The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum

But even your argument endorses my position.  You've listed a number of items that seem to fall beneath a pagan concept yet none of them are requirements nor identiiers of anything pagan.

So what is paganism?  

 

You've used the argument that if it works then it must be ok.  Yet by default that same concept applies in any situation where you may desire something, find it not meant to be but go to an alternative and get it and think that is right.

Because from a pagan perspective, most notable heathenry, transactions between men and gods fail to be reciprocal and of value when one party doesn't uphold their end of the deal. There's a reason its polytheistic, you know, with some older gods being usurped by new ones.

The idea that I should have unfaltering faith in a deity despite feeling ignored, abandoned or forsaken is, again, more Christian than pagan. It's well recorded that idols have been broken and worship revoked when the relationship was no longer reciprocal.

Not sure where you got this one from.  The baptist do not believe just anyone can be or is a priest but that one must be ordained.  Catholic for sure believe that and the Lutherans I know also fall into the.  Even the methodist I've met would fall into the same catergory.  Very few of them believe all were priests / priestess and held thier own personal connection to God.  That's not to say that most do not believe one may not speak of thier religious experiences.   At best that is more of a New Age slant on things for even those who follow Wicca held that one was a priest / priestess only after undergoing so much training and initiation to discover the mystical and dogmatic facets of their religion and its practices.

I was talking specifically of the Quakers, which ddates back to the 17thc and is hardly new age.

All that tells me is your didn't believe it to begin with and whom ever you were praying to probably said why answer you don't believe in them anyway.  

Belief. Faith. Trust. Here we go with that Christian-similar worldview again. None of my pagan gods ever required that. Odin wouldn't care if I had faith as long as I was upholding my oaths. Which I have and had done. See, what I think is that my friend who was Christian, has joined that club in the afterlife.  And by venerating my beloved dead (and not concepts of faceless ancestors) and by attaching myself to their "language" I have a much better chance of communicating and interacting with them.

As for the hex and such again that by itself does not make one a pagan nor is it needed to make one a pagan.

Again, what does make one a pagan? A belief in the gods, a belief sobstrong that they mixed matched and threw some away? So if the tribe on this side of the river breaks their idol of the gods, do they stop being pagan?

Pow Wow and many other folkish practices also use folk magics or scripture magics and do not claim to be pagan either.  No more so than to practice ceremonial or high level magics based upon earlier Christian designs by itself makes one a pagan.  Especially in the sense of Pagan being a religious practice vice simply a way of life or skill set.

It's not the practice. Its the approach to life. Its what you demand of your efforts and what your lines are. Staying strictly heathen on basis of faith is more Christian than a a heathen exploring tangible and working methods to noticeably improve daily life...that happen to have Christian basis.

I'd disagree that the essence of Paganism is expermential belief and partnership.  New age practice and application, perhaps, seeing white light and happy happy joyful joyful for certain.  

I don't know why I should suffer for religion. And by suffer I mean,  get nothing out of it but remain in faith that God/s have a mysterious will and plan for me. I'd figure, much like indigenous cultures, that if something isn't going well its either a) a dicky spirit b) a bad spirit c) I fell out of favor.  And if "c" and unwarranted I'd say fuck off, anyway. I wouldn't assume I steppedboff a righteous path, or neededbto learn an uplifting soul lesson.

I don't think i've ever encountered anyone who would claim their beliefs and spiritual practices were expermential, and seldom any one who would claim they have a partnership with thier gods / goddesses.

Nor does the recognization and association with "spirits" define a pathway as Pagan or any other religious practice.  They (spiriti recognization) maybe componet facets that might be found but never are they to my knowledge an requirement.  More often seen as a facet of an Animis worldview but again not a requirement to be Pagan as a religion or pagan as a way of life.  Though many try to define pagan as an umbrella term that one can just insert anything they desire and make it so because they desire it.

But neither are they not a component to pagan paths. So what's your point?

But no one has said they can't experience thier spirituality anyway they desire or believe.  No one has even said they can't try to pigeon hole any and everything they cherry pick as part of thier belief and apply it.

What is there to cherry pick? Tell me, is there a book in existance that isn't written by the hands of men? Are you positive that the KJV translation is the truest interpretation of "God's" word? And, no, it isn't understood as such by "all modern Christians who know better",  so how can I deviate from the deity?

But in the end in my opinion to claim Christo-Pagan is still the refusal to fully embrace either pathway and cling to the cherry picked items while they tend to change or ignore the less desired ones.  To try and change a practices identity to suit their indecession and fears vice fully embracing one and accepting the positive with the negative.

Then pagans should all be hardcore reenactors, slitting throats and splashing people with blood on Main Street.

I also think hearing deer speak to me in the forest sounds like the start of a Disney movie, but hey, to each their own.

If you pray to the Christian God then embrace it and claim yourself a Christian.

But I'm not Christian. I'm dealing with a god identified personally through Anglo-Saxon Christianity. A cultural understanding of God unique to my folk, by no means identical to Middle Eastern varieties. And there's a reason it's different: its been colored in by the European lower mythology and pagan practices.

As I said, Christopagan is an inadequate title, but the spirit behind it is not.

People have been doing that for ages which is the reason their are so many branches of Christianity today.  Some survive, some die and some are killed off but they elected a pathway and embraced it.  They didn't take one side when it was convient then the other when it was not convient for them.

Which is what made them Christian. Adherence to a path in the hopes of eternal salvation. That's not my issue here.   If God and I chose to part ways than I won't believe I'm going to hell. Just as you don't believe it.

Here's a funny story about the pagan Clovis. He knew joining Christianity would bring him political and economical advantages. So he switched over. And it wasn't that big of a deal because that's what you did with imperfect Gods...you followed the ones that brought luck, fortune and victory. Much like my pagan examples, I'm following the deity that's providing at the moment. Unlike them, I have the capability to break that relationship when it proves unworthy.

In many ways it reminds me of a scene from the movie KINGDOM OF HEAVEN when the head cleric says convert to Islam and repent later.  Take no stand and hold to that belief simply claim what feels right at the moment or most useful in that situation.

And what's wrong with that? Why should I adhere to this modern conception of what pagan means when it isn't fruitful? Honestly. I mean, I'm not denying bumps in the dark, I don't avoid death (ha! I'm obsessed with the Othernside right now), I think gods can be assholes and that pain is a process in the cycle. So tell me why you keep insinuating that I'm all "whatever feels good, do it. Bunnies and unicorns."

For me I am Pagan in the sense I pray to, honor and worship only Hekate / Hecate, Artemis, Bast, Pahket, Sekor and the Huntsman.

 And if you have a need they can't fulfill? You'll just deny yourself for a sense of loyalty and faith? How will the reward that? Obviously not by meeting your needs, so will it be salvation, spiritual fortitude? Fortitudenfor what? To better suffer under their commands as you are the clay to the Potter?

  When I have a need I call upon them or one in particular if they hold more sway over that area.  I do not call upon anyone else based upon the concept they might perform for me when my own divinities have either ignored my prayer / request or turned it down.

To me doing such would be like asking for a loan and having it refused for my own good then going to a loan shark to get it.

Own good? You're really spouting off a lot of Christiany ideology here.

Sure I get it but I pay a higher price and seldom is it working out for my own good.  Granted the immediate reward may seem to make it worth while but in the end it never is worth the price and the payback it requires.

Yes the whole, God has a plan don't muck it up routine. It's better to trust in Gods will than to have a will of your own.
 

But then again I also do not see one having a expermential belief or partnership with the Christian God if they are Christians.  I may identify them by other means or names but never expermental or partnership.  But then as I stated i'd not use that for those who follow a Pagan pathway either, seekers perhaps but that is based upon how I define and understand what it means to be dedicated, commited and bound to.

There also used to be a Christian belief that a woman's womb was in inverse proportion to her intelligence. Really nothing to do with what you said, just thought I'd throw that out there.

As far as choosing one over the other, I do not have that issue.  I simply am sworn to and honor those gods / goddess and try to live my life as I think proper and thier revelations show me or guide me.  I do not have alternative gods / goddesses or God I call upon when they do not answer or give me what I think I desire.

You're a good worshipper, then. Wish I could say the same, but I'm more interested in taking it as far as I can until my questions are answered.

(On my phone, may be multiple typos.)

No apology to be made.  I made an erroneous statement.  I was aware of the (Eastern) Orthodox, and Anglican before your post.  I just did not include them, which was wrong of me.

 
Can I just say - to you, to Randall, and to anyone else who's in concurrence with that model - that it warms the cockles of my history-geek heart to see the differentiation between Protestant and Anglican being made?

Sunflower

In your case - and perhaps other instances of self-identification - it seems to me that the "Christo-" component is best understood as not denoting Christianity per se (with all the creedal implications that proceed from it), but as referring to the syncretizing of other aspects (in your case, a personal connection to that deity...

"That deity" in this case evidently being YHWH, not Christ. So Juniperberry is also right in saying that "Christopaganism" is an inadequate term for this particular expression.

We really do need something else. Although, perhaps, "pagan" really will do just fine, since Christ is at the heart of Christianity, and one either accepts the essence of what Christ is meant to be, or does not - and all the other syncretism and folk practice and spiritual add-ons are just ornament at best, unacknowledged heresy at worst.

True enough, though it'd be the YHWH of Christianity, rather than the YHWH of Judaism - that is, having more reference to the Christian than the Judaic deity-relationship... though part of the point is that it's not the universal/catholic Christian relationship but one very particularly rooted in Anglo-Saxon contexts.  

Which nitpickery mostly serves to support the point that existing vocabulary is inadequate - with which I agree wholeheartedly.

Sunflower

Nitpickery aside, I would offer the term "JudeoPaganism", since the worship of YHWH without Christ cannot be Christian.

Except that Judaism-the-religion has even less to do with it than Christianity-the-religion.

Need MOAR WORDS!

Sunflower

Right... which is exactly why I suggest it. If one's practice is about YHWH, but not about Christ, then it is not Christianity at all.

(I'm only considering Yewberry's experience here, not that of the OP.)

Right... which is exactly why I suggest it. If one's practice is about YHWH, but not about Christ, then it is not Christianity at all.

 
Sunflower's point as I understand it was that this is not a connection with the Jewish Adonai, but the Christian YHWH.

How can those possibly not be the same?

One of the concepts in Gnostic Christianity is the Old Testament god is false. Christ speaks of the really true Almighty.

The Jewish conception of God and the Christian conception of God are very different.  Which is something that annoys a lot of my Jewish friends: they hear people talking about "Judeo-Christian values", and say that that means "Christian values, also we feel guilty about the Holocaust."

I don't know where those conceptions diverge, but historically, aren't they the same actual entity? Isn't the Jewish God the one Jesus supposedly referred to?