The word Pagan

[Callisto]

Well, I obviously agree. So how is there a "right" term, here?

In regards to modern reconstructionisms, the right term is considered to be polytheists and not pagan. In order to discuss the ancient practices they are reconstructing, words like "religion" and "polytheism" embody the concepts associated with those ancient ways. I didn't suggest some kind of official labeling of ancient practices.

I would venture to guees that pretty much the exact same people despise both pagans and polytheists, and not because of terminology.

"Haters are gonna hate," this is true. However, in terms of the overall vernacular, "polytheist" has not carried the same baggage in mainstream society that "pagan" continues to do so.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

In regards to modern reconstructionisms, the right term is considered to be polytheists and not pagan.

Considered by whom? I call myself both polytheist and pagan and woe betide anyone who tries to stop me. You seem very concerned with correcting other people's language, Callisto. You're in danger of being taken for a school-teacher!

 

[ENTP Logician]

Considered by whom? I call myself both polytheist and pagan and woe betide anyone who tries to stop me. You seem very concerned with correcting other people's language, Callisto. You're in danger of being taken for a school-teacher!

Can that not be said of anyone who corrects for example calling a male Wiccan a warlock or other common misconceptions other people have about different titles in neo-pagan, pagan, and re-constructional pagan religions?

 

[Politesse]

I would say yes. All of this terminology is new, and much in flux. Putting too much weight on this title or that is not the path to wisdom.

 

[ENTP Logician]

I would say yes. All of this terminology is new, and much in flux. Putting too much weight on this title or that is not the path to wisdom.

Agreed.

Labels are simply tools to better convey complex ideas in less words.

 

[Callisto]

Considered by whom? I call myself both polytheist and pagan and woe betide anyone who tries to stop me. You seem very concerned with correcting other people's language, Callisto. You're in danger of being taken for a school-teacher!

"considered by whom"? I plainly stated as to who holds that view.

I don't know where you get the idea that I'm attempting to dictate to anyone. I am, however, pointing out what IS a common convention among Reconstructionists which has NO BEARING AT ALL on any other category of practitioner. I don't understand this pervasive mentality among Neopagans that everything has to be internalized and deemed a personal value assessment about them.

Feel free to highlight any comment of mine wherein I dictated to anyone else, including you, as to what they can or cannot do.

 

[Cassandra]

I do not see the problem with the term Pagan.

My view:

For one, people tend to forget that names are not something people give to themselves, but mostly receive from others. If you look at the original meaning of names created by people themselves, then the name for a people often originally meant: "the people" .

It is foreigners/outsiders who often create names to distinguish peoples from others or their own. That is even so with first names and surnames. Parents give a name to children and often they were given the names of ancestors, which is in fact a very important spiritual practice of which the meaning is greatly lost. Surnames often mean something like son of x (John-son, Mac-Donald, O-reilly, Janis-kova), or coming from there (Wastington, Von Brandenburg). Often they are descriptions given by others (Short, Long, Keen, etc). So I think it is rather futile for Pagans to insist to create a new name of their own for "Pagans".

More important "Pagan" is not a name for a group with a common identity, it is simply an English container label, a category name. Nothing more an nothing less. It is only a category word for all the various Nature based religions before the Abrahamist brainwash. Pagan is rather a good descriptive word as these religions kept on being practiced on the countryside for centuries and it reflects the strong connection with Nature.

The word "Pagan" is no more specific than cars, peoples, countries etc. It is really a waste of time to start discussing on this. Nor do I feel it as negative. Maybe it was in ancient days to city-dwellers. If people in urban areas want to look down on country dwellers I have no problem with that. You can not change that anyway. Let them have highly philosophical book religions and theorize about that. I am not envious of that.

 

[Aštra’el]

There are many terms that one might use to describe my spiritual-religious system; "pagan" is one of many. It is also probably the most accurate. It doesn't matter to me who might disapprove and why.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

In regards to modern reconstructionisms, the right term is considered to be polytheists and not pagan. In order to discuss the ancient practices they are reconstructing, words like "religion" and "polytheism" embody the concepts associated with those ancient ways. I didn't suggest some kind of official labeling of ancient practices.

"Haters are gonna hate," this is true. However, in terms of the overall vernacular, "polytheist" has not carried the same baggage in mainstream society that "pagan" continues to do so.

Unless I'm mistaken, paganus was used by the ancients to refer to worshippers of the Old Gods so it's descendant word 'pagan' is still appropriate by reconstructionist standards. As for "polytheist" not carrying the same baggage as "pagan"; two things:

1. That depends very much on who you ask and where they grew up. Pagans growing up in Muslim countries, for instance, will more than likely tell you calling someone a polytheist is a pretty derogatory term in the same way some people use 'pagan' (with a small p) in the West;
2. Why not use the term 'Pagan'? It has been used to deride those who keep the Old Gods for centuries, millennia, so let's take it back and use it for ourselves. We'll suck the poison out of the term in doing so, rendering it far less effective as an insult. Why shouldn't you use the term simply because you don't feel the ancients used it? Languages evolve and so do religious practices - neither are static. The sad thing about viewing it as an insult is that people who worship the Old Gods and eschew the term are still caught up in a Christian (or other Abrahamic) mindset that they're (presumably) trying to break free from. Giving the term a different definition can help people break out of that mental box.

 

[Quintessence]

Uh oh, @A Greased Scotsman - you're poking the bear! That schism between those who identify as Polytheist versus those who still identify as Pagans is a bit too tender to tread into this territory.

(though for the record, I generally agree with you - as I watched in fascination the dialogues that happened a few years back, I didn't get it either in that I felt it was much hullabaloo about not much of importance)

 

[Callisto]

Unless I'm mistaken, paganus was used by the ancients to refer to worshippers of the Old Gods so it's descendant word 'pagan' is still appropriate by reconstructionist standards. As for "polytheist" not carrying the same baggage as "pagan"; two things:

1. That depends very much on who you ask and where they grew up. Pagans growing up in Muslim countries, for instance, will more than likely tell you calling someone a polytheist is a pretty derogatory term in the same way some people use 'pagan' (with a small p) in the West;
2. Why not use the term 'Pagan'? It has been used to deride those who keep the Old Gods for centuries, millennia, so let's take it back and use it for ourselves. We'll suck the poison out of the term in doing so, rendering it far less effective as an insult. Why shouldn't you use the term simply because you don't feel the ancients used it? Languages evolve and so do religious practices - neither are static. The sad thing about viewing it as an insult is that people who worship the Old Gods and eschew the term are still caught up in a Christian (or other Abrahamic) mindset that they're (presumably) trying to break free from. Giving the term a different definition can help people break out of that mental box.

Ancient polytheists didn't self-identify as "pagan" it was a term applied to them. Just like early Christians had atheos (atheist) applied to them because they denied other gods. Ancient polytheists didn't have a need to label their interactions with the gods as "religion" or to label whether they were polytheists. The point is why the term is preferable among Reconstructionists for the reasons previously cited.

Most individuals of indigenous/cultural practices don't self-identify as either "polytheist" or "pagan". The discussion here is in regards to revivalists/reconstructionists practices found among Neopaganism.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

"Haters are gonna hate," this is true. However, in terms of the overall vernacular, "polytheist" has not carried the same baggage in mainstream society that "pagan" continues to do so.

Again, that all depends on whom you ask and what society or culture they grew up in.

 

[Callisto]

Again, that all depends on whom you ask and what society or culture they grew up in.

Again, the discussion pertains to why the word is used and preferable among Reconstructionists.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Again, the discussion pertains to why the word is used and preferable among Reconstructionists.

I don't see how that counters what I said. The preference of recons to identify using the term 'polytheist' over the term 'Pagan' because the former doesn't have baggage that the latter does doesn't make sense in light of the fact that "polytheist" does actually have at least as much baggage as 'Pagan' - especially since the two have been all but synonymous for a long time.

 

[Quintessence]

Lol... if you folks really want to keep going with this, it probably needs to be taken to Same Faith Debates.

Gosh knows we could argue until we're blue in the face about terminology. And at least it'd be an incredibly refreshing change from the beaten-to-a-bloody-dead-pulp arguments about defining atheism that cycle here at least every month or so. Urgh. *twitches*

 

[Politesse]

Lol... if you folks really want to keep going with this, it probably needs to be taken to Same Faith Debates.

Gosh knows we could argue until we're blue in the face about terminology. And at least it'd be an incredibly refreshing change from the beaten-to-a-bloody-dead-pulp arguments about defining atheism that cycle here at least every month or so. Urgh. *twitches*

Ah, but what about these Atheist Pagans I keep hearing about?

 

[Quintessence]

Ah, but what about these Atheist Pagans I keep hearing about?

Oh gawds. We could debate that one too. I'd represent the "I really don't agree with this being a thing and consider it an oxymoron just like monotheistic Pagan, but I can't really stop people from identifying that way" camp.

 

[Callisto]

I don't see how that counters what I said. The preference of recons to identify using the term 'polytheist' over the term 'Pagan' because the former doesn't have baggage that the latter does doesn't make sense in light of the fact that "polytheist" does actually have at least as much baggage as 'Pagan' - especially since the two have been all but synonymous for a long time.

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.

 

[Callisto]

Lol... if you folks really want to keep going with this, it probably needs to be taken to Same Faith Debates.

Gosh knows we could argue until we're blue in the face about terminology. And at least it'd be an incredibly refreshing change from the beaten-to-a-bloody-dead-pulp arguments about defining atheism that cycle here at least every month or so. Urgh. *twitches*

It's not my intent to argue. I'm simply stating that while something might be factually correct, it's not necessarily going to be relevant to the particular discussion. Some religions do not self-identify using words like "pagan," or "polytheist," that's not refuted. It's simply not what was being addressed.

 

[Callisto]

Ah, but what about these Atheist Pagans I keep hearing about?

What about them?