as an umbrella term to refer to any person who follows a modern or reconstructionist earth-based religious or spiritual path so in that sense it would include Wicca, Traditional Witchcraft, Asatru, Druids, etc., etc. as well as the variety of folks who identify themselves as Eclectic Wiccanish folks but not true Wiccans or class themselves as any of the other religions mentioned. People that seem to be on the fringe but I might also lump as pagans are other folks like members of the World Pantheist movement and modern shamanic practitioners who follow paths that are strongly earth-based. I do not view the term as defining a religion with various sects. I don't include Buddhists, Hindus, Native American spirituality, or other non-Abrahamic religions in the term pagan because they have their own very long and different histories with an unbroken historic record.
I think people usually understand me when I use the term pagan, at least around here, but I'm sure I would get some arguments over my definition. Sometimes I'll use neopagan if the discussion is such that I think I need to distinguish between the modern practice of these types of paths as compared to the historical pagan religions that were in existence before and at the time of the rise of Christianity.
-
This is how I look at it and I'll start it out this way:
Christianity is the furthest left term in the tree diagram - it is the broadest term you can use to define someone's faith (assuming they're Christian). Then there are a gazillion branches sticking off towards the right that label the different traditions: Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran, LDS, etc. There are even smaller branches off of that level - conservative, liberal, fundamental, etc.
It is the same with Paganism. Paganism is the furthest left term in the tree diagram. Then on towards the right are the different traditions: Wicca, Druid, Astru, Hereditary, on to infinity. Even that level has offshoots - Dianic, Eclectic, etc.
Those who aren't sure or don't care where they lie in that tree diagram can just call themselves Pagan (or if using the first example, Christian).
Like I said, that is just my opinion.
-
I would go with the first definition found here:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/paganism1.htm
"Pagans consist of Wiccans and other Neopagans"
The why is because it is the most commonly accepted definition in the community. I am sure that the responses on this thread will answer the last question.
-
The why is because it is the most commonly accepted definition in the community. I am sure that the responses on this thread will answer the last question.
The online, or real life? Because in my country people haven't heard much about Wicca, but the word "pagan" is known by everyone.
Also, at FairyQueen - your understanding of the term, umbrellaish and leftish, sounds so much easier to explain than mine that I am actually willing to steal it.
-
I would go with the first definition found here:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/paganism1.htm
"Pagans consist of Wiccans and other Neopagans"
The why is because it is the most commonly accepted definition in the community. I am sure that the responses on this thread will answer the last question.
:yeahthat: Agreed but I take it one step farther. I use "pagan" as an umbrella term for any person who doesn't follow one of the Abrahamic religions. I tend to use "Pagan" when referring to a religious practice that isn't Abrahamic but also doesn't fall into one of the pagan paths like Wicca or Hinduism.
-
To me, "Pagan" has two main branches--the old religions from before the Judeo-Christian tradition, and "Neo-Pagan" which is what most of us on this forum are. I agree with FairyQueen's analogy of the tree for this, only I think that Neo-Pagan has much more diversity than Christianity.
-
The why is because it is the most commonly accepted definition in the community. I am sure that the responses on this thread will answer the last question.
The online, or real life?
I was speaking of the Pagan community - online and IRL.
-
I would go with the first definition found here:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/paganism1.htm
"Pagans consist of Wiccans and other Neopagans"
The why is because it is the most commonly accepted definition in the community. I am sure that the responses on this thread will answer the last question.
:yeahthat: Agreed but I take it one step farther. I use "pagan" as an umbrella term for any person who doesn't follow one of the Abrahamic religions. I tend to use "Pagan" when referring to a religious practice that isn't Abrahamic but also doesn't fall into one of the pagan paths like Wicca or Hinduism.
That about sums it up for me
-
Thank you all for your answers! They were pretty much what I assumed Pagan to mean. I think earthmuffin had an awesome definition and an explanation that I might keep for myself. Hehe. :D
I also want to bring up this one incident where I was reading an article and it defined Paganism as any Earth-based religion but included religions like Buddhism. I kind of liked the definition but the religions the classified it under totally threw me off. I always thought that Buddhism was a different sort of religion than any kind of Pagan religion, no matter how much the Buddhist respect the Earth. Is it just me?
-
Buddhism, in it's pure form, is a philosophy. Some sects revere the Buddha as a god, but they are in error in doing so. Tibetan Buddhists also believe in spirits and demons and such.
-
Buddhism, in it's pure form, is a philosophy. Some sects revere the Buddha as a god, but they are in error in doing so. Tibetan Buddhists also believe in spirits and demons and such.
Quoted for truth.
-
Buddhism, in it's pure form, is a philosophy. Some sects revere the Buddha as a god, but they are in error in doing so. Tibetan Buddhists also believe in spirits and demons and such.
:confused:
I agree with all your factual points about Buddhism, GW, but I just don't understand the opinion that Buddhists who revere gods are in error. While it's true they have interpreted Buddhism in a different way than it was first taught, who is to say it is wrong to do so? In theory that sort of statement could be very offensive to Mahayana Buddhists or other sects who do revere gods (in theory, because Buddhists work to be free of negative emotional patterns like taking offense). Is any religion or spiritual path that evolves away from the original teachings to be considered erroneous?
-
It was once said, by ninth-century Master Lin Chi: "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him." He makes a valuable point: to turn the Buddha into a religious fetish is to miss the essence of what he taught.
You really over-think things Muffin. You need to let go of that scientific mind set in order to free your spirit.
-
You need to let go of that scientific mind set in order to free your spirit.
If I remember correctly EM needs that scientific mind set to make a living. There is no reason why someone cant be both scientific and spiritual. I, for instance, am in that boat.
-
Buddha himself would be offended if he was refereed to as god. He was a man; in my opinion, a man above all men, but still just human. Gods are to be worshiped, not humans. You can honor one's teachings without turning him into a god.
-
You need to let go of that scientific mind set in order to free your spirit.
If I remember correctly EM needs that scientific mind set to make a living. There is no reason why someone cant be both scientific and spiritual. I, for instance, am in that boat.
This has nothing to do with her making a living. It has everything to do with spirituality.
-
Allow me to elaborate. The "scientific mindset" I refer to represents logical thinking, which tells us that the real is only that which can be perceived by the senses. This will actually close one off from the spiritual realms because of skepticism and even disbelief.
Muffin herself is an interesting study, in that she denies Deity, is very logical and science based, yet practices shamanism and believes in spirits.
-
Muffin, Dear, I hope you don't think I am picking on you, I'm not. We all love you. ;)
-
Muffin, Dear, I hope you don't think I am picking on you, I'm not. We all love you. ;)
I don't think it would be picking, unless you had said "She is in interesting study, we should put her in a glass jar and watch her with a microscope". Seriously, snored orange juice out of my nose when I read the "is an interesting study thing".
But yeah, I am new to the forum and I already love you too, muffin.
-
You never answered my question, GW.
I am aware of the some of the teachings of Buddha, most of which were orally transmitted and written down by various disciples hundreds of years after the Buddha's death. There is a similar pattern in Christianity. Various sects/denominations hold various and often different interpretations of the original teachings of these two men, with very periods over which teachings and traditions have evolved. One path may have strayed farther from the original intent or ideas of the originator of that path, but to say one is less "correct" than the other is folly in my opinion, just as it is to say that my mindset, whatever it may be, makes me less able to understand the truth than you or any other human being.
As for the study of me, you have not gotten it quite right. I don't deny Deity-- that would atheist. I also have to disagree that logical thinking requires a belief that the only thing real is that which we perceive. We live within our own perceptions yet our perceptions change over time (and sometimes quite drastically depending on our circumstances) and what we perceive as reality one day we may realize was an illusion the next.
-
I did answer it, which is that fixating on the person of the Buddha distracts one from the path.
Let me rephrase the deity issue, you stated you don't believe in personal deities, i.e., you don't hold to the idea that there are anthropomorphic Gods and Goddesses, but rather see nature as a whole as embodying deity. I am not implying that is incorrect, that is your personal choice. However, Nature itself, in this case, becomes deity.
I struggled for years overcoming the logical, science based thinking patterns, and still can't completely do away with them. We need a certain balance so that we remain grounded in reality. There is great danger in dwelling in the spiritual realms at the expense of the material. On the one hand, there is the mystic, who went up on the mountain and never came back. He may have had great insight, but fails to be able to impart that to others and is unable to deal with the real world. Then there is the hard-nosed materialist, the Athiest type who denies the very existance of the spiritual. He will never be able to see that realm because his very disbelief acts as a shield, cutting off any contact that would otherwise be made. We need to take the middle path.
-
there is the mystic, who went up on the mountain and never came back. he may have had great insight, but fails to be able to impart that to others and is unable to deal with the real world. Then there is the hard-nosed materialist, the Athiest type who denies the very existance of the spiritual. He will never be able to see that realm because his very disbelief acts as a shield, cutting off any contact that would otherwise be made. We need to take the middle path.
Good example, it shall come of use. Still, I can't help but mention that EM seems to be taking very well the middle path, and even her presence in the forum is a sign of that.
-
She has come a long way from an Atheist background to what she is today. :D
-
She has come a long way from an Atheist background to what she is today. :D
:rolleye:
I'm glad that you two think I am on the right track and approve; otherwise I am not sure how I would be able to live my life. ;)
From wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism
"Agnosticism is the view that the truth value of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—is unknown or unknowable.[1][2]"
GW, this was the actual question that you did not answer:
Is any religion or spiritual path that evolves away from the original teachings to be considered erroneous?
-
She has come a long way from an Atheist background to what she is today. :D
:rolleye:
I'm glad that you two think I am on the right track and approve; otherwise I am not sure how I would be able to live my life. ;)
That sounded a bit snippy, I thought I was nice.
-
She has come a long way from an Atheist background to what she is today. :D
:rolleye:
I'm glad that you two think I am on the right track and approve; otherwise I am not sure how I would be able to live my life. ;)
That sounded a bit snippy, I thought I was nice.
I think she was just being sarcastic in a friendly way.
-
She has come a long way from an Atheist background to what she is today. :D
:rolleye:
I'm glad that you two think I am on the right track and approve; otherwise I am not sure how I would be able to live my life. ;)
That sounded a bit snippy, I thought I was nice.
I think she was just being sarcastic in a friendly way.
That was my intent-- friendly sarcasm and I was chuckling as I wrote it so the tone in my head at least was not snippy...I could be more blunt and say that honestly, guys, I find your talking about me as if I am not here to be impolite and discussion about the correctness of my path or anyone else's to be insensitive and insulting to those on those paths, but I was hoping you would have figured it out from my comments above so I wouldn't have to. I'm not angry or anything so hope you won't take this criticism the wrong way. In general, people seem to be having a lot of difficulty yesterday and today with smooth communications (myself included) and I don't want to add to the difficulties. Heck, even our two cats are fighting like cats and dogs today. Anyway, I hope there will be no hard feelings from my honesty. I do value the exchange of ideas and the many personalities that are represented on this board.
-
That sounded a bit snippy, I thought I was nice.
How is being judgmental of anyone (even in jest) being "nice"? Frankly, I find it rude and somewhat offensive.
-
That sounded a bit snippy, I thought I was nice.
How is being judgmental of anyone (even in jest) being "nice"? Frankly, I find it rude and somewhat offensive.
Mmmm, I wanted to politely express the opinion that we should leave EM alone because she seems just fine. I failed, apparently.
-
1. What does the word "Pagan" mean to you?(meaning is it more of a classification or religion to you)
2. Why do you feel that way?
3. Do you ever find people that disagree with your interpretation of "Pagan"? What is their view and argument for it?
A1&2:
I keep an open mind about language; I'm kind of an English language buff, and understand that words often can vary in meaning and nuance depending on context, so I don't typically define words in any concrete sense based on "feeling" or "opinion". I recognise several meanings of "pagan", including its common use among anthropologists as a shorthand umbrella term for "polytheist and/or animist pre-Christian religion", and I recognise that many who practise ostensibly polytheistic or animistic Eastern / Asian-indigenous, and even indigenous North and South Amer. religions wish to distance themselves from the word "pagan", as their history of being slurred with that word by Christians is much closer in time. I also recognise the ancient Latin "paganus", meaning (roughly) "country-dweller", and so this can imply a rural or rustic spirituality, id est "nature religions" --in spite of most people simply not knowing the Latin origin, this seems to be the prevailing implicit definition of "pagan" when speaking to most people, especially with connotations of Popular Wicca or "Wiccanate paganism".
I don't typically self-identify as "pagan" except when it's just easiest to (I'm always surprised at how few people can actually figure out what the word "polytheist" means, even if they've never encountered it before) or occasionally when identifying myself with people or figures that are more "generally pagan / neopagan" rather than explicitly specific to my religion (Hellenic polytheism). It's not my first choice because of a lot of the aforementioned connotations that I simply don't identify with: My spirituality is very urban, I'm not Wiccan, I don't find it a very powerful word to "reclaim" from a status of slur --but I use it when I prefer to avoid lengthy educative speeches at people who really don't care to learn the finer nuances of language.
A3:
I don't often find people who especially disagree, because like I said, I keep the definition flexible, depending on who I'm talking to, and I find most people who self-identify as "pagan" understand it to be an umbrella term similar to the anthropological definition. Once I found myself in a surreal conversation with some-one who was very insistent that "pagan means nature-worshipping" and simply would not stand for any-one who "found [their] Goddess Forms in a concrete space" to refer to oneself as "pagan" (nor would she apparently allow for said person to be male and thus lack any "Goddess forms", whatever that might be)... people can be really weird, let me tell you, Internet.
-
I also recognise the ancient Latin "paganus", meaning (roughly) "country-dweller", and so this can imply a rural or rustic spirituality, id est "nature religions" --in spite of most people simply not knowing the Latin origin, this seems to be the prevailing implicit definition of "pagan" when speaking to most people, especially with connotations of Popular Wicca or "Wiccanate paganism".
From what I've been able to glean from various sources is that "paganus" was the Roman equivalent of "redneck." Not quite as benign as "country-dweller." :D Kinda funny it was an "insult" even then. (Assuming I'm not completely talking out of my arse.)
-
I also recognise the ancient Latin "paganus", meaning (roughly) "country-dweller", and so this can imply a rural or rustic spirituality, id est "nature religions" --in spite of most people simply not knowing the Latin origin, this seems to be the prevailing implicit definition of "pagan" when speaking to most people, especially with connotations of Popular Wicca or "Wiccanate paganism".
From what I've been able to glean from various sources is that "paganus" was the Roman equivalent of "redneck." Not quite as benign as "country-dweller." :D Kinda funny it was an "insult" even then. (Assuming I'm not completely talking out of my arse.)
I can never get a straight answer from any-one on the exact ancient connotations of "paganus", and I'm not familiar enough with the ancient sources using it to get a better idea for myself. The best I can tell, it was likely a relatively benign term, up to a certain point in ancient history, after which it became nastier, but like I said, I'm not familiar-enough with those sources to say for certain. Even so, in modern English, "redneck" has very specific, namely rural connotations toward the addressee, so even if that is absolutely the most-accurate translation, as I said, my own spirituality if very urban, so that's not an appropriate term for one like myself to reclaim and empower.
-
Oh trust me, Young.... you do not have to be rural to be a redneck!
-
Oh trust me, Young.... you do not have to be rural to be a redneck!
Except that people unfamiliar with how you use it, especially those who don't speak English as a first language are going to find that it's commonly defined to have those connotations (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/redneck?r=75&src=ref&ch=dic), thus enforcing those connotations. Furthermore, I can probably very easily find white people who'll say "you don't have to be black to be a n-----" (I've actually met people who've said that), but that doesn't make it OK for myself (being white), for example, to adopt that slur in reclaimation. I cannot meaningfully empower a word when I'm not among the people it was designed to disempower. Yes, the history of the word "pagan" as a slur clearly shows that it's evolved from "paganus" to be more-inclusive, but that doesn't change the fact that a majority of people, including self-identified pagans, have this mental image of "pagans" who not only take a very spiritual approach to nature, but explicitly celebrate it, often ignoring or simply being ignorant of any spirituality to the cities. Even Urban Primitive by Raven Kaldera and Tannin Schwartzstein, one of only two currently in-print book about urban pagan spirituality, has a very clear and unapologetic rural bias in its pages (the other being Christopher Penczak's City Magick, but I've never read it; Patricia Telesco's The Urban Pagan has been out-of-print for years, and I don't have a copy to reference). How easy is it to find on-line guides to "pagan camping", but pretty impossible to find a guide to "pagan couch-surfing" or "pagan squatting" --the pagan community just assumes that everybody who does or may identify with it is going to welcome the rural and rustic spirituality, and so it ignores or outright rejects the urban, making it a super-special niche topic for anybody who might be interested.
Yeah, maybe I'm not helping the matter by pointing this all out (and I claim a cookie the first time anybody attempts to accuse me of "dwelling on it" -LOL), but it's a very real thing I have to live with: The community of self-identified pagans has not designed itself for people like me, and any time I try to make a corner for myself and others like me, I feel like I'm fighting an uphill battle. There's a very real historical and etymological basis for this rural bias, and that's fine, but at the end of the day, I still feel like if I'm going to empower a formerly pejorative term for my own purposes, it should be the Latin equivalent of "city-slicker" rather than "hillbilly". That doesn't mean I don't feel some solidarity with the pagan community, especially those with whom I share practises and worship the same gods --but I always only feel "pagan, but only just barely".
-
I'm curious what the connotation of pagan is within the pagan community in your view. I ask because I'm fairly new to the whole thing, have only attended one function that could be considered pagan but was sort of a special subgroup and I live in California. From comparing the people at the function to the ones I've met online and others locally that I suspect are pagans, there seems to quite a variety, though the no. Cal pagans do seem to have their own flavor. I'm thinking the connotation the word has could largely be a function of where one resides and the types of pagan social events one has attended.
-
I'm curious what the connotation of pagan is within the pagan community in your view. I ask because I'm fairly new to the whole thing, have only attended one function that could be considered pagan but was sort of a special subgroup and I live in California. From comparing the people at the function to the ones I've met online and others locally that I suspect are pagans, there seems to quite a variety, though the no. Cal pagans do seem to have their own flavor. I'm thinking the connotation the word has could largely be a function of where one resides and the types of pagan social events one has attended.
Well, to find the pagan-cultural connotations of the word, just look at the aesthetics of this site, for starters! LOL All green, and photos of forestry.... A Google Image search will turn up some pentagrams, pics of runestones... and then fanciful paintings of Stonehenge rituals surrounded by trees (https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTm_AenAb9Ju9j1HQgqtSPfVVKDZGtIZoqIb0JUns21cuw7y41H5Q), that Waterhouse painting of the witch in the woods (https://encrypted-tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSXjZNE8eKYXp4p1Yj8JtruRfIkaPp0SmNM9qDBAVZmMUGKcBGR), various "Green Men", photos of people in modern woodland ritual....
My spirituality is one that can sense the nymphai playing in subway tunnels, one that sees Pan in every Skid Row (http://ofthespiae.hellenistai.com/2008/11/03/urban-pan/). These images of woodland rituals and romanticising the woodlands really don't speak to me on a spiritual level --if this is what the Pagan community says represents the community, then I don't see my spirituality represented.
-
I am cleaning this thread up. If you have posts that have been modified or deleted, it is because they were unrelated to the OP questions.
-
I'd say the connotations of pagan being hippie earthmuffins probably fits quite well here where I am. But many people are like that here where I live whether or not they are pagan. I do think when I learned about paganism being composed of earth-based religions, I did expect a lot of nature lovers and was surprised to learn many of those I met online were not as nature-loving or hippie-ish or green as I expected them to be. I also found a lot of hard to read websites with black backgrounds, moons and gothic fairy art, for the most part interspersed with more Celtic looking ones, none of which really appealed to me. I attended one local event as I mentioned and boy, did I feel like I stood out like a sore thumb. It was difficult as I was stuck with these people for three days in the rain and cold. But, in the end, they were OK. I can't say I've ever met a more cheerful or accepting bunch. No one snickered at my lack of organic hemp elven clothing or pierced nose or the fact that I'm not on a gluten-free diet and all were openly warm to me. It sounds like, and forgive me if I am making assumptions I should not, that maybe you've been rejected or ridiculed by some not-so-nice pagans and I feel badly if that has been the case. Personally, I still don't feel like I fit in with any spiritual group in particular but at this point, I'm OK with it. I do my own thing and I come here for a sense a community and I do get quite a lot out of it. I think there's a fairly diverse set of beliefs represented here.
-
I'd say the connotations of pagan being hippie earthmuffins probably fits quite well here where I am. But many people are like that here where I live whether or not they are pagan. I do think when I learned about paganism being composed of earth-based religions, I did expect a lot of nature lovers and was surprised to learn many of those I met online were not as nature-loving or hippie-ish or green as I expected them to be. I also found a lot of hard to read websites with black backgrounds, moons and gothic fairy art, for the most part interspersed with more Celtic looking ones, none of which really appealed to me. I attended one local event as I mentioned and boy, did I feel like I stood out like a sore thumb. It was difficult as I was stuck with these people for three days in the rain and cold. But, in the end, they were OK. I can't say I've ever met a more cheerful or accepting bunch. No one snickered at my lack of organic hemp elven clothing or pierced nose or the fact that I'm not on a gluten-free diet and all were openly warm to me. It sounds like, and forgive me if I am making assumptions I should not, that maybe you've been rejected or ridiculed by some not-so-nice pagans and I feel badly if that has been the case. Personally, I still don't feel like I fit in with any spiritual group in particular but at this point, I'm OK with it. I do my own thing and I come here for a sense a community and I do get quite a lot out of it. I think there's a fairly diverse set of beliefs represented here.
Quite the contrary: Most of the self-proclaimed "tree-hugging dirt-worshippers" I know (especially locally) are some of the kindest, warmest people I've met, who typically make every effort to be as accommodating to others as possible. I just don't have anything really in common with them. I don't enjoy camping, and I don't really get a welcoming spiritual sense from woodlands, no matter how nice and welcoming any co-ritualists are making themselves. They don't see anything spiritual and divine about subway tunnels or urban loading-dock alleyways. Nice people, we just don't have anything in common, and I'm OK with that.
Granted, I also have a deeply "mystic" sort of spirituality, and I tend to be deeply uncomfortable with going through the motions of group rituals that don't share some meaningful commonality with my own practises just for the sake of community outreach --and I'm also OK with that; it just means I'm not going to go dance in the woods with a bunch of people just because they're nice and we all happen to be "pagan" by anthropological definitions. At the same time, it's danged-near impossible for me to escape the cultural connotations of the word "pagan" with "nature-based / rural spirituality" within the pagan community; within the pagan community, it's a self-reinforcing stereotype for the majority of people. That sort of self-reinforcement doesn't create diversity, but instead it creates sub-communities, given enough time and enough people who just naturally go against the grain --and I'm OK with that.
-
To return to the original thread, the learned etymology site "Take Our Word For It", has this on Pagan:
The literal meaning of the Latin paganus is "villager" or "rustic" (from pagus "rural district"). It was once thought its meaning of "non-Christian, heathen" developed because the ancient idolatrous religion persisted in the rural districts long after Christianity had been generally accepted in the towns and cities of the Roman Empire. While it may indeed be true that the older Roman religions lingered in remote hamlets, this is not the word's true origin.
A secondary meaning of paganus was "civilian". Early Christian authors such as Tertullian and Saint Augustine called themselves milites Christi, "soldiers of Christ". It therefore became natural to refer to those who were neither Christian nor Jewish as pagani, "civilians".
http://www.takeourword.com/TOW143half/page2.html
peace,
ES