![[tmbchr]™](/journal/popocculture-blog-logo.jpg){kind=logo}
Philosophical Paganism
Here’s a question for people who know a lot more about polytheism, paganism and Wicca than me. Can you be, or is there a term for somebody who maybe believes and is “into” this stuff, but who doesn’t practice any accompanying forms of magic/k, ritual or occult practice?
I’m thinking something like “philosophical paganism” or “philosophical polytheism” would be an appropriate moniker, but I’ve never really seen anybody talk about it like this. Everybody who seems to be into paganism who I’ve ever come across typically seems to be of the pentagram-wearing spell-casting variety. But I imagine there are many other people who just think this approach to religion makes more sense, but don’t have an altar or an athame or anything set up in their bedroom.
I guess the equivalent of it in mainstream culture would be something similar to all those people who profess a belief in God, or even maybe Jesus, but who don’t really go to Church or do much of anything else. I guess in popular religious-studies terminology nowadays, most of those people are classified as “spiritual but not religious.” How many people reading this would describe yourself that way - whether or not you’re a pagan?
Funny cause whenever I hear the phrase “spiritual but not religious,” I always want to tell people that I’m religious but not spiritual, just to be a jerk.
December 11th, 2005 at 6:50 pm
My sentiments exactly, especially the jerk part. A wise man once said:
December 11th, 2005 at 8:22 pm
I’d call the people you’re describing “non-practicing.”
December 11th, 2005 at 8:29 pm
I believe, but I’m not sure, that the term “pagan” originally meant “peasant,” and what we now call “paganism” was the customs of the regular people in early pre-Christian times. Paganism is therefore not actually wicca, or witchcraft, but a more animist belief in the cycles of nature and the intelligence behind those cycles. As an astrologer I find this view to be wise and rooted in authenticity, unlike the dogma of religion which is rooted in what one person decided everyone else should believe and then proceeded to murder and pillage in order to sway others to their opinion.
December 11th, 2005 at 8:32 pm
Let’s not forget that people of all religious persuasions murder and pillage…
Also, I think it’s important to remember that much of astrological lore was brought to us by way of Christianity. Christ and his twelve disciples are themselves essentially astrological symbols
December 11th, 2005 at 8:33 pm
Dan, maybe. I always imagine though when people ask the question, “Are you a practicing Catholic? (or whatever)” I want to say, “No, I’m a professional. I don’t need any more practice.”
December 11th, 2005 at 8:57 pm
Heh, or maybe also someone in the vein of James Hillman, who might see the Gods as deep psychological symbols and understand themselves in terms of divine/archetypal perspectives—thus the Gods would mean a great deal to them and play a large role in their life, but without the whole “pentagram-wearing spell-casting thing”.
I don’t know. It kind of bothers me, the way all kinds of nuances of belief (if you would even call that ‘belief’) and the ways people relate to what they consider divine are “off the map” so to speak.
December 11th, 2005 at 9:29 pm
religious but not spiritual that is fuckin’ hilarious. I think your a fuckin agnostic, dude, like doubting Thomas.
What did it for me was a nice hit of acid and trying to comprehend the fact that the universe cannot be comprehended by the limited volume of grey matter inside your brain-bucket…
I wrote an essay at St. Bonnie’s about how it was a legitimate ineffable religious experience and I consider it a point of samadhi, and I got an A on the paper, too.
I mean 12 times a day I’ll think “thank god that truck didn’t bang into me” and shit like that, I mean I don’t beseech the Lord or anything, but “Thank God” definitely comes out of my mouth at certain times (I think it was having the kids), its like a social programming thing I think or some hangover or vestige of something, Although I find the idea of the whole Kingdom of God thing a bit annoying, heaven as a carrot, “empire” as the stick to enforce rules, we all know that…
Don’t feel bad you are interested in this stuff, it shows a lot of personal open-minded-ness as if I just wear my little ol’ pentagram people always give me wierd looks, and I don’t have tats or an amputation or anything…
It sucks not being able to represent your “faith” like a fuckin cross…
I mean I call myself a witch if a jehova’s witness gets in my face, and yeah I’m a minerval or whatever but you know I kinda feel the same way, like I’m not a “joiner” I guess?
I do teach my kids to say “blessed be” when someone sneezes though. Sounds better than “bless you”.
Categorization leads to calamity!
-tc
“If my wings should fail me Lord,
won’t you meet me with another pair?”
December 11th, 2005 at 9:39 pm
Or hilariousness! Seriously, people are too down on labels and categories, but that’s already been addressed here ad nauseum.
It’s not really that easy to describe what I am I guess, but I’m 101% not agnostic. Hell, I even had a dream where Jesus came and told me a parable about my life’s mission, and another dream where God brought me to this cave and showed me a black rock carved with an agreement between me and him. Pretty much the opposite of agnostic if you ask me.
December 12th, 2005 at 10:22 am
Yes, there are such people, they’re called Jungians. Seriously, that would probably be more common in a place where polytheism is the norm, like India. There are probably people there who don’t literally believe in gods, but think its good for personal and national character and morality to pay lip sevice to them, like ’spiritual’ Christian types do here.
December 12th, 2005 at 12:48 pm
i think you’re describing like the more philosophical paganism of the ancient greeks and romans, like plato and his pals. they ‘worshipped the gods’ and whatnot, but they tended to call themselves ‘philosophers,’ ’cause that was their bag. philosophy’s become such a watered-down discipline these days thanks to the frickin’ existentialists and materialists, but back in the day it used to be far more like what we do around here.
seriously, though, what would be a good term for someone who follows the path of radical inquiry? an ‘enquirer’?
December 12th, 2005 at 1:36 pm
You know, many Christians are polytheistic. Vox Day is one who infamously has said that Christianity is not a monotheistic religion, otherwise why would you need the commandment “Thou shalt have [i]no other gods[/i] before me.”?
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2005/12/mailvox-christians-are-polytheists.html
So if you get an easter/Christmas christian, you may have what you’re looking for…
December 12th, 2005 at 2:05 pm
(Scott, BBcode doesn’t work here. Just use HTML)
Juana, I think that’s a great point both about the Jungians thing and about India as being a good example. That’s one of the greatest things about Hinduism, I think - is that you actually can have that opinion that you’re holding and that it’s perfectly orthodox to have it on some level. They acknowledge that - *gasp!* - different people have different religious needs.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:16 pm
Tim, with all due respect Chaldean astrology, which is the method practiced by the Greeks and what has come down to us today, originated with the Babylonians long before Christianity. In fact I would argue that the early Church suppressed the study of astrology along with other sciences which is why those sciences ended up flowering in the Arabic countries instead during the Dark Ages.
It’s an interesting point about the twelve disciples. DaVinci’s painting “The Last Supper” relates the disciples to the zodiac.
December 12th, 2005 at 6:20 pm
well you know more about it than me, being an astrologer. my realy point was that i dont think its necessary to villify christianity in order to praise paganism. the two dont need to be exclusive. and whatever happened in the past IS in the past. we can leave it there and we can make something useful out of all of whats available to us.
December 12th, 2005 at 6:48 pm
What if your comprehension does not originate in that limited volume of grey matter? What if consciousness is purely energy? What if one could expand that energy, and thus expand one’s ability to comprehend?
December 12th, 2005 at 8:01 pm
To quote Wayne’s World: What if monkeys fly out of my butt?
December 13th, 2005 at 11:57 am
Many polytheists do not practice magic as an integral part of their religion.
I think the association of various Pagan paths with magic has come about because the occult revival happened before the Pagan revival.
December 13th, 2005 at 7:20 pm
“Can you be, or is there a term for somebody who maybe believes and is “into” this stuff, but who doesn’t practice any accompanying forms of magic/k, ritual or occult practice?”
Certainly. To be a polytheist means nothing more than that one believes there are many Gods; it doesn’t speak to one’s practices. A person could easily say, “I am a polytheist (or, ‘I am a pagan’), that point of view seems correct to me, but I have not decided which God(s) I wish to worship or how I wish to go about it, nor am I interested in doing any magic at this time.” There is nothing at all inconsistent in this, and in fact I think that it speaks to the position of more than a few people.