[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
To be a Pagan means to wear a leather jacket and ride around on a Harley with a bunch of other similarly-equipped Pagans.
Glad we could clear this up. 
[/QUOTE]
Actually, according to an old 80’s movie I once saw, it’s an acronym standing for People Against Goodness And Normalcy.
I goofed when trying to open a new tab and the browser ate my original comment. Let’s see if a condensed version makes any sense.
Okay, there are three types of fluffybunnies that I’ve run into the most. I’ll give a small example of each for clarity:
[ul]
[li]the whitelighter: This person seems to be the most popular type on the internet. Thinks the “burning times” actually killed more people than the Holocaust, and that, somehow, witches were being burned left and right all over America in the 1600s. (false historys/BS is a heavy element of this type.) Has a goofy “magical name” that they use publicly. (It’s my understanding that magical names are supposed to be a bit of a secret because it’s a name of power.) Everything is love and light, and “balance” is created by eliminating all “bad” things out of your life. (Sadly enough, the scale of balance is tipped over instead.) The magical and the mundane have no clear line of separation in this person’s life. Any occurrence, even the most mundane, tend to have some sort of “magical” or “mystical” origin in this person’s life. A shelf breaking because there’s too many knicknacks on it can’t be the reason; it’s got to have been magic or SOMETHING trying to tell them something. [/li][li]the babybat: This person is a lot like the whitelighter, but reverse the “love and light” with “gloom and doom.” (I’m borrowing the goth subculture term “babybat” because it’s fitting and often enough, babybats in goth subculture happen to be “darklighter” type pagans. Think of every silly stereotype of goths you’ve ever seen. Generally this will give you a fairly accurate description of a babybat goth.) Sometimes they worship Satan, but mostly they look for “dark goddesses” and curses and other things to prove that they are “oh so dark and dreary.” Sometimes they follow the rede to the letter, and sometimes they eschew it completely in favor of being as “bad” as possible. Sometimes babybat pagans look a lot like Laurie Cabot. This is not always the case, but like whitelighters, they’re pretty unstable.[/li][li]the “I read a book” pagan: The conclusion of the “I read a book” phrase is “and now I’m all powerful!!!1eleventy.” A good bit of the time, this book is a Llwellyn source, something like Silver RavenWolf’s To Ride A Silver Broomstick, or possibly Nocturnal Magick. Sometimes it’s even that big blue book that Raymond Buckland wrote a few decades ago as a primer to Wicca-based paganism. Either way, it’s not enough to really know what you’re doing, magic or spirituality-wise. These people are very, very, common, and in a Venn diagram of these three types of pagans, the IRAB pagans will often also be whitelighters or babybats. [/li][/ul]
[QUOTE=Lilairen]
And is only relevant to Wiccans and people of Wicca-derived religions. As someone whose religion has utterly nothing whatsoever to do with Wicca, I’m not a part of that ‘we’.
[/QUOTE]
My apologies for “we-ing” you inadvertantly… and refer back please to my first comment, “I can’t and wouldn’t speak for all Pagans.”
For me, the specific language or derivation of the Rede doesn’t matter. I read the biblical “golden rule” exactly the same way.
By Lilairen’s descriptions, I fall into the “miscellaneous random shit” category.
Oh, one other thing I wanted to mention - there’s a fair bit of mild Llewellyn-bashing here, and I’d like to point out that while this publishing house does, in fact, let a sizeable chunk of woo-woo nonsense get printed and distributed, they also publish some very decent books about Paganism. It’s not ALL Ravenwolf-type stuff.
This has been highly informative, and I for one am appreciative of everyone who’s given their perspective.
A question, and I hope everyone knows my attitudes well enough not to mistake it for marginializing someone: How common are belief systems like Lilairen’s (not specifically Kemiticism, but the general “I identify as a form of pagan, but not the ‘doing workings and honoring the Goddess’ kind” of belief, within the ‘big tent’ of Paganism? I’d formed the perhaps-mistaken impression that the sort of generalizations I’d made in post #6 were true for most modern Pagans. That does not, of course, mean that I hold Lil’s beliefs in any less respect, just that I’d formed the impression of a sort of majority consensus that her system doesn’t fit, and I’m wondering if I’m mistaken on that.
And completely off the point, but something I’m sure many of you will find hilarious: Every time I see the question that constitutes the thread title here, with the particular prosody it reads in, I hear it sung in my head to “How do you solve a problem like Maria?” from The Sound of Music, and have this vision of a gathered coven breaking into song about what paganism means to them. 
[QUOTE=Polycarp]
I’d formed the perhaps-mistaken impression that the sort of generalizations I’d made in post #6 were true for most modern Pagans. That does not, of course, mean that I hold Lil’s beliefs in any less respect, just that I’d formed the impression of a sort of majority consensus that her system doesn’t fit, and I’m wondering if I’m mistaken on that.
[/QUOTE]
In all honesty, I don’t know that there IS a majority consensus. There are so many religious and philosophical theories that fall under the broad category of “non-standard religion.” Reading through some of the other entries here surprised me, too - some of what I take for granted as common among Pagans I know apparently isn’t even close to common universally. When people say any belief not based on Abrahams’ God would classify as Pagan, that would include Hinduism and Buddhism, neither of which I would personally think of as Pagan.
Polycarp, your generalizations SORT OF fit me… there are differences in the details, but from an outside perspective, I’d say your conclusions weren’t too far off.
o/ How do you solve a problem like Kali-ma? o/
[QUOTE=Polycarp]
This has been highly informative, and I for one am appreciative of everyone who’s given their perspective.
A question, and I hope everyone knows my attitudes well enough not to mistake it for marginializing someone: How common are belief systems like Lilairen’s (not specifically Kemiticism, but the general “I identify as a form of pagan, but not the ‘doing workings and honoring the Goddess’ kind” of belief, within the ‘big tent’ of Paganism? I’d formed the perhaps-mistaken impression that the sort of generalizations I’d made in post #6 were true for most modern Pagans. That does not, of course, mean that I hold Lil’s beliefs in any less respect, just that I’d formed the impression of a sort of majority consensus that her system doesn’t fit, and I’m wondering if I’m mistaken on that.
[/quote]
Really impossible to answer. I don’t know about Liliaran’s folks, but neopagans in general don’t have much in the way of rosters. Because so many of us hold either multiple initiations or none at all, and because many groups don’t keep rolls, and many people don’t work with a group, we really don’t know how many of any kind, or even just how many “Religion - other” there are in the US. “Pagan” isn’t on the census, and lots of people wouldn’t mark it if it was. Some out of fear of reprisal, some because the terms “pagan” and “neopagan” are hotly debated ones - lots of people don’t want to be called that even if they are Goddess worshipin’ nature magickians*.
I can say that **Lilairen **is the very first member of a reconstructionist religion that I’ve “talked” to whom I *believe *when she says what she’s doing is based on sound archaeological research and actual prayers found written from actual Egyptian sources. Why do I believe her? I’m not sure, honestly, but I do. 99.9% of “reconstructionists” are full of it, either willfully lying or believing their elders’ claims of knowledge passed down where no evidence is present of either written communication or even an oral line.
[dryly] You have no idea: I’m a Wiccan Shaman Druid 
*By the way, for those of you wondering why I consistently misspell magic, it’s because I use the Crowleyian spelling (based on his inclusion of the feminine “k”) to refer to spiritual and religious work, and the standard spelling to refer to stage illusionists. Just helps me keep things straight in my mind. Was Crowley full of shit? Perhaps, but it still serves a useful purpose, so I use it. <– And that bit right there sums up my brand of neopaganism.
In past discussions, I’ve seen it mentioned that paganism is an orthopraxic religion rather than orthodoxic (i.e., the binding elements that everyone adheres to are a set of rituals rather than creeds). But I don’t know if that’s universally true, or only for Wicca. How well does it describe the other faiths?
[QUOTE=LifeOnWry]
Oh, one other thing I wanted to mention - there’s a fair bit of mild Llewellyn-bashing here, and I’d like to point out that while this publishing house does, in fact, let a sizeable chunk of woo-woo nonsense get printed and distributed, they also publish some very decent books about Paganism.
[/QUOTE]
Indeed. Llewellyn published Scott Cunningham (who I greatly admired without following the same path).
[QUOTE=WhyNot]
Poor Ravenwolf, I’m sure she means well. …
[/QUOTE]
I’m not
Although I don’t associate with many lately, it seemed back then that the fluffybunny and partypagan stage didn’t last long. Most of them moved on to something else, although I still know one or two in their 40’s that don’t seem to have advanced much. Most of the pagans of my generation that I know are 9-5 working, Polo/Dockers wearing, married-with-kids-and-mortgage, that might have a small bumper sticker but little else to give them away.
You’re going to see people like MGibson’s neighbors, and while I’ve run into far more “christians” like that, I don’t believe that all (or even most) are cheap beer swilling slobs.
Polycarp, generalizations about pagans are just that. Probably a large percentage never got past the, well… the Llewellyn level, and possibly aren’t that serious about the whole thing.
I’m not exactly standard pagan (by which I mean, of course, “wiccan” ), and I’m not sure that many people are. Don’t really know however, because I don’t discuss religion or politics with people IRL if there is any way I can avoid it.
The rede is all well and good, and worth following, but I don’t see it as a religious thing - the “golden rule” doesn’t define x-ianity, and it’s still worth remembering.
The Lord and Lady as different aspects of one higher deity? Not me. Don’t really have a “Lord and Lady”, feel the attempt to define them as One is too close to the x-ians and their Trinity, and have found no indication that Celts felt that way (Janus-style statues notwithstanding). Doesn’t mean that others can’t find the concept to be in accordance with their beliefs, just doesn’t fit in my system.
Polycarp did nail it with the “there is no right answer to what pagans believe”, because there is no one set definition of what a pagan is. White supremacists, tree-hugging hippies, and everything in between.
And, once again, by the time I got this far there has been several good posts that are closer to what I find to be “mainstream”. WhyNot sounds as if she maybe still discusses things with people and probably has a better idea of what’s going on, where I often make a conscious effort to avoid other pagans. Back when I was interested in the community, there was still a lot of “My Way has been passed down, from Crone to Maiden, for many generations”, Gardnerian-style initiations were viewed as the only way to true enlightenment, solitaries were viewed with disdain, bedecking yourself with crystals and bathing in patchouli wasn’t uncommon. I hope that things have changed, but at my age and after this long, I don’t have much interest in finding out. I do things my way and it works for me.
I’m not as big a prick as I sound, I hope.
[QUOTE=Bobotheoptimist]
And, once again, by the time I got this far there has been several good posts that are closer to what I find to be “mainstream”. WhyNot sounds as if she maybe still discusses things with people and probably has a better idea of what’s going on, where I often make a conscious effort to avoid other pagans.
[/quote]
Yes, I’m pretty active in “the community” - whatever that means. I attend several festivals each year, the largest being Starwood, which attracts somewhere between 1500-2000 various people of various flavors of neopaganism and “other” (including the non religious and “Christian pagans” whatever they are.) For several years, I headed a religious community of about 60 active members and an additional 50 or so “Beltaine and Yule” folks. And, obviously, I love to talk this stuff to death.
My husband is an academic writing and teaching and going to conferences on occult stuff, as well, so I get a lot of the “There’s no evidence for that claim” stuff pounded into my head from him. When I’m feeling cheeky, I point out that lack of evidence does not equal falsehood, especially when we’re talking pre-writing, but generally I’m in agreement that a vast utopic wymmyn centered gynocracy probably didn’t exist on a large scale ever. OTOH, I always say, that doesn’t mean we can’t try to create one now, so be nice to us! 
Oh, ditto! A lot of my bemused indulgence with a pinch of patronization sounds awfully cranky when I put it in writing!
I started out as one of those Fluffybunny people, in a way at least. I had been raised in a very conservative christian home and knew that wasn’t the right way for me. Buckland’s book (the Big Blue Book) and the various Llewellyn publications were my first taste of paganism and were actually quite helpful in their own way. Mostly they helped me see that another way was available. I readily admit that I spent some time in that phase but it didn’t take long for me to figure out that they weren’t really that deep and that other resources would be better. (though as mentioned by a poster above, I did discover Cunningham through them and I like his style)
One great thing I did learn from Buckland (yes, even he can be learned from 
) was that it is ok to take the parts from various beliefs that work well for you and to discard those that don’t. To a kid raised in the strictly conservative environment I was, this was an eyeopener.
I do try to live by the Rede as much as possible, not because I see it as some universal principle but because it fits well with my own philosophy of life.
I also feel a connection to the Greek pantheon and call on those gods during rituals and meditations, but as WhyNot said I don’t claim to do things the same as the ancient greeks did or even to understand the gods in the same way.
A lot of what I was going to say has already been covered in this thread, so I don’t need to make this longer by saying it all again.
[QUOTE=ultrafilter]
In past discussions, I’ve seen it mentioned that paganism is an orthopraxic religion rather than orthodoxic (i.e., the binding elements that everyone adheres to are a set of rituals rather than creeds). But I don’t know if that’s universally true, or only for Wicca. How well does it describe the other faiths?
[/QUOTE]
In Asatru, it’s fairly mixed. There is a lot of variation within practice of ritual, especially when one considers how diverse belief can be in a group whose members range from extremely folkish (i.e. the in-group of those who are “allowed” to practice Asatru must be of Germanic origin) to the universalists (some of which are refered to as Wiccatru for their combining of both practices into their own spirituality). The term folkish does not firmly declare that Asatru practitioners must be “of the folk” to be accepted, but it does imply in its loosest definition that one must [at the very least] have an understanding of the culture from which these gods and these ideas came from. This in and of itself is standard for a lot of the practitioners that I’ve met that are more serious, but does not mean that they all agree that, in order to understand the cultural POV of the ancient Norse, one must be of Norse heritage. (Personally, a good reading of the sagas, Snorri Sturluson’s work, and other firsthand accounts of old Norse life are a good start to understanding old Norse ethics and practices. It also helps if some of those primary sources have annotations in the translation, as a lot of writers and bards used cryptic verses to add flavor and an element of mysticism to their stories. Reading the history of the peoples would also be a good start, as there isn’t a whole ton of historical anthropology done on the Norse in comparison to other cultures.)
Group ritual generally consists of blot and sumbel, but there are no universally agreed days upon which one must give offerings, do ritual, or perform magic and divination. I’m a miminalist in my own practice, and generally try to at least give offerings both when I feel it is needed (often, when one is called by the gods/land wights, or when one is giving thanks for assistance/advice) and at the solstices and equinoxes. This coincides generally with Yule, Midsummer, Ostara, and Winter Finding, which are celebrated by many Asatruar. However, some Asatruar celebrate other times of the year in addition to this. There’s a lot of variation as to which holidays are celebrated. Some groups practice oracular/divinatory or magical ritual, but it is not as common as groups that do not practice either type of ritual.
What does this mean for me as a solitary practitioner? I try to read and learn more about the historic Norse peoples so that I can have a better understanding of how my spirituality works within the framework of a reconstruction. Now, understanding that I do not live in medieval Scandinavia, I adapt what I can to a more modern practice. I don’t make animal sacrifices, but I do offer food and beverages as part of blot and sumbel. I live in an urban area, which generally means that most of my ritual doings have to be done indoors for the time being. (Maybe if I have an enclosed back yard someday, this will change. It’s a lot easier to have a fire pit and the ground under my feet instead of carpet, a window sill, and a candle.) I don’t really have “ritual tools.” I have several bowls that I use for giving offerings, but they are not specifically consecrated for that purpose. (They’re handy when I cook; why be wasteful?) Communication with other Asatruar (and pagans in general) is helpful for me to have a sense of community, but it’s not mandatory. I’m a bit more pragmatic and have taken towards the practices of a folk practitioner, so I generally feel a little odd in group ritual anyway. (Ever go to a public ritual and feel like everyone’s just making it up? Ever go to one and be offended that the people who set it up don’t understand what they’re trying to do? This isn’t supposed to be playacting.) I don’t use magic for several reasons. 1. I don’t really have a use for it in most of my daily life. 2. I don’t really think it’s a great idea to go meddling regularly with the spirit world. 3. I would be more comfortable in an apprenticeship style learning experience with magic, as, well, I’m inexperienced at best. I know well enough that I do not want to take magic into my own hands without some very knowledgeable person to give me guidance. This is currently an unavailable option for me. Eventually when I feel comfortable enough, I may pursue learning useful bits of folk magic on my own. For now, however, I have other things to learn.
[QUOTE=ultrafilter]
In past discussions, I’ve seen it mentioned that paganism is an orthopraxic religion rather than orthodoxic (i.e., the binding elements that everyone adheres to are a set of rituals rather than creeds). But I don’t know if that’s universally true, or only for Wicca. How well does it describe the other faiths?
[/QUOTE]
Well, as I understand your question - There are groups of traditions that follow similar rituals and there is some overlap between groups, as few of us are absolutely unable to assimilate new ideas. But I think we’re hitting a terminology problem here - Saying “paganism is…” is problematic, since there are so many different religions lumped under the generic term. I don’t know that we’ve yet come up with a definition of “pagan” that all can agree on.
Wicca shares a set of beliefs and rituals, and Wicca is (in my opinion) pagan. But rarely will you see two wiccans (outside of a coven) that have the exact same ritual and belief just as any two random christians are unlikely to have the same church experience, and you’re amazingly unlikely to get two druids to agree on anything, including (or especially) rituals (because the rest of them are kooks 
)
I’ve compared the term “pagan” to the term “christian”, but it might be slightly more accurate to compare “wiccan” to “christian”, as there is no single wiccan church just as there is not a single definition of christian.
Glancing over the thread, I think I’ve spotted at least three traditions that probably don’t normally use the circle-and-4-guardian system that is a cornerstone of some other rituals. Elements of Qabalah rituals are seen frequently, but Kabbalah itself certainly isn’t pagan.
Antinor01 - Bucklands BBB rocks! 20 years later I still occasionally use it.
[QUOTE=Antinor01]
I
I also feel a connection to the Greek pantheon and call on those gods during rituals and meditations, but as WhyNot said I don’t claim to do things the same as the ancient greeks did or even to understand the gods in the same way.
[/QUOTE]
I definitely agree with the both of you on this one. As a reconstructionist, I realize that there is not enough evidence out there to prove one way or another that any of us are actually doing the same things that the prechristian groups that we are using as inspiration did. In some ways, I am called by the Norse gods and entities of the spirit world (even admitting this in writing makes me feel weird, as it sounds a little crazy); however, any sort of communication I have from or with them does not really give me any more understanding than occasionally running into an “in the flesh” acquaintance.
A lot of my spirituality is based on trying to figure out how things mesh together for me in accordance with what works for me. If you don’t work at the ritual aspect or the meditative aspect, it takes a lot longer to develop some of the spiritual aspect. Not doing work to try and find out more about what you do in ritual in an attempt to communicate with the gods before you do ritual is a little bit like praying to a brick; try as you might, you’re unlikely to get a good result right away.
[QUOTE=WhyNot]
Yes, I’m pretty active in “the community” - whatever that means. I attend several festivals each year, the largest being Starwood, which attracts somewhere between 1500-2000 various people of various flavors of neopaganism and “other” (including the non religious and “Christian pagans” whatever they are.) For several years, I headed a religious community of about 60 active members and an additional 50 or so “Beltaine and Yule” folks. And, obviously, I love to talk this stuff to death.
[/QUOTE]
Would the “Beltane and Yule folks” be the equivalent of the Christians who only attend church on Easter and Christmas?
One of these days I’d love to attend a group gathering. My experience with such has been limited to the fluffybunnies and the “we must hide our rituals because WE! ARE! THE! PERSECUTED!!!” folks. (And they just make me tired.)
Hee. I often describe myself as “your everyday ordinary new-age tree-hugging crystal-wearing tofu-eating hippie chick, cleverly dsguised as a suburban soccer mom.” I probably run into more people who identify as Pagans than is usual, but I run in two circles that encourage a less-mainstream worldview anyway - actors and artists.
[QUOTE=LifeOnWry]
Would the “Beltane and Yule folks” be the equivalent of the Christians who only attend church on Easter and Christmas?
[/QUOTE]
Yes. I prefer to call them the “Samhain and Beltaine folks” myself. You know, sex holiday and the most woo-woo holiday of the year = super popular amongst the party pagans. Personally, I’ve been to one Beltaine ritual in my life. It was totally used by the hosts and many guests as an excuse to have a big sex party in the backyard of someone who lived in the country. (Yes, complete with the “party tent” that didn’t fully close from view. Yecch.)
[QUOTE=nashiitashii]
Yes. I prefer to call them the “Samhain and Beltaine folks” myself. You know, sex holiday and the most woo-woo holiday of the year = super popular amongst the party pagans. Personally, I’ve been to one Beltaine ritual in my life. It was totally used by the hosts and many guests as an excuse to have a big sex party in the backyard of someone who lived in the country. (Yes, complete with the “party tent” that didn’t fully close from view. Yecch.)
[/QUOTE]
So I suppose asking if you’d like to perform the great rite isn’t a pickup line that would work well on you?
[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
To be a Pagan means to wear a leather jacket and ride around on a Harley with a bunch of other similarly-equipped Pagans.
Glad we could clear this up.
[/QUOTE]
No, that would be People Against Goodness And Normalcy. And that’s…just the facts, ma’am.
Yeah, actually I meant “Samhain and Beltaine” and it’s an analogue to Christmas and Easter Catholics. My Yule wires got crossed with my Christmas wires and it came out all kerfluey.