This is a short personal rant.
I have heard many people claim that "pagans" should actually be identiofying as "neo-pagan". This is argued on the basis that pagans today are:
- not living as those who "originally" were pagan did
- not following the exact same practices that the "original" pagans did
- live in a vastly different world to that in which the "original" pagans did.
Which of these arguments does not apply to Christianity - particularly after the Council of Nicea? I actually have felt inclined, at times, to congratulate parts of Christianity for moving on, growing and changing with changing circumstances to stay relevant. Apparently, however, in some parts of Academia, that is A Bad Thing.
If I am expected to use the label (I'm tempted to write "the psuedo-label") "Neo-Pagan, then I expect the label (or "psudo-label") Neo-Christian to be used.
I'm afraid I think the "Neo-Pagan" thing is not a case of being accurate (some of the tenets that psuedo-label are based on are arguable, given things like hedge-witch, kitchen witch and family coven taditions), I consider it is a case of intellectual snobbery.
My apologies - normal service will now resume :)
Love, light, hugs and blessings
Gnwmythr
This post's photo is ... yet to be posted
Tags: about me, arrogance, attitudes, judging others, respect, science, bullying, cross-fertilisation (ideas),
First published: Monday 4th May, 2009
Last edited: Monday 4th May, 2009
