From: ba@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (B.A. Davis-Howe)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: >suggestion<
Date: 28 Jul 92 16:20:04 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

ciaran@county.lmt.mn.org (Ciaran Benson) writes:

>  Whenever someone tells me that my Paganism isn't a religion, I feel pretty hurt.
>It sounds to me like not just an attack on what I call myself but also on everything
>I hold as sacred.

Ciaran, noone, but noone, in this whole mess, has ever said that *your* Paganism
is not a religion.  What we have said repeatedly is that paganism--the whole
ball of wax--is not *a* religion.  That is, it is not one religion.  It is a
collection of religions and philosophies which includes your religion, my
religion, and lots of other stuff.  However that does not mean that my religion
is the same religion as your religion.  They are separate religions which are
part of a *larger* category (not a religion) which is called paganism.

>  I guess I'm ok with that, if you guys will please stop responding to my posts with
>"paganism isn't a religion".  It does sound to me like you're being pretty intollerant
>of what I call myself and how I worship when you continue to point out this
>disagreement.

Waht we are repeating is that you are missing our fundamental point.  We are not
objecting to what you call yourself or your religion.  We are pointing out that 
you are making global definitions which impinge on *our* lives and religions.

>sensitive in the future.  In addition, I'll try to be less sensitive to people who
>don't like me capitalizing words like Goddess, Pagan, and Paganism.

I haven't heard anyone say that *you* shouldn't capitalise them to your hearts
content, but we started screaming when we were told that *we* were *supposed*
to capitalise them.

>  The beginning of this thread was only my second or so post, so the intensity of the 
>response was very alarming.

>  In solidarity with all of the people who do feel as I do, excuse me whilst I define
>my stance in the argument of; "Paganism ... Is it a religion?"

>Susan said;
>>"Um.  Okay, here we are back to the same semantic thing.  I agree with
>>you that you're pagan; I just wouldn't call your *religion* paganism,
>>even though it incorporates paganism into it.  To me that's like
>>saying a Christian's religion is monotheism."

>  What religion would you call me then?

I will call your religion Pagan in writing, since that is what you call it.  To 
make it clear in speaking, I will call it Vaglanism, which is my cutsey way of
saying "Vaguely Pagan but with no particular allegiance to any one pagan 
religion".

>  For me to not be able to call my religion Paganism would be like someone who
>doesn't like being a Luthern anymore being told that they can't call themselves a
>Christian.

>  Anyway, for me the Christian is to monotheism is as Pagan is to ? argument
>goes;

>  Pagan is to Paganism as Christian is to Christianity

This statement is true, with the special definitions of Pagan and pagan I
propose in another post.

>  Christian is to monotheism as Paganism is to polytheism

Not all pagans are polytheistic.  Some pagans are animistic, some are mono-
theistic, and some Pagans are atheistic.

>  Wiccan is to Paganism as Luthern is to Christianity

Witch is to Wicca is Christian is to Christianity
Gardnerian is to Wicca as Lutheran is to Christianity.
Wicca, all by itself, without any other parts of the collection which is
paganism, is a religion with sects.

All of Christianity has a common heritage.  It is one tree, from one set of
roots.  The branches grow apart, but the roots are still the same.  My religion
is a whole different tree than any of the Native American traditions.  We grow
from different roots in differents continents.  I am not part of the same
religion as the Dine.  One of the problems you continue to have is imposing
this monolithic concept of paganism on us.  You are telling me what *my*
religion is.  If you would simply listen to what we are saying carefully,
without assuming an attack, you would realise that there does not need to be a
problem.  If you can just separate in your head *your version of Paganism* from
*all that is pagan in the world*, we will get along fine.

>  I accept fully that this is exactly opposite of the views of many people who call
>themselves P/pagan, and appreciate the people on this board who have pointed
>that out to me.  I'm glad this has been taken care of so quickly without it dragging
>on for eternity with my continual blundering on people's toes.

I don't think you are opposite the views of anyone.  The only problem arises 
when you attempt to apply your local interpretations globally.

>  There.  Now I've gotten to tell everyone how I feel, and what's been hurting
>my feelings so much.  Hopefully this hasn't hit anyone's button or been interpreted
>as telling anyone else what they can or can't call themselves.

Well, you are still claiming, in this post, that my religion is Paganism, and
Wicca is merely a sect.  If this post changes that view, you and I will have
worked out our differences.  Wicca is a religion, not just a sect.  Santeria
is another religion, not just a sect.  "P"aganism is a religion, not just a 
sect.  All three of these religions are part of the larger category paganism.
I am aware that I have repeated myself extensively in this post.  I hope that

              Merry meet, merry part, merry meet again,
                               Br'anArthur

Queer, Peculiar, and Wyrd! :-)