NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/alt/pagan/14712

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-30 | 10.2 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!udel!intercon!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Amanda Walker)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: The meaning of "pagan"
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:05:53 -0500
Organization: InterCon Systems Corporation
Lines: 188
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Amanda Walker)
NNTP-Posting-Host: chaos.intercon.com
X-Newsreader: InterCon TCP/Connect II 1.1b30

[e-mail] (Tammy Stark Blandino) writes:
> Having someone as your god and following a set of rules or dogma are
> two different things.  For most the two are tied together.  However,
> because of the nature of paganism, it is possible to see the god or
> goddess in any archetype.  For this reason a person could be pagan and
> worship Jesus as a god.  But the "rules" of his/her belief are pagan,
> not christian.  A person who FOLLOWS the religion of CHRISTIANITY would
> not be able to to accept any other than "god" (i.e. the trinity and
> thus Jesus) as god.

This isn't a result of the "nature of paganism," though.  At best, it's a
contrast between monotheism and polytheism, although even that is extremely
fuzzy.  Many pagans see the gods and goddesses they worship as aspects or
personification of a divinity which is itself beyond personfication or
description.  There are also many Christians who approach the same issues in
precisely the same way.  I, for example, find myself quite able to interact
and worship with pagans of many different flavors.  Often, literally the only
meaningful differences in our beliefs are the particular names we use.  It is
for this reason that, while I describe myself as Christian, many pagans (and
in fact a number of other kinds of Christians) would argue with this, and
would call me pagan.  The fact that I use Judeo-Christian symbol-systems is,
to a very large degree, independent of the way in which I use them.
Generally, I have found that mystics (of whatever flavor) tend not to get
hung up on human names and symbols.  If I participate in a pagan circle, it
does not matter than in my private work I use the Sephiroth Binah and
Chokhmah as reference points instead of the Celtic deites Ceridwen and
Cernunnos.  We share the same universe, interact with the same cosmic forces
and forms, and manipulate the same energy.  Names and forms are things that
we create in order to approach the infinite.  They are tools just as hammers
and chisels; but our work is fundamentally the same, despite superficial
variations in the shape of the tools we use.

> A person has every right to refer to themselves how they wish.  However
> to say someone is a Pagan Christian is like saying something is an
> Apple Orange.

Is it really?  Early this year, I posted a fairly long article on this
subject.  Here is part of what I said:

-----------------------------------------------------------
I hold that things aren't true because they're in scripture, but that
things are in scripture because they are true.  This may seem like a
subtle distinction, but it's a very important one.

-- Paths to the Divine

One result of this view is that it does not preclude truth occurring in
other places--I see no need to claim that the Bible (a human record of
human experience, put into its modern form by a human council) has any
monopoly on truth, or that the forms that have grown up around
christianity in general (much less any single church within it) are the
only keys to experiencing the Divine.

The forms don't matter.  Sanctification is done by people.  Rituals set
aside time for the Divine--it is the act of setting aside that is
crucial, not the forms by which it is done.  What makes a time holy is
setting it aside on purpose.  Christ said concerning breaking bread and
sharing wine, "do this as often as you shall eat and drink, in
rememberance of me."  It is that purposeful rememberance that makes the
Christian Eucharist sacred.  Likewise, the sixth commandment in Exodus
is to "*keep* the Sabbath holy."  It is the human act of setting it
aside which makes the Sabbath sacred.

The specific words don't matter.  Whether you say "Allah," "God,"
"Yahweh," "Deus," or "Great Spirit," it's the same One.  Whether you say
"The Holy Ghost," "Sophia," "Nuit," or "Shakti", it's the same creative
Spirit.  And whether you read the Bible, the Quran, or the
Bhagavad-Gita, "love one another" means the same thing.

Some will claim this is not a Christian point of view, but I disagree,
and am supported in this by theologians all through Christian history,
from many in the early church through such modern writers as C.S. Lewis
and Thomas Merton.

-- Paganism

If one takes the view, as I do, that Christian writings and traditions
are examples, rather than restrictions, it becomes not only possible but
fruitful to examine how other communities have coped with the presence
of the Divine.  In particular, each community uses its own environment
and social context as raw material for its sacred texts and traditions.
It is no coincidence that the desert and water are used so often as
symbols and settings in the Hebrew and Christian scriptures.  It is
likewise no coincidence that fire and winter take primary roles in Norse
myths, that the sea appears so often in Japanese myths, or that the Nile
was central to the Egyptians.  As Christianity expanded, it affected and
was affected by other systems of belief and symbolism, as it was adopted
by people far from the desert and mediterranean shore that gave it
birth.  It also brought with it material from its roots in Judaism and
other religions of the middle east, such as Mithraism, the Roman cult of
Sol Invictus ("the Unconquered Sun"), and various mediterranean
mystery religions.  All of these went into the mix of what has become
Christianity.  Some things that were very important to the early church
are almost completely absent in modern christianity (such as desert
symbolism), and vice versa (such as Christmas and Easter celebrations).

One of the things that I find very useful is to study and pursue other
beliefs and practices which grew out of other cultures and areas, since
they too have gone into the mix of modern culture.  These pagan sources
are just as valid as christian ones (if often less well preserved), just
as relevant to my faith, which goes beyond a particular set of books.

For example, I grew up with Lake Erie and the Atlantic Ocean.  Watching
storms come up over the lake or hurricanes come up over the Ocean is a
very immediate way to experience the awesome destructive but cleansing
power of Creation.  There is very little in the Bible, for example, to
relate to this experience.  On the other hand, the Irish descriptions of
Llyr are quite apt, and capture aspects of an experience that the
Hebrews never had.  Likewise, when you see Mt. Kiluea erupt, the goddess
Pele is a much more applicable image than anything out of christianity.
As another example, the Hebrew and Christian scriptures have very little
to say from the point of view of women.  I find that traditions which
involve wise women, goddesses, and priestesses help me understand issues
which are glossed over or ignored in more male-oriented systems.

Everyone sees themselves, the world, and the Divine through their own
eyes.  By learning how other people see, we ourselves learn to see more
clearly, and to see more of the picture.  The entirety of creation is
beyond our capacity, but the more we can grasp, the better our
understanding becomes.

-- Thoughts

Am I Christian?  Yes, by the measures I use.
Am I Pagan?  Yes, by the measures some people use.

Is it possible to be both?  In pragmatic terms, I think probably so, although
some people disagree.

Is that my problem?  No :).

What do I believe?  It all depends on what you mean by "believe."  Many
things that other people are greatly concerned with are irrelevant to
me, and vice versa, but it all can be summed up into a single word,
which is "Love."  Love is what all of the religions in the world come
down to.  All of the rest is peripheral.  I am glad to share faith with
anyone who loves all of creation, including their self.  The words and
forms they use don't matter if love is at the center.

I am many things.  The word "Christian" describes some of them.  The
word "pagan" describes others.  I do not think this is a problem--I feel
no need to find a single lable which describes me completely...
-----------------------------------------------------------

Now, all that being said, I'm not saying that the phrase "pagan christian" is
the best way to express some of this, but it's certainly not nonsense, and I
know people of whom it is much more descriptive than it is of me (I'd
probably be best described as an esoteric or hermetic Christian mystic).
Most categorical distinctions have boundary cases--people are by there very
nature difficult to pigeonhole when you get right down to it.

> The statement doesn't say that they can't.  Using Jesus as a diety and
> following Xtianity are two very different things.

Only if you restrict Christianity to its institutionalized forms.  I am not
at all willing to do this, if for no other reason than that the teachings of
Jesus themselves are a radical indictment of institutional religion.

> I might also point out that most of what is considered Xtian TODAY
> is not what the man Jesus taught.

This may be true, but what besides "Christian" would you call someone who
does follow what he taught, at least as well as those teachings have survived?
I do not see how you can completely separate Christ from Christianity.  This,
to me, really is nonsense.

> Also consider the fact that, maybe,
> just maybe, he taught additional stuff to his inner circle, the
> apostles.  Just a little food for thought.....

This is almost certain.  Even in modern exoteric Christianity, teachings from
the Essenes and the (proto-)Kabbalah are inextricably woven through.

> "all those who worship a religion that does not follow the principles
> of of the Judeo-Christian-Moslem base, but who may or may not use
> archetypes contain with in it."

But how do you separate a religion from the archetypes it uses?  They are the
fabric around which all the dogma and doctrine in the world are mere
accessories.




Amanda Walker
InterCon Systems Corporation