“Pagan”: Some Musings on Definitions

"There has been such debate on web sites, in forums and mailing lists on how to define “Pagan” and “Neo-Pagan” as a descriptive term for certain modern religions. Some Neo-Pagan sources define “Pagan” as being earth-centric or nature-centric. 

However, many Reconstructionist religions and many ancient Pagan religions on which modern Pagan religions are based are or were not earth-centric and Reconstructionists have complained that this definition of “Pagan” excludes them. Since I have Reconstructionist leanings, I would like also to have a working definition of “Pagan” includes this religious approach.

ReligiousToleration.org has an excellent discussion on the issues involved in the use of the word “Pagan” at http://www.religioustolerance.org/Paganism.htm. Issac Bonewits also has in interesting discussion on paleo-, meso-, and neo-Pagan at: http://www.neoPagan.net/PaganDefs.html. Other sites with thought-provoking discussions are listed below. 

Let us look first at how a much-used dictionary, The American Heritage Dictionary, defines “Pagan”:[3]

1. One who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew, especially a worshiper of a polytheistic religion. 2. One who has no religion. 3. A non-Christian. 4. A hedonist. 5. A Neo-Pagan.

A number of Pagans I know ascribe to part of the first definition of Pagan — one who is not a Christian, Muslim or Jew. 

This and definition no. 3 are very broad and inclusive, but not very meaningful. Definitions no. 2 and 4 make the word “Pagan” useless for describing a group or type of religion. Definition no. 5 equates Pagans as Neo-Pagans and excludes the very people who have as much right to the term as any Neo-Pagan, the Reconstructionists.

As for defining “Pagan” as “one who is not a Christian, Muslim or Jew,” I personally have a hard time thinking of Buddhists, Hindus or followers of various Native American religions as “Pagans.” Many times, these religions are based on wholly different world views than the Western world view.

Definitions no. 1 and 3 define “Pagan” by what it is not. 

I would like to see a definition that is based on what “Pagan” is. However, any sufficiently inclusive definition of “Pagan” probably could not include a list of characteristics shared by all, or even most, contemporary Pagan religions.

My Definition of “Pagan” as Used for Contemporary Religions

“Pagan” is a classificatory term for a varied group of religions that are based wholly or in greater part on pre-Judeo/Christian/Islamic European or Mediterranean religions throughout all of Europe and the Middle East and Northern Africa included in the area occupied by the Roman Empire at itgreatest extent. 

This definition includes such religions as those based on various Mesopotamian-area religions or Egyptian religion, but excludes religions of southern Africa, religions of India and eastern Asia, and religions of Native Americans, however similar in nature. 

In other words, Pagan religions include religions founded in the Western world and Western civilization. 

Traditionally, the history of Western civilization has usually included Egypt and Mediterranean Asia. Religions outside of this geographic region are not, to me, “Pagan.”

Since the word comes from the Latin paganus, it seems to me that it should apply to religions native to geographic territory of “Western Civilization.” I see it applying to the area covered by the Roman empire at its greatest extent and all the rest of Europe not conquered by Rome, but Christianized by the beginning of the Early Modern Period (about 1500 CE). 

The Latin term and the subsequent English derivation was applied within the Roman Empire or later, Christendom — Europe, the Middle East and North Africa for 1,000 years or so. It is only relatively recently that “Pagan” has been applied to religions outside that area. This still doesn't tell very much about what Pagan religions are like, but one now has a narrower scope for research and exploration.

Source and Full Article
http://www.silver-branch.org/ssbcreations/ssbpagandef.html