Is the USA seeing a pagan revival?
Is the USA seeing a pagan revival? As more and more people are leaving the Big 3, some for atheism and others for agnosticism or spiritualism, we might be inclined to give an emphatic yes. However, we must first define what we mean by "paganism". Are we sticking to the original Latin for 'country bumpkin', going with the far more common definition of 'people who follow non-Abrahamic religions' or the new definition being put forth in this opinion piece: 'secularism and spiritualism without god'?
Which is why lately I’ve become interested in books and arguments that suggest that there actually is, or might be, a genuinely post-Christian future for America — and that the term “paganism” might be reasonably revived to describe the new American religion, currently struggling to be born.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/12/opinion/christianity-paganism-america.html
Which is why lately I’ve become interested in books and arguments that suggest that there actually is, or might be, a genuinely post-Christian future for America — and that the term “paganism” might be reasonably revived to describe the new American religion, currently struggling to be born.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/12/opinion/christianity-paganism-america.html
Comments
I've had a lot of interactions with them over the years. And I think, since they've adopted the term, and are by some measures the fasting growing religious identification in the world, I won't grudge them claiming the term for their own.
And for them, it means more-or-less 'Someone whose religious/spiritual/mystical/magical practices are based on or significantly inspired by pre-Christian European Polytheism.'
To be fair, some of them also loop in non-European stuff, like Egyptian Polytheism, but generally most of them follow things which have some pre-Christian European basis like Druidism, Asatru, or the Greco-Roman traditions.
The term "pagan" also comes from the Latin for 'country dweller'; those who held on to the 'old' faiths, much like rural Christians are now as urbanites are leaving formal religions for spirituality.
I've known witches, Wiccans, Satanists, Astrauians, Odinists, Hinduism, modern Druids, reconstructionist druids, Buddhists and more. And, for the most part, they we're fine people.
I've read more books and articles about ancient Celtic people and their religions than most modern practitoners who chose those paths. I've compared and contrasted those religions with others from across the globe.
And since I hold no bars when being critical or condescending towards people from the Abrahamic faiths, I feel no compunction doing the same with minority - pagan - religions. And if followers of those paths want to be offended, well let them.
No one can make you offended, you can only allow yourself be take offense.
By analogy, you wouldn't use the word Buddhist to mean post-Judeo-Christian, as this article uses Pagan to mean post--Judeo-Christian, because there are Buddhists, and it would at best be very confusing to have to be constantly specifying which type of Buddhist you meant, i.e. 'Classic Buddhists' or 'Post Judeo-Christian'. Even if offending the Buddhists didn't concern you, it would just be hella confusing.
So why use a term already actively adopted by a religious community of millions that, as I said, may well be the fastest growing one in the world? Why not simply say Post Judeo-Christian?