The word Pagan

[Politesse]

What about them?

Twas a joke.

 

[Politesse]

It's extraneous, there are any number of things one can point to that carry baggage in one culture or another. That doesn't impact how it's used in the particular group being discussed. In Western culture, "polytheism" does not carry the same baggage as "pagan". In mainstream culture, until recently "polytheism" was primarily used in academic circles in a factual nature whereas "pagan" has been the mainstream vernacular as a pejorative. "Polytheism" isn't commonly used as a slur despite it and "pagan" sharing a common of non-Abrahamic. When bigots opt for a slur, the word is "pagan". When alt right conservative politicians and evangelicals lash out, they're not using "polytheist", they're using "pagan." Anyone who doesn't adhere to their views is pagan, even atheists.

I've never heard a bigot refer to anyone as a Pagan; usually they go straight for "Satanist" and decry anything else as political correctness. But perhaps it's a West Coast thing.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

I've never heard a bigot refer to anyone as a Pagan; usually they go straight for "Satanist" and decry anything else as political correctness. But perhaps it's a West Coast thing.

Televangelists like John Hagee have referenced Paganism (with a small 'p' but **** him, I'm capitalising) before in their Nuremberg sermons.

EDIT: Post number 3000!!!!

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

It's extraneous, there are any number of things one can point to that carry baggage in one culture or another. That doesn't impact how it's used in the particular group being discussed. In Western culture, "polytheism" does not carry the same baggage as "pagan". In mainstream culture, until recently "polytheism" was primarily used in academic circles in a factual nature whereas "pagan" has been the mainstream vernacular as a pejorative. "Polytheism" isn't commonly used as a slur despite it and "pagan" sharing a common of non-Abrahamic. When bigots opt for a slur, the word is "pagan". When alt right conservative politicians and evangelicals lash out, they're not using "polytheist", they're using "pagan." Anyone who doesn't adhere to their views is pagan, even atheists.

That's a good point. You've convinced me!

A separate but related question I have would be: Why do recons insist on referring to themselves using or avoiding terms they allow other people to define? Why not define it themselves?

 

[Politesse]

Or just use Greek. I've always been a bit puzzled on that point.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

That's a good point. You've convinced me!

A separate but related question I have would be: Why do recons insist on referring to themselves using or avoiding terms they allow other people to define? Why not define it themselves?

I do wonder, kinda related to that question. Why don't Pagans refer to themselves as the name for the culture practice they take up?

Instead of calling oneself a Pagan, say Astru, Kemetist , Italo-Roman, Slavic, etc. Maybe put modern with it.

 

[Quintessence]

I do wonder, kinda related to that question. Why don't Pagans refer to themselves as the name for the culture practice they take up?

This isn't applicable for many contemporary Pagans. There is no reason (aside from personal preference) for contemporary Pagans to limit their sources of inspiration to one particular culture, thus many (probably most) of them do not.




At any rate... a small observation. It feels like the only reason "polytheist/polytheism" isn't used as a slur is because non-monotheistic theologies have been beaten so hard out of the public consciousness it doesn't even register on people's radars enough for them to use it as a slur. But if you watch how many Christians react to Trinitarianism being compared to polytheism, I'm skeptical that the term has any less of a nasty, slur-ridden subtext than "pagan" does in American culture...

 

[Callisto]

I've never heard a bigot refer to anyone as a Pagan; usually they go straight for "Satanist" and decry anything else as political correctness. But perhaps it's a West Coast thing.

I will read or lurk on conservative political and religious sites and one can often find calling anything they're against "pagan" - and most of the time it has absolutely nothing to do with actual paganism, ancient or modern. They regularly conflate secularism, liberalism, atheism, and activism with paganism. Two article examples, from 2013 and 2016 respectively:

“Where are the champions of Christ to save the nation from the pagan onslaught imposing homosexual marriage, .. death by abortion and red ink as far as the eye can see on America?,” ... Lane’s op-ed also attacks “the pagan media elite and pagan National Education Association,” writing:

Christians must be retrained to war for the Soul of America and quit believing the fabricated whopper of the “Separation of Church and State,” the lie repeated ad nauseum by the left and liberals to keep Christian America – the moral majority – from imposing moral government on pagan public schools, pagan higher learning and pagan media.


Political Evangelical Calls For ‘War’ Against ‘Pagan Onslaught Imposing Homosexual Marriage’

they even call each other "pagan" when they're sniping at each other,

"Signs suggest that a plurality of Iowa GOP voters have thrown their support behind Texas Sen. Ted Cruz. But this week, New York Times columnist David Brooks penned a blistering attack on Cruz as a hypocritical Christian who really preaches “pagan brutalism.” To Brooks, Cruz is a harsh, Pharisaical opportunist – Donald Trump with a more pious veneer."

NY Times Op-Ed, "The Brutalism of Ted Cruz"

 

[Callisto]

That's a good point. You've convinced me!

A separate but related question I have would be: Why do recons insist on referring to themselves using or avoiding terms they allow other people to define? Why not define it themselves?

Ideas have to be conveyed in some manner. Unless individuals are only talking among fellow practitioners, there is a need to use a word that others are likely able to understand. Among themselves, they don't need to call each other "polytheists" (or pagans). E.g., when I'm speaking with other Hellenics, we refer to ourselves as "Hellenics" or "Dodakatheists". Same for Egyptian Recons (Kemetism) or Roman (Religio Romana or Via Romana) or Lithuanian (Romuva), etc. When we're in a public forum like this one and we're needing to convey how our practices differ from those commonly associated with Neopaganism, "polytheism" is the preferred term. Of the words available in the English language, "polytheism" is the most technically correct. Of the many ways in which Recons & Neopagans can differ, notably Neopagans are not necessarily polytheists.

 

[Callisto]

Or just use Greek. I've always been a bit puzzled on that point.

Because not all polytheists are Hellenic or speak Greek. Even among those that are Hellenic, which Greek? Classical dialects? Modern? They're not the same. Rather, the language commonly used to communicate is English.

 

[Callisto]

I do wonder, kinda related to that question. Why don't Pagans refer to themselves as the name for the culture practice they take up?

Instead of calling oneself a Pagan, say Astru, Kemetist , Italo-Roman, Slavic, etc. Maybe put modern with it.

Most Neopagans are not practicing traditions associated with an ancient culture. The largest segment are Eclectics, and within that group most are engaged in some kind of wiccanized personal practice. Eclectics primarily focus on personal innovation and create their personal brand of religion by cherrypicking different bits from a wide range of sources. Sometimes that's inspiration and general concepts associated with ancient pre-Christian religions, but also New Age or even pop culture.

Whereas those who do practice some form of tradition, like Recons, do tend to identify as Kemetic, Hellenic, Celtic, Germanic, etc. As noted above, "polytheist" is employed in a public sense. Among each other, they identify by tradition.

 

[Politesse]

Because not all polytheists are Hellenic or speak Greek. Even among those that are Hellenic, which Greek? Classical dialects? Modern? They're not the same. Rather, the language commonly used to communicate is English.

Well, usually when one is trying to reconstruct a culture, language is involved. But I guess it's not really the culture you are interested in?

 

[GoodbyeDave]

Why don't Pagans refer to themselves as the name for the culture practice they take up? Instead of calling oneself a Pagan, say Astru, Kemetist , Italo-Roman, Slavic, etc.

As you see, I do.

But I think it's also important to also self-identify as a Pagan, because I want to emphasise that Paganism is a major religion. If you count Hindus (and many do), it's the second largest religion in the world; if you don't, the third. By linking together all Pagans, I'm emphasising that this is not some odd cult with a few followers.

If a Catholic and and a Protestant can both be called Christians, then a Hellene and a Shintoist can both be called Pagans. I can worship at a Shinto shrine, but a Catholic cannot take communion in an Anglican or Lutheran mass; when I was a boy, they couldn't even attend the service.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

I do wonder, kinda related to that question. Why don't Pagans refer to themselves as the name for the culture practice they take up?

Instead of calling oneself a Pagan, say Astru, Kemetist , Italo-Roman, Slavic, etc. Maybe put modern with it.

Plenty do this but as you'll probably be aware, there are plenty who don't limit themselves to a single culture so Kemetic-Slavo-Hellenic-Asatruar would be somewhat long-winded a moniker.

 

[Callisto]

Well, usually when one is trying to reconstruct a culture, language is involved. But I guess it's not really the culture you are interested in?

I’m not sure how you got to the conclusion that not speaking an ancient dialect amounts to disinterest in ancient culture. It gives the impression you’re not quite familiar with what Reconstructionism is about.

No one is attempting to reconstruct a culture. There's no intent to rebuild the Roman Republic or Classical Greece or Old Kingdom Egypt, etc. Ancient cultures are studied in order to better understand the worldview that existed, the purposes and functions of the religion, and to aid in reconciling the practice of them in the modern era. This does not equate historical reenactment. No one is going about their day, dropping kids off at school and headed to work dressed in chitons or shendyts or spjarrar. So why would they go about speaking different ancient dialects? Besides, these religions existed for thousands of years during which various stages of cultures and dialects formed.

Modern persons are a different people in a different society with a different world view. These practices are never going to be identical to the ancient practices, rather Reconstructionism is about reconciling the religions within terms of the modern world. Modern Christians do not practice in a way identical to early Christians. Nor do they go around dressed like ancient Israelites and most are not fluent in (or even possess a working knowledge of) Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, or Latin dialects.

Today, as in ancient times, not all worshipers speak the same language or belong to the same culture. Aset (Isis) was worshiped from Egypt to the British Isles. That didn’t mean natives of Britannia needed to become fluent in Demotic. Similarly, Christianity's expressed in different languages, then and now.

It can be helpful to have some knowledge of ancient dialects. However, unless one is an academic, it’s not that necessary. Many scholarly works cite ancient texts in their original language but it’s much more common today to include translations of those texts as well. If someone wants to learn Ionic Greek in order to read The Iliad or offer Homeric hymns in that language, that’s fine but it’s not necessary. But no, he’s not going to be worse off for doing so in English or whatever is his native language.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Plenty do this but as you'll probably be aware, there are plenty who don't limit themselves to a single culture so Kemetic-Slavo-Hellenic-Asatruar would be somewhat long-winded a moniker.

KSHA maybe?

 

[Politesse]

This:

No one is attempting to reconstruct a culture. There's no intent to rebuild the Roman Republic or Classical Greece or Old Kingdom Egypt, etc. Ancient cultures are studied in order to better understand the worldview that existed, the purposes and functions of the religion, and to aid in reconciling the practice of them in the modern era. This does not equate historical reenactment. No one is going about their day, dropping kids off at school and headed to work dressed in chitons or shendyts or spjarrar. So why would they go about speaking different ancient dialects? Besides, these religions existed for thousands of years during which various stages of cultures and dialects formed.

is exactly what I meant by

But I guess it's not really the culture you are interested in?

I'm quite clear that you have no interest in becoming Greek, or even seeming Greek. So I'm not sure why you think I'm confused? It is also a fact that there have been many projects over the years to recover culture, especially in post-colonial contexts, and that (given as my job freuently puts me in contact with people who are attemting to do exactly this) I'm more familiar with that use of the word reconstruction than its much more recent application to modern religious movements.

Language recovery isn't piecemeal, aesthetic, or optional from everyone's perspective. Many of my students, for instance, are trying to recover a pre-Spanish Mexican identity. And they do mean language. And culture. And social conventions, and political autonomy, and philosophy, and religion, etc etc. These things are not your goal; reconstruction, for you, is only about specific ideas and symbols that you wish to pull out of antiquity and put in an overtly new context. In short, you are an inheritor of the Renaissance, not the the cultural revitalization movement. And that's why you find the idea of recovering language or clothing or gender roles risible rather than tempting.

 

[Callisto]

It's clear in your mind as to whatever it is you consider "becoming Greek" to mean. However, it doesn't seem to mesh with what it means to be Hellenismos (to be Greek). That's why it appears that you might be confused.

For my part, I'm using "reconstructionsm"as it refers specifically to the methodology employed by polytheists, which is what is relevant to discussing the religions that are identified as Polytheistic Reconstructionism.

You're incorrect as to what is my goal, or that typical of Polytheistic Recons. It's not simply "specific ideas and symbols," rather it relates to establishing a way of life that was part of being OF these religions - the purpose and function of these religions which were integral to everyday life.