Democratic Forest Trusts (PDF)in Watson, Alan; Dean, Liese; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2006. Science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values: Eighth World Wilderness Congress Symposium; 2005 September 30-October 6; Anchorage, AK.Democratic trusts with leadership elected by citizen-members promise to solve many of the problems afflicting both traditional government and corporate ownership of forestlands. This article explores these issues in some depth.Complexity and the Dream of Human Control of Eco-Systems (PDF)in Watson, Alan; Dean, Liese; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2006. Science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values: Eighth World Wilderness Congress Symposium; 2005 September 30-October 6; Anchorage, AK.The title captures it. I then explore the kinds of institutions compatible with both nature and the modern world that are implied from this analysis.Rethinking the Obvious: Modernity and Living Respectfully With Nature (PDF)The Trumpeter: Journal of Ecosophy, Winter, 1997.Modernity is usually considered a wrong turn in terms of respect for and sustaining the environment. I argue the reality is more complex, for modernity has freed us from personal dependence on agriculture, ended the economic value of children, radically reduced the likelihood of large scale wat, and shifted much production to intellectual rather than material capital. This partially decouples society from nature, which gives us important opportunities as well as problems.Towards an Ecocentric Political Economy (PDF)The Trumpeter, Fall, 1996.This paper begins my effort at showing how liberal modernity can be harmonized with an ecocentric perspective on our relationship with the natural world. It is a corrective to much “free market environmental” literature that sacrifices Nature to money as well as to anti-liberal attacks by well-meaning but economically naïve environmentalists.Unexpected Harmonies: Self-Organization in Liberal Modernity and Ecology (PDF)The Trumpeter, Journal of Ecosophy, 10:1, Winter 1993This is my initial paper exploring how what I term ‘evolutionary liberal’ thought can be an important means by which society and nature can be brought into greater harmony. The other Trumpeter papers build on it.Deep Ecology and Liberalism: The Greener Implications of Evolutionary Liberalism (PDF)Review of Politics, Fall, 1996.Liberal thought and deep ecology are usually regarded as mutually exclusive. But the “evolutionary” tradition offers a way to integrate the two through commonalties in the work of David Hume, Michael Polanyi, Arne Naess, and Aldo Leopold, providing a stronger foundation for liberalism while strengthening the case for an ecocentric ethic.(Related subjects: Ecology)Saving Western Towns: A Jeffersonian Green Proposal (PDF)in Writers on the Range, Karl Hess and John Baden, eds., University Press of Colorado, 1998.Developmental pressures in the rural and small town West involve three groups: long term residents, new arrivals, and environmentalists. Today their interests often conflict. This conflict is in part the outcome of institutions which prevent harmonizing competing interests. The concept of developmental trusts, both for rural regions and for small communities offers a means whereby these interests can be harmonized for the benefit of all concerned.(Related subjects: Politics)Social Ecology, Deep Ecology, and Liberalism (PDF)Critical Review, 6: 2-3, 1992.Murray Bookchin is considered a leading radical environmental theorist. However, his analysis is incapable of leading humankind towards a more respectful and sustainable relationship with the natural world. Criticisms of Bookchin from both the deep ecology and evolutionary liberal perspective complement one another, pointing the way towards a better understanding of how modernity relates to the environment.The paper as a whole offers an early discussion of issues that are more clearly addressed in later papers, particularly Deep Ecology and Liberalism (1996) and the three Trumpeter articles in 1997, 1996, and 1993. However, there are other ideas in the article which have not been developed more thoroughly elsewhere.
Pagans are among the newest and oldest of religions. The earliest Pagans were among the hunting and gathering peoples at the dawn of history, while today’s NeoPagans arose within the modern world and work within cutting edge businesses and sciences. If what you think you know about Pagans stems from Hollywood, sermons, or fragmentary news reports, most of what you know is probably wrong. With that in mind, here are twelve things most people don’t know about Pagans.
Pagans do not believe is in some single personality that created and controls the world, communicating through a series of prophets or other source of divine commandments. We view such an entity as one deity among others, and not as all powerful. However once they started writing down their thoughts, historically most Pagans believed there is one source from which everything, including the Gods, emanates.
Some Wiccans call this Source the Dryghton. Our view closely resembles descriptions of the Godhead as reported by many mystics. While many Pagan traditions honor it, all focus mostly on “intermediate” spiritual powers, the Gods, elements, spirits of place, and ancestors, most closely involved with this world wherein we live.
“Pagan” is an all embracing term, like “monotheist.” Just as monotheists include Jews, Christians, and Muslims, so the term “Pagan” includes both Traditional and NeoPagans, (who differ from Pagans in the broader sense in that we have arisen within the context of the modern world, in societies where the traditional Pagan religions have been outlawed for nearly 1500 years). Hindus are also often included as Pagans. We NeoPagans reflect this modern heritage in ways Pagans with more unbroken roots to Pagan times do not.
Think of Wiccans, Witches, Druids, Celtic Reconstructionists, and others as one complex NeoPagan subspecies, and contemporary Pagans with relatively unbroken roots such as Traditional Native Americans, Shinto, and the African Diasporic traditions as another. Both fit into a larger Pagan category that includes the religions of Classical Greece and Rome, ancient Egypt, Tibetan Bon, Chinese Naxi, hunting and gathering religions and many others. So all Witches are Pagans, but not all Pagans are Witches.
Most Pagans do not want to convert you. Almost all Neopagans do not. Neopagans do not believe any particular religion is necessary for someone’s well-being, let alone their salvation. Therefore we feel no urge to make the rest of the world Pagan. Today, when we are not threatened with death or violence, we like to make information available to those who are interested, and often open our Sabbats to interested people, but the initiative must always be theirs.
We have no missionaries. Future Neopagans must ask to join us, and even then there is no guarantee the group asked will agree to admit or even to teach every seeker. Some groups are even closed to new members. Period.
Sacrifice is a long spiritual tradition in both Pagan and monotheistic traditions. Ancient Jews sacrificed animals to their God before the Romans destroyed their temple in Jerusalem, and ancient Pagans performed similar sacrifices. In both cases sacrificial animals were usually eaten, as they normally continue to be where sacrifice persists. Modern Jews do not sacrifice animals, and most NeoPagans do not either.
In over twenty five years of practice, I have never heard of animal sacrifice among NeoPagans. Pagan traditions with stronger roots to earlier times usually continue animal sacrifice, such as Santeria and practitioners of Voudon. But exceptions exist, such as a Voudon Priestess who is a vegetarian and so does not conduct sacrifice. The Gods come anyway.
Wiccan is often used as a synonym for Witch. The original Wiccans are followers of the Pagan traditions that Gerald Gardner made public after England abolished its anti-Witchcraft laws in 1951, and in some cases of those who taught Gardner.
Wiccans have always called themselves Witches, but as the number of NeoPagans has increased and become more accepted publicly, even earlier practices have become public and many other NeoPagans have started their own traditions. In both cases they also call usually call themselves Witches and Wiccans. Despite these differences, these varied groups generally respect one another as fellow Witches and NeoPagans.
Wiccans and many other Pagans celebrate the “Wheel of the Year” which progresses through the seasons as life progresses from birth, through youth, adulthood, and finally death. We think of this cycle as a wheel because it continually repeats itself in nature and, many of us believe, for people.
Among NeoPagans there are usually eight Sabbats honored, though some celebrate fewer. Samhain, Oct 31- Nov 1, marks the beginning of the Wiccan year, and is followed by Yule, Imbolc or Brigit, Ostara, Beltane, Midsummer, Lughnasadh or Lammas, Mabon, and back around to Samhain. Some groups might begin with Yule, the Winter Solstice. All these sacred days are called Sabbats. In this way we honor the sacredness of all necessary aspects of physical existence, from birth to death. Among many NeoPagans, especially Wiccans, a similar cycle is honored through
“Esbats” which are keyed to the phases of the moon, which undergoes a similar cycle of waxing, fullness, waning, and darkness. Most Esbats are celebrated on the Full Moon, or close to it. Groups that gather for these celebrations are usually smaller, often a coven or equivalent group.
A Coven Is Like a Congregation
A coven is the Wiccan and many other Witches’ equivalent of a congregation. It is the traditional group that meets together on a regular basis to honor the Gods and to work magick together. Most other Pagan groups have equivalent groups. For example, Druids have Groves. On the other hand, many Pagans do not work in and through covens, and may gather together only for Sabbats and festivals. These Pagans are often called “solitaries.”
‘Drawing Down the Moon’ is a ritual central to Wiccans and has equivalents in a great many other Pagan and NeoPagan traditions. Through it we encounter our Gods directly, without either scripture or sermon. The Goddess is invoked into the High Priestess.
When She comes, the Priestess enters into trance, and the Goddess gives teachings, advice, and blessings to coven members through her. Then She departs. Less often the Wiccan God enters into the High Priest. The opportunity to experience such close communion with our deities is perhaps the greatest blessing in Wiccan and similar Pagan practice.
In fact, most respect him and regard him as an important spiritual teacher. This was true for Pagan oracles in Classical times and remains true today. Pagans do not interpret his teachings in the way that Christian do, however. We do not believe he was the only begotten son of God, nor that believing in him is necessary for the remission of sins, nor do we believe in sins in the ways many Christians think of the term.
To us, it makes no more sense to say that this respectful lack of involvement is “hate” than to say that because I am not interested in becoming involved with someone, that means I “hate” them. No, I wish them well on their life journey, but theirs is not my journey. A far more interesting question is to why so many Christians persist in hating Pagans.
Witches often have a “Book of Shadows” or similar text, but we do not regard these as inerrant, and most of their contents are of rituals and other practices that have worked for us or others in the past. A Book of Shadows is more like a cookbook of recipes combined with a collection of inherited teachings than a source for sacred dogma. Pagans find their main teachings in the Sacred as it manifests in this world, because we focus on Spirit is immanent rather than transcendent.
We find wisdom in the cycles of our lives and in the seasons, and in the many other ways that Spirit manifests in this world. Because our world is so varied, different Pagan practices focus on the Sacred through different aspects of our world, but all regard spiritual experiences of and in our world, as well as through our Gods, as our chief source of spiritual knowledge.
Pagans Don’t Worship Satan. They Don’t Even Believe Satan Exists.
Pagans do not believe in Satan, let alone worship such a being. Pagans believe our world is a manifestation of the Sacred, and is not fallen. As a consequence, its spiritual powers are worthy of veneration and honor. While because in human beings freedom and ignorance exist together bad things inevitably happen, Pagans do not think there is any need to posit an ultimate source of evil, or even that such an idea makes much sense.
Many modern Pagans spell magick with a ‘k’ to distinguish it from stage magic. Pagans use magick primarily for healing work, but it is also used to provide protection for people and places, helping someone get a job or place to live, and even for finding parking places. The skeptic will say magick is simply a fancy name given to coincidences. This leads to my personal favorite description of how magick works: the non-coincidental accumulation of meaningful ‘coincidences.’
Gus diZerega blogs for Beliefnet at A Pagan’s Blog. He is a political scientist/theorist with a PhD from the University of California at Berkeley. He is the author of Pagans and Christians: The Personal Spiritual Experience, (Llewellyn, 2001) and (with Philip Johnson), Beyond the Burning Times: A Pagan and Christian in Dialogue (Lion Hudson, 2008) While living and working as an artist and craftsperson to finance his degree, he met and later studied with teachers in NeoPaganism, the earth religions more generally, and shamanic healing.
posted November 10, 2009 at 1:26 pm
Well-crafted!
posted November 10, 2009 at 2:00 pm
I would like to note that animal sacrifices do occur in Asatru, and some other Reconstructionist traditions. I think this is important to mention, as well as that when animals are sacrificed, it is done in ways that are more humane than what you would find in a slaughter house.
posted November 10, 2009 at 3:29 pm
BRAVO Gus! VERY well done!
posted November 10, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Well, Gus, now you know someone who has participated in an animal sacrifice. Last month I helped a friend on Whidbey Island with the ritual slaughter of several ducks and a chicken. One of those ducks is in my freezer even as I type. The ritual consisted of a few simple words of dedication over the animals, with thanks for their lives and the good they will bring us.
The birds were all raised organically at home and well-cared for. They were dispatched as quickly and humanely as possible.
posted November 10, 2009 at 7:03 pm
Thanks for the clarifications regarding some of the reconstructionist traditions. My opinion of them does not go up or down because I personally see no problem with it done in an appropriate and respectful manner. Certainly a meat eater such as myself has little reason to object.
posted November 10, 2009 at 7:04 pm
love that you took the time to say this! i hope it reaches all who needs to see it!!!
thanks…
posted November 10, 2009 at 7:39 pm
Again, I have to thank Gus for his ever so simple;
“come on, you idiots!” take on explaining
things to non-Indigenists (non-pagans).
Now…if only we can get his column picked up
by the AOL or FOX News websites…we’d all get
a lot less “ain’tchoo one uh dem dehr satanistic folk?”
Nice Gus, seriously though, someone should see about
getting your articles a little more coverage.
M
Beijing
posted November 11, 2009 at 12:07 pm
However once they started writing down their thoughts, historically most Pagans believed there is one source from which everything, including the Gods, emanates.
Wasn’t this a pretty late development? Like in Classical Greece? I think many of us think of ourselves as hard polytheists, and I, for one, don’t see things this way. I don’t see a single source for everything in the cosmos. I see the Gods and other Spirits as individuals, not ‘aspects’ of anything.
The exercise shows how diverse some of us Pagans are – while much of what you have written applies to me and others like me, there are definitely bits that do not. Fascinating.
posted November 11, 2009 at 12:46 pm
True… I didn’t know any of these things. Cool! e cigarette
posted November 11, 2009 at 3:08 pm
Gain favor with Satan! =
http://www.filthyrichmond.com/2009/06/gain-favor-with-satan.html
posted November 11, 2009 at 3:17 pm
Gus,
Thank you so much for this article. There are still so many misconceptions about the Pagan path.
Willow
posted November 11, 2009 at 3:36 pm
watch & learn…There is only 1 gospel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtt7LhFa_Ys&feature=channel
posted November 11, 2009 at 3:54 pm
oh no! I saw the word “pagan” and the deeply-imprinted programming from the tunnel-visioned viral doctrine kicked-in so I gotta post a whole bunch of links to “save” you. Sigh…
Great article
posted November 11, 2009 at 4:09 pm
In Slavic languages is a distinction to this day between “boh/bog” that means God and “div” or “diva”(female) that can be translated as god (with small g). The Boh is only one (the Source), while divs are embodiment of natural principles or natural powers. For example Perun, Svarog and Lada were div(a)s. While today many people equate Perun with God, among pagan community in Slovakia (where I live) is strong belief that old Slavs in fact lived in monotheism as I described above. There is still oral tradition and old celebrations surviving that support it. Christian church had very hard time to cover/exterminate this tradition because it does not oppose Church’s monotheistic teaching.
posted November 11, 2009 at 4:19 pm
Religion is a practice for respected or appointed people to provide answers and explanations to things that just didn’t add up scientifically for the given time period. Humans have developed a reliable and logical method of testing and understanding the world around them. Falling backwards into the arms of religious ignorance can hinder the development of intelligent society and should be avoided at all costs. The world is not flat and is not in any means just a few thousands of years old , and people should not waste their time into understanding this ancient belief. Perhaps spend your extra time trying to find a cure for cancer, aids, or solve world poverty. Think im wrong? just remember when your slapping your offended fingers against the keys on your computer box, mans ingenuity pounded this technology out of earth and rock… The ones who developed computers and the internet probably never intended someone to explain theism in a manner other than a history lesson. Much less struggle to explain how anything like this can be “modern”
posted November 11, 2009 at 4:35 pm
IMHO, being pagan is a label either accepted or applied. Either you call yourself a pagan, or others call you one. But at the end of the day, it comes down to the simple concept of belief and allowing others their own belief. So to be pagan in my opinion is simply that you allow others their own belief, while still retaining your own. The ability to find what makes you spiritually content, while giving others the right to find their own path.
Humans need faith to survive, imagine trying to do something as simple as drive your car without faith in your ability and the abilities of those driving around you. Or standing on a curb and seeing a bus charging at you doing 60mph. Because of faith in 4 inches of concrete at your feet called a curb, the threat of that bus bearing down quickly is squashed.
So we all have the need to believe, but, being pagan means first you let others have a right to their own belief. Past that, believe what you need
posted November 11, 2009 at 5:03 pm
You make a nice sounding point here: “Pagans Do Not Hate Jesus, In fact, most respect him and regard him as an important spiritual teacher…however. We do not believe he was the only begotten son of God, nor that believing in him is necessary for the remission of sins, nor do we believe in sins”
I have always found it terribly perplexing, however, that people can claim to respect Jesus and his teachings, yet blatantly disregard what He claims as truth. Jesus clearly states that he is the only begotten Son of God, and that the only way to salvation is through Him. If this is NOT true, he is clearly not a good spiritual teacher, but an egotistical maniac. If it IS true, we had better believe it. We cannot pick and choose bits and pieces of Jesus’ teachings to follow- if He is who He says He is, he deserves a lot more than that.
posted November 11, 2009 at 5:30 pm
Courtesy post: I linked to this thread from my blog at Alexandria.
I’ll return when I have enough time to post something coherent, but in the meantime: Very well done, indeed, Gus.
posted November 11, 2009 at 5:59 pm
Very well done and interesting article. Loved it!
posted November 11, 2009 at 9:15 pm
Gus,
Thank you for the wonderful article. Granted, there are many things in ‘Paganism’ but I think you did a great job in hitting the main ideas.
I do have a question. I have run into the name “Dryghton” but didn’t find specifics on the name. Where did you find the information? I’ve been trying to research the name, Dryghton but haven’t found much info. Can you share?
Thanks,
Gwyddion9…Ron
posted November 12, 2009 at 7:44 am
This is an interesting attempt to categorize that which most strenuously resists all attempt at categorization, Gus!
I am Wiccan, and I have to disagree with you about “Drawing Down” any god or goddess. Why would it be necessary or desirable to invite from outside oneself that which already resides within?
My gods are not separate from me. They ARE me.
posted November 12, 2009 at 11:02 am
A friend of mine, who knows my faith, sent me this. You did a wonderful job in describing the main aspects of the Pagan belief structure. I am traditional, Celtic Wiccan (not a Gardnerian) and this posting is refreshing and well-organized.
I am with Janus, however, in that we do not “draw-down” any diety, as She and He is within all things; we are their essence and not separate of them.
Thank you for giving me something accurate to share with those that ask me questions about my Faith!
posted November 12, 2009 at 11:16 am
Very interesting question Janus and Sarnah-
Here is a brief reply – I will make a longer reply in today’s post.
I have encountered the Goddess when She was being drawn down into the priestess. She was not in me in the way the God is when He has been drawn down into me. The experience had every dimension of encountering Someone quite different from myself: wiser, more loving, more powerful, more beautiful – and all to many orders of magnitude. And separate.
When the God was drawn down interpretations could reasonably vary, but because the experience was of a being so different from me – imagine masculinity minus any fears, insecurities, desires to control, etc., etc – that I was changed by the encounter. My teacher in these matters describes these experiences as a “tuning” where our vibrations, so to speak, are drawn into greater harmony with the Gods – a bit by bit process to be sure, but one that fits my experience.
This can only be a “Thou art Goddess Thou art God” kind of thing from a monistic perspective – and while I happen to take that perspective, using the same reasoning, you are me and I am you. There is a sense where that is true- but there is an important sense where it misses the point.
posted November 12, 2009 at 1:11 pm
Gus,
I do have a question. I have run into the name “Dryghton” but didn’t find specifics on the name. Where did you find the information? I’ve been trying to research the name, Dryghton but haven’t found much info.
The name was not taught in my tradition and i’m trying to find more info on the name. Please, can you direct me to some info on Dryghton?
posted November 12, 2009 at 1:50 pm
Gwyddion9-
My understanding is that the Dryghton is a term that means leader if traced back linguistically. That sheds no light on the use in Pagan circles.
It is referred to in much British Traditional Wiccan ritual – not all – some have abandoned itand I have no idea as to the content of rituals with no influence by Gerald Gardner. It is part of a saying that is essentially NeoPlatonic in tone and theological content.
As I understand it, it is NOT something a 19th century folklorist trying to recreate an ancient Pagan religion would be likely to have used, because the view then was that we ‘progressed’ in spiritual insight from animism to polytheism to monotheism.
posted November 12, 2009 at 2:11 pm
I’m working on my “elevator speech” for the Parliament and this essay comes at a great time.
Like Kirk though, I am a hard polytheist not a monist. I really don’t find the Dryghton or Ground of All Being notion compatible with my beliefs.
Using as a basis some of what I wrote years ago for the Covenant of the Goddess press packet, my current speech (I know it needs trimming!) goes:
Witchcraft is a life-affirming, earth- and nature-oriented religion which sees all of life as sacred and interconnected, honors the natural world as the embodiment of divinity and experiences the divine as both feminine and masculine.
A coven is the Wiccan equivalent of a congregation. It is the traditional group that meets together on a regular basis to honour the Goddesses and Gods, including the Triple Goddess of the waxing, full, and waning moon, and the Horned God of the sun and animal life, and to work magick together. We attune ourselves to the seasons, the unseen powers and the legacy of our ancestors and we honour the Earth itself as an ancestor.
Our religion is not a series of precepts or beliefs, rather we believe that we each have within ourselves the capacity to reach out and experience the mystery — that feeling of ineffable oneness with all Life. Those who wish to have this experience must work, and create, and participate in their individual religious lives.
Wicca is a participatory revelation, a celebratory action leading to greater understanding of oneself and the universe. We believe there is much to learn by studying our past, through myth, through ritual drama, through poetry and music, through love and through living in harmony with the Earth. We believe in peaceful means of conflict resolution, and in spreading peace throughout the world.
posted November 12, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Excellent post, thank you.
posted November 12, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Thank you Gus.
I was taught a family tradition from Ireland and the name ‘Dryghton’
was never mentioned. I was curious as I’m always wanting to learn about the histories that made the Wiccan/Pagan religion or histories, in general when regarding Paganism.
Thank you for taking the time to respond. I appreciate it a great deal.
Blessings,
Ron
posted November 12, 2009 at 7:52 pm
Not all pagans celebrate the Sabbats/Esbats. In Hellenic Polytheism, many of us follow the traditional lunar calendar beginning with the new moon (the day after the dark moon). The first day of the month is sacred to Selene and Apollon Noumenios; the second to the Agathos Daemon; the third to Athene; the fourth to Hermes, Herakles, Aphrodite, and Eros; the sixth to Artemis; the seventh to Apollon; and the eighth to Poseidon (and Theseus, but he’s a hero). The final day of the month, what one would consider the real dark moon, is sacred to Hekate. Our other holidays can happen at any time during the lunar month, but it is true that many fall near the full moon. Some of us are also incorporating solar festivals (ex: Heliogenna, a winter solstice celebration).
Religio Romana, Kemetism, and other non-Celtic-derived paganisms/polytheisms also have different festival calendars.
Otherwise, great post — you clarified a lot for people. Now if only certain people would read it and become more tolerant instead of trying to convert us in the comments.
posted November 13, 2009 at 10:27 am
http://janusgates.blogspot.com/
posted November 13, 2009 at 10:31 am
For those of you who are looking for an explanation of the term, “Dryghton,” it helps first to check the spelling. Then Google.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiccan_views_of_divinity#Dryghten
posted November 14, 2009 at 12:37 pm
Thanks for the diversity. It is good to live by our own beliefs and conscience–while we are still free to do it.