Really burns my biscuits...

I see so very many Pagans who are surprisingly ignorant of what I consider basic parts of Paganism. I consider basic knowledge about multiple pantheons, their traditions, their deities, to be necessary for anyone who calls themselves Pagan. I also see many Pagans out there who have no knowledge of astrology, Qabala, Tarot or any other divination system. In my opinion, and in the traditions in which I am initiated, knowledge of magic is considered extremely important to one's religious path. If you can't do any magic, are you really a Pagan? Even if you specialize in theurgy rather than thaumaturgy, knowledge of magic is vitally important.

This came as part of an email from a list that I'm on. Pagan, non-Hellenic, mostly local-based. The poster is pretty well-known in the Northeast (and probably, by this point in most of the rest of the country, at least to some people)and from all that I know, she's generally considered to be well-respected. I've met her a few times, but can't say too much more to that than "she was a very nice person to chat with."

I'm trying to come up with an intelligent response to this because my gawds, it pisses me off and I have a hard time just letting stuff like this go by without batting an eyelash.

Now, please keep in mind that I do not advocate the idea of not learning.

HOWEVER! That doesn't mean that any of these particular realms of knowledge are REQUIRED to be pagan.

Can anyone tell me WHY one needs to have multi-pantheoinc and traditional knowledge to be pagan?

Can anyone tell me WHY one needs to know Qabala, astrology or tarot to be pagan?

Can anyone tell me WHY one might not truly be pagan if one doesn't practice magic?

In discussing this, chironcentaur remarked that more and more, she distances herself from the label pagan, here's just another reason why (I tend to agree. It is a rare thing tha tI call myself "pagan") When you get right down to it, though, it's nearly impossible to completely avoid the label. So...I'm pagan.

So why is it that I should try to learn about a mystical system that I could never learn in its proper context because I am not a Jewish man of forty years of age or older? (To my Jewish friends, if I'm incorrect about my understanding of that as requisite to study Qabala, please do correct me)

Why must I learn astrology? I've done well so far without it (Though if others want to study and write about it, that' fine too. I'm more than happy to laugh my ass off at Stella Hyde's Darkside Zodiac books.)

Yeah, I work with tarot. On a very sporadic basis. I can't see my life being much different if I didn't. I can't see my religion being much different if I didn't either.

Why am I required to work magic to be pagan?

If it's so important in the systems to which she is initiated, fine. The folks who work in those systems are perfectly within their rights to say that certain practices are required.

But fer crying out loud lady, who died and left you with the right to determine what is necessary to call oneself "pagan" or not? Don't try to herd us all into the same barn and tell us we all need to have the same knowledge to qualify.

(no subject)

I think it's reasonably intelligent and decently thought-out. I behaved myself. I didn't use any profanities. I didn't hurl accusations. Most importantly, I didn't say it "burns my biscuits".

First of all, I'd like to be clear- I do not at all advocate the idea of not learning. I am also not intending to be rude or inflammatory. But I have a very hard time with broad-brushing when it comes to pagans in general.

Admittedly, I rarely use the word "pagan" to describe myself, being that it's such a general, non-descriptive word that is used as broadly at times to describe everything outside of Abrahamic religions. But let's face it, it's pretty much impossible to avoid altogether. So...I'm pagan. I resent the idea that I must have knowledge of certain subjects if I am to call myself "pagan".

1. Why is multipantheonic and traditional knowledge necessary to call oneself pagan? If one is entirely devoted to say, the Norse gods, and following Norse traditions, how are they less of a pagan if they do not have knowledge of Gaulish or Egyptian or Roman deities? How would this diminish their devotion to their deities and traditions?

I have to admit that were it not for my involvement with Cedarlight Grove, Ar nDraiocht Fein, and ADF's Dedicants Program and clergy training, my knowledge of pantheons and traditions other than Greek (and some Roman and a dab of Etruscan, mostly by simple association and interest in things Italian, being of Sicilian descent) would probably be next to nonexistent- as it is, my knowledge of other pantheons and traditions is below what I think of as basic, but I'm working on it. I know some about Aztec mythology and religion thanks to a class I took in college, and little bits of general knowledge picked up here and there. Would I be less pagan? Why?

2. Why is divination necessary to call oneself pagan? I work with Tarot. On an extremely sporadic basis. Until the last few weeks, it's had little to no appreciable impact on my religion, and even what it's had recently, I would have figured out in other ways had I just left the deck in its box. I'm learning about runes and the Greek alphabet oracle. Largely because I'm interested. Partially also because I'm required to for ADF's clergy training. At this point in the game though, if it weren't for that requirement, if I dropped them tomorrow and never picked them up again, I don't really see a huge detrimental effect on my religion taking place. But again I ask, would that make me less pagan? Why?

3. Qabala? Why would it be such a big deal that I not learn about a system that I would be prohibited from learning about in its proper context on the basis that I am not a Jewish man of forty years or older? Astrology? Its main contribution to my life is that I get a great deal of joy and amusement from reading Stella Hyde's Darkside Zodiac books.

4. Why is it so necessary to perform magic to call oneself pagan. Many Hellenics consider working magic to be impious. Are they less pagan for that?

Can one not practice a purely devotional religion to the gods of a single culture, leaving out magic and divination if one does not feel a desire or need to include them? Or is that somehow just not pagan? Why?

I have no problem with the idea that particular traditions and systems require one to have specific knowledge- it would be less than productive of them not to. And I fully support and advocate people having the opportunity to learn that which they want to learn. But to say that one should have any of this knowledge in order to apply a term so broad and nebulous as "pagan" to themselves is much like someone telling me that I have to know how to change a diaper, make a casserole and baste a hem to call myself a woman.

Now, if you have a different definition of pagan, I would be very interested to see that and consider your "necessities" in that context.

Renee

--
Renee Rhodes
Lore Master, Cedarlight Grove, Baltimore MD
Arkon Polemarkhos, ADF Hellenic Kin

The difficulty with this conversation is that it's very different from most of the ones I've had of late. Which, as I explained, have mostly been with trees.

(no subject)

Okay, so...I got this response from someone else on the list- a grove member who has relocated elsewhere in the country. This is the only response so far. This one is going to take me a bit to come up with a good response to...most particularly the last paragraph.
( The entire response here. )

...and here's mine to her:

>>It seems to me [name] stated quite clearly that she was just speaking her personal opinion.

[name]-

It's quite clear that the word "opinion" was used. And the statements made really could not be reasonably presented in any other way. However, the paragraph did not read to me as an opinion. But even that it may be an opinion, I feel the need to question it when someone states that a, b and c are necessary to be pagan, especially considering that it is only a very contemporary thing that most pagans study any of these subjects at all.

She also spoke in reference to the various systems of which she has studied:

"In my opinion, and in the traditions in which I am initiated, knowledge of magic is considered extremely important to one's religious path. If you can't do any magic, are you really a Pagan? Even if you specialize in theurgy rather than thaumaturgy, knowledge of magic is vitally important."

This certainly seems to be much more than personal opinion. I don't know how many traditions she speaks of, it doesn't really matter. whether it was intentional or not, these words carry the weight of entire traditions questioning whether or not one is actually pagan if one does not practice magic. Again, not whether one is part of their particular system or not, but whether one is *pagan*


>>One of the nice things about being Pagan is that many pagans advocate opening yourself up to learn more about the nature(s) of the universe and our spiritual relationship with it than one "right" approach. For some this means books, for some this means finding teachers, for some this means various forms of personal discipline and practice.

For many, yes, this means no one "right" approach. For many others though, there IS one "right" approach. I am one of those people. I tried the "many different ways" approach and got nothing out of it. If others get what they need from it, good for them. Doesn't mean everyone does though. Also, it doesn't mean that just because someone has found one way that works for them, that one has somehow closed off to all other ways. But that's another tangent for another day.


>>One thing I DO feel strongly about is that I will not study under the tutelage of anyone who feels it's "my way or the highway." Personally, I don't learn well in an environment where I am not allowed to exercise my right to skepticism.

I agree here.

>>I think that a lot of [name] biases come from playing a leadership role in pagan society, and I tend to agree with her.

Agree on which points- that her given criteria is necessary in order to call oneself pagan? Or something else that I've missed or was never mentioned? In either case, leader or not, I don't think it's anyone's business to tell someone what they need to know in order to be pagan. As soon as you start getting into any sort of defined practice, it's a whole other ball of wax.

>>Greater and broader substantive knowledge allows the pagan community to be more creative and more tolerant. The history of religious intolerance and warfare in general leads me to believe that ignorance and fear drive wedges between folk.

Not sure what religious tolerance, warfare and fear have to do with this discussion other than maybe I could say that I don't see it as much of a display of religious tolerance to question if someone is pagan or not on the basis of whether they practice magic or not. But I think that's grasping at straws.

But speaking of ignorance, she said ... "I see so very many Pagans who are surprisingly ignorant of what I consider basic parts of Paganism."

People can't even agree on a definition of what "pagan" is, at best, we generally settle for some things that we can agree that it isn't. If we can't determine for sure what it is, how can there even be criteria for what is part of paganism or no? Am I really so ignorant and uneducated because I have little to no knowledge of certain subjects that she considers "basic" parts of paganism? I almost hate myself for invoking the word, and if you ever see me doing this again, it'll probably be a long way down the road, but to me this comes across as a very elitist point of view.

Let's put it this way: In my opinion, I have to wonder if one is truly pagan if one does not at least have a cursory familiarity with the Athenian festival calendar, or does not have basic knowledge of the Lymrian oracle. Or can't correctly spell and pronounce the names of at least ten Aztec deities. (For the record, yes, these are things that I know.)

How does that fly?

Renee