That Troublesome Term…Again
by Ruby Sara
Greetings, friends and beloveds, from the STILL EFFING COLD streets of the fiercely wild urban midwest. I’ll admit to you, I’m peeved by this lingering cold here. Of course, I won’t have to put up with it for much longer, which is both a happy and sad thing. I refer to the fact that in just a couple short months, the intrepid spouse and I will be packing up our not-so-meager collection of possessions (oh…books…oh…moving books…oh…oh hell) and heading for the gorgeous mountain country of Tennessee, where I will be pursuing a second masters degree in Storytelling. I am tremendously excited about this news, y’all, yes indeed, but also naturally sad to be leaving the friends I’ve made here. But more about that later.
To the business at hand.
I’ve been busy as a badger these last few weeks and it’s not really getting any less busy. I said I’d be on PG sabbatical until the end of July, and so I shall be, with possibly larger changes then…still to be determined. But deep within the busy-ness, I’ve also been busy a-pondering, and much of those ponderings have to do with who I am and what I do and who I’d like to be…you know, the business of being human. And seeing as how it’s one of my favorite subjects, I’ve been musing rather a lot on the matter of “Paganism,” and my place in it. It should come as no surprise to those reading PG for the last couple years that I’ve been squirrelly with the term, wrestling with its efficacy, attempting to eschew it from my vocabulary, and proffering terms that better suit me. Which is why it’s always interesting to me to see that others have or are asking the same questions, which inevitably cause some kerfuffling. For example, Star Foster at Patheos has made a call for folks to weigh in on the subject based on a post by Drew Jacob about his own rejection of the term for various reasons.
…And I find that I have a couple of thoughts about it, helter-skelter and badger-chewed as they may be. So you know, taking a little sabbatical from a sabbatical can’t be a bad thing. The badgers have promised to at least chew at a slower tempo than normal for a few minutes. Generous creatures.
So…the first thing is that I think the whole conversation represented by the two links above is pretty much precisely why I think the term is a problem. The minute someone claims to either be or not-be pagan, they are asserting a definition for it. A definition which is then *immediately* contradicted by several people at once, saying that the definition is either too limited or too broad, followed very closely by the people asserting that labels are a. silly, b. useless, c. so five-minutes-ago.
Of course, my belief is this: labels are important. They are important because they create communities. In the realm of the individual, labels may not be that important. If, alone, I want to call myself a Psyluminous Kerflammawaffle (and…I think I do), then I get to be the sole arbiter of what defines that term, and it doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks. But, if I want to use an identifyer that links me to a group of people, that has use. People can band together under that label and work for the rights of that group if the group is well-defined (not fixed or immutable, just well-defined…as in, the majority of people in that group generally agree on the characteristics/stories of that group). I can have a conversation with a person outside the group about our similarities and differences. The group can work together under a common vision/story to organize services and events for the group or to serve others. These identifying labels assist in making that possible. If I didn’t believe labels were important, ultimately all this fusting over whether to remain Pagan or whether the term is useful is admittedly stupid. But, I think it is important. And I think it’s important because I think communities are important. Insert rant about hyper-individualism (where, interestingly, I make an argument for a general Pagan culture in order to criticize it, before I asserted that there wasn’t one, and am now back to believing there is one…ah, the radical pendulum of thinkiness…I think Walt Whitman had something to say about that).
There are real instances where the term “Pagan” certainly qualifies as a useful label. Case in point: Peter Dybing’s recent successful fundraiser for Doctors Without Borders in response to the crisis in Japan. Dybing raised over 30,000 dollars for Japan under the rubric of the “Pagan community,” and those who identified as Pagans donated money to the cause. If Dybing had decided to raise the money without appealing overtly to Pagans, he may not have been able to raise as much as fast, as I think the matter of personal and communal pride in one’s label and community was a factor in that fundraiser, as it is in many other areas where religious and other groups participate in giving and service oriented activities.
I have said before that the term Pagan doesn’t have any meaning. Well, I maintain that to some degree, but partly I was wrong. I think the term does have meaning, insofar as it seems to connote a particular culture (a fringy one), one that uses a particular vocabulary and that possesses a number of cultural signifiers. If you were out strolling through the park, and you noticed a group of say 20 people standing together, with someone drumming nearby, and they were wearing a motley assortment of cloaks, animal skins or antlers, amulets, medieval or viking wear, with a large array of t-shirts (tie-dye, silk screened, some with various pithy religious statements on them) and the like in the mix, you might readily say that they were Pagans. If they were standing in a circle all facing one direction, you’d feel even more sure. And at some point, if you overheard them having a friendly chuckle over the nature of some friend of theirs from an astrological or “totemic animal” perspective, you’d be even MORE sure. Now, it may be that these elements seem derived from various eclectic Wiccan or Wiccanate milieus, and that’s because they are. Frankly, if all of Pagandom could just come together to assert that the term PAGAN meant Wiccan and/or Wiccanate and/or Wiccan-derived culture/religious milieu, then I think that would be fine (a bit redundant, but fine). If we agreed to define ourselves as “earth-centered,” we’d have at least something to really start arguing about. But we don’t assert that. We insist that “Pagan” also covers Druids , non-Wiccan witches of various varieties (being themselves a whole kettle of argumentative fish when it comes to definitions), Kemetics, Hellenics, Celtic Recons, Natib Qadish, Asatru, Thelemites, Renaissance Hermeticism and Qabala and Ceremonialist magic, Chaos magic, etc…not to mention the folks who attend Shinto rites, belong to African Diasporic Traditions like Vodou and Santeria, or worship Hindu deities, etc., or combine or practice 2 or more of any of these. No religious identifier is going to encompass all these disparate faiths. (Some folks insist that we need the umbrella term because we need the numbers in order to battle discrimination. But if that’s the concern, then I think we would do better to drop the label Pagan, assert ourselves within our smaller more defined groupings, and team with others like Hindus and Buddhists and Vodouisants and Santeros and American Indians to work for the religious rights of all “minority” religions in the United States. Then we could stand as Heathens, Wiccans, Earth-Centered whatevers, Druids, combinations thereof, etc., alongside all other religious persons who suffer discrimination, without the confusing baggage of the term Pagan, and work for change with that larger group.)
So I think Pagan does encompass a kind of cultural language and aesthetic, mostly Wiccanate in nature. I think this cultural aesthetic and language is what Drew chose to no longer be associated with (according to my interpretation of his post). And that choice resonates with me, because I too have not felt like I belong in that cultural milieu any longer. My personal pondering regarding my own spiritual journey is not over, and I won’t speak too much to that at the moment. But ultimately, I believe that the term, as it’s come to be used in our communities, is so deeply flawed, so vague, that what use it has is extremely limited and, in my opinion, heading towards obsolescence…unless the vagaries of human linguistic and communal movement deem otherwise, and it becomes redefined in more specific and concrete ways, which is certainly possible.
I don’t know. I just fust and burn and wonder and try to hold myself together as best I can. The badgers have made it mid-shin, friends and beloveds, and I limp away, still pondering, and still praying for sunshine, and the promise of a week of warm days…preferably sometime before midsummer.
Grok earth, friends. Pray without ceasing.
I find myself in the midst of similar ruminations. In fact, I’ve erased “Pagan” from “Plainly Pagan” several times. Why I put it back, I’m never entirely sure. Some of it is certainly my own stubborn refusal to let others define the term for me. But honestly, there are more and more days…
Hystery,
Yes, I feel like I go back and forth and back and forth on the matter almost daily.
Thanks for your comment!
RS
C’mon down! The weather’s beautiful… when it’s not too hot, and the chiggers aren’t too bad, and… and… just c’mon, you’re gonna love it! I don’t know that I could live anywhere else at this point in my life (well, except maybe San Franciso… but that’s a whole different kettle of fish – probably in a cream sauce).
When I bother to think of myself in labelly terms I do tend to stick with “pagan” as the best general pointer to the types of things that I am likelier than not to believe. Please let me know if that’s not vague enough, I can run it through the obfuscator again…
Oh, and finally – if you’re in a blogroll-updating kind of mood some time, Executive Pagan is moribund… my new home is at http://amongmiracles.wordpress.com
Thanks, peace and blessings!
Erik
Erik,
LOL. I am really looking forward to it!! I always love moving to a new place…even though the actual moving is never really very awesome.
Blogroll updated! Thank you for the reminder.
RS
Depending on which end of Tennessee you’re moving to, we’ll almost be neighbors! And wherever you are landing, I lay upon you a geas to visit the Nashville Parthenon within six months, if you have not already been there – it’s an incredibly moving experience. It may have been built as basically a tourist attraction, but I believe absolutely that Athena has claimed it as her own.
Erik,
Yes! I’ve already been to the Parthenon…though I’ve only seen the outside, and I plan to make a real visit when I’m down there this fall. I’ll be in the eastern half of TN – would be neat to meet one of these days!
RS
I’m near Charlotte, so it could happen – perhaps a rendezvous in Asheville once y’all are settled in? “The San Francisco of the East” awaits…
[...] Pagan identity, and some arguing that PR and politics should matter in our decision. And more. And more. I have more to say on this, but will present my thoughts in [...]
As someone who values community deeply and my religion even more so, I reluctantly allow people to use the term pagan to describe me, although I do not think the term fits. I use it out of political expedience and cultural shorthand more than anything else, as it does not fit my theological ideas nor my identity.
I wish there was a coalition people could join rather than loosely identifying with this nebulous term.
I wish there was a coalition people could join rather than loosely identifying with this nebulous term
It looks to me as though that’s more or less the situation that already applies…? At leat, it makes some sense to me when I look at it from that perspective…
Ruby, you wrote this as an aside, but I think it hits the nail on the head:
“(Some folks insist that we need the umbrella term because we need the numbers in order to battle discrimination. But if that’s the concern, then I think we would do better to drop the label Pagan, assert ourselves within our smaller more defined groupings, and team with others like Hindus and Buddhists and Vodouisants and Santeros and American Indians to work for the religious rights of all “minority” religions in the United States. Then we could stand as Heathens, Wiccans, Earth-Centered whatevers, Druids, combinations thereof, etc., alongside all other religious persons who suffer discrimination, without the confusing baggage of the term Pagan, and work for change with that larger group.)”
It is the baggage of the term pagan that keeps many from using it, or associating with the Neopagan community, but as ‘religious minorities’ we could combine forces to combat discrimination while still retaining our own religio-cultural integrity.
Speaking of terms, I think more distinction needs to be made between Judeo-Christian defined pagans and those affiliated with and directly involved in the Neopagan community. Globally speaking, the two terms seldom overlap in any real cultural sense, and should not be routinely conflated, as it tends to have the effect of Neopagans assuming they share affiliation with religious or cultural groups who do not profess any affiliation with them. No group should be put under an umbrella term they do not accept for themselves.
Hi Eireann,
Thanks for your comment. Your point about the baggage associated with the term outside the community is a good one – it is an angle on the term that I haven’t included in my previous posts. And your comments about the conflation of Neopaganism with other religious or cultural groups is an excellent one – something that has bothered me as well – and good food for thought.
Thanks again,
RS
I really enjoyed a lot of this post. You have an excellent, approachable blogging style and I’m glad I found this post, but I’d like to ask you about this sentence: “Frankly, if all of Pagandom could just come together to assert that the term PAGAN meant Wiccan and/or Wiccanate and/or Wiccan-derived culture/religious milieu, then I think that would be fine (a bit redundant, but fine).”
I’m curious why we should rob the term Pagan of its umbrellaesque nature and make it synonymous with all things Wiccan. As it is, non-Wiccan Pagans have difficulty not being eternally lumped in with the Wiccans on everything (so perhaps that’s your point right there).
There is utility in an over-arching term for our related (though by no means synonymous) belief systems. By making them synonymous you make it not only redundant but effectively render one term or the other obsolete.
Anne, I think Ruby’s point there was that this has already happened, in deed if not in word, so if they go ahead and just admit it, then everyone will know it up front, and those who don’t want to claim that label can do so easily and openly without this discussion of whether or not it is necessary or appropriate to do so.
Well, I suppose that could be argued on some level, but it’s ultimately not reality. While many do conflate the two, there are many Pagans out there (such as myself) who are very much not Wiccan and for whom those two terms are quite separate. So if that’s what Ruby means there, perhaps it’s meant tongue in cheek… ?
heh — Two thoughts on rereading my comment.
One, there was a bit of what appears to be a Freudian slip in there. I *meant* to say that “I really enjoyed this post a lot,” and instead typed “I really enjoyed a lot of this post.” Both are true, but the former is the one I meant to say! : )
Second, if Éireann’s comment is in fact the case, my apologies for missing the (perhaps obvious) subtlety. It’s just that I’m Pagan, but not Wiccan, and am so tired of being lumped by default. Despite that, I really appreciate the umbrella term of Paganism, and how it helps us to build community among those of similar (though not always the same) beliefs. Rather than admit defeat and say the two have become synonymous, it would I think be better if we took it back to be the all-encompassing term many still consider it to be. But of course I’m seeing that from unique perspective and it’s just my own little corner of the universe. Carry on…
Hello Anne,
Thank you for your comment and question!
My statement was not meant to be tongue-in-cheek. My main argument is that the term, whether used as a religious identity (“I am Pagan”) or as an umbrella term, is too broadly defined as to be useful in either capacity, and that I think ultimately the word should either be discarded in favor of identifyers with clearer boundaries and theological definition (labels such as Wiccan, Heathen, etc.), or we should give the term “Pagan” more definite and concrete parameters and then allow people to make the choice of whether the term applies to them based on those parameters. I think the former is preferable, but there are a number of reasons why I think either would be beneficial – I outline some of them in some of my previous posts on the subject.
I made the specific comment about Paganism and Wicca because, as Eireann noted, some have observed that the cultural influence of Wicca in the culture that calls itself Pagan is already quite prominent. I have read comments by various reconstructionists that the Pagan community is Wiccan-centric and that they feel like they can’t relate to it. In response to this commentary, some have posited that Paganism ought to make more of an effort to include non-Wiccan ritual, culture and language in the broader community (i.e. at conferences, festivals, and in organizations online and IRL). However, it is my belief that this movement toward this particular kind of inclusion, while seemingly positive (in many other different ways, I am all for inclusion), has the effect instead of making the term even more nebulous, so that the boundary between Pagan and non-Pagan becomes exceptionally blurred, in which case I believe it loses its use.
There are a lot of perspectives on this issue of course, and it will continue to be a conversation for a long while yet. And it’s such a large issue that to see it from every angle is pretty much impossible at the moment…I have changed my mind about it myself more than once, and I’m sure I’m not done. But at this moment, given the experiences I’ve had, this is how I see it.
Thanks again!
RS
Interesting take… one that I’ll have to mull over for a bit. I just found your blog today, so I’ll have to go take a look at your prior posts on the topic. Thank you for pointing those out.
While I myself sometimes get annoyed at being grouped with (…how can I put this delicately…) the more In Your Face Hey Look At Me I’m a Witch folks, “Pagan” is the one inclusive term that both describes my beliefs and is something that (at least some) people understand. Even the other Pagans I meet often have to have religious monism defined and panentheism not only defined but also disambiguated from pantheism. Animism is thankfully, to a greater degree, already understood. And none of those account for my observance of quarters and cross-quarters. So without that term, I’m labelless. Part of me kind of adores that idea, of course, that I can just say those who ask that my faith is personal and it’s complicated and isn’t all faith personal and complicated, but sometimes it’s nice to have one word you can toss out there instead of four or five that you constantly have to define. (Granted, there are so many definitions of Pagan that perhaps one word is no better, but it seems to make conversations go quicker.)
Anne, how do you see your beliefs and practice as different from what the Wiccanate Pagans believe and do?
[...] Foster’s Link Roundup, T. Thorn Coyle’s Can We Share a Common Fire?, Ruby Sara’s That Troublesome Term… Again, Resa’s Labeling is Complicated, and two posts at The Wild Hunt: Paganism, Solidarity, and [...]
[...] The Troublesome Term Again [...]
[...] The Troublesome Term Again [...]
Having been a Nichiren Daishonin Buddhist with the Soka Gakkai International for 31 years, and in the last 18 years followed the path of shamanism because that is my artistic and healing form, I identify as “pagan” in the definition it has for some as “non-Christian” or “non-Abrahamic religion.”
BTW, shamanism is a similarly controversial term. It was coined by a professor of religious studies, Mircea Eliade, based on the Siberian name for spiritual healing practices. Some indigenous peoples feel that shamanism is a Western attempt to lump together a variety of practices in a confusing way. They also feel it is cultural misappropriation when Western people with little training in spiritual matters label themselves shamans, especially when they are claiming to do indigenous practices that they may have no connection to.
I am a 70-year-old retired Christian pastor. As I get older and nearer to the time of passing I want to learn as much as I can about earth-centered spirituality whether it’s called by the “troublesome term” Pagan or by some other name. I really feel uncomfortable about my church’s misunderstanding of, and antagonism toward, what I consider a wonderful spiritual way of life and I want to experience some of what you experience. I discovered your website while surfing for information. Can you help, please.
Thank you and bless you.
Roger
Hello Roger,
Thank you for your comment. I would be happy to engage in a conversation with you about earth-centered spirituality. The interfaith conversation between Christianity and earth-centered and/or Neopagan religions is an important one to me, and I would be happy to answer any questions or have a discussion with you about it.
Please feel free to email me at figsandhoney@gmail.com.
All best,
Ruby Sara