(no subject)
Feb. 18th, 2008 03:51 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
badstarOkay, 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.
It seems to me[name] stated quite clearly that she was just speaking her personal opinion. 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.
As for myself, I don't practice "magic" much in that I don't feel much inclined to "push the river" even if I thought I could. Which is not to say I don't study magic. I do work persuasively with magical elements, for healing, for personal guidance, for inspiration, sometimes just to remind myself that I am not alone. And, it doesn't hurt my faith to learn more about what others believe, or study, or how others practice. Study merely gives me tools to use or choose to lay aside in my personal practice. And it helps me to
understand my roots as a fellow human, and to have a clue about lexicons which might be unfamiliar to me.
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 think that a lot of [name] biases come from playing a leadership role in pagan society, and I tend to agree with her. 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.
...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
It seems to me[name] stated quite clearly that she was just speaking her personal opinion. 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.
As for myself, I don't practice "magic" much in that I don't feel much inclined to "push the river" even if I thought I could. Which is not to say I don't study magic. I do work persuasively with magical elements, for healing, for personal guidance, for inspiration, sometimes just to remind myself that I am not alone. And, it doesn't hurt my faith to learn more about what others believe, or study, or how others practice. Study merely gives me tools to use or choose to lay aside in my personal practice. And it helps me to
understand my roots as a fellow human, and to have a clue about lexicons which might be unfamiliar to me.
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 think that a lot of [name] biases come from playing a leadership role in pagan society, and I tend to agree with her. 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.
...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
