Names, titles and other designations

[Milfoil]

How do you find a way to describe what path you follow when what you believe is so diverse?

I'm increasingly finding that there is no real label for what I feel and believe. Some that fit closely carry too much baggage and are inappropriate in some way or another. Then I see other people using a definition as a kind of badge of honour or big hat when really it is simply a description. Other names or terms are not part of our language and have no direct comparison and as such, we are often using them to mean different things or they never had any real meaning in the first place.

I know, there is a slightly different slant on belief for everyone and that often we find comfort in associating with like minded individuals and so religions are born but so many people all over the globe are realising, in the 21st C, that all beliefs hold some similar keys, positive aspects and wonderful insights. So anyone coming from a non-specific (not indoctrinated by any one belief) background will naturally look at each faith or belief path with a broader vision and open mind towards possible faults and human errors/dogma.

How then, if, as so many here on AT, you follow an eclectic spiritual path, do you define your beliefs or label yourself so that others can understand? Yes, I am acutely aware that none of us NEED a label and that is part of the question in a way but generally, in order to communicate with people we have to make distinctions and have definitions which involve names and labels . . . .

 

[ThunderWolf]

I generally just call myself Pagan. It's a very broad term that is so diverse it's hard to really even have any specific meaning. I do generally say it's steeped in Wicca but there's so much more to it that it isn't exactly Wicca either (though in any given mood I may just say I'm Wiccan as that's from whence my personal eclectic path sprang). My path is very diverse but based in nature, so I use the very broad term of Pagan most often.

 

[Zephyros]

Names and definitions are human constructs, meant to engender a feeling of community. As the saying goes "I wouldn't join any club who would accept me," I am quite comfortable in not calling myself anything, or even "spiritual" since in "true" spiritual terms, I think it makes no difference at all.

I'm me, and truth be told, I don't even know what that means, either. So, as a shaved ape, it`s all good one way or the other. I just don't care. If others don't understand, I'm not Jesus, I don't feel the need to teach and explain everything I do, it`s my own thing.

Key sentence: I don't care

 

[Milfoil]

I generally just call myself Pagan. It's a very broad term that is so diverse it's hard to really even have any specific meaning. I do generally say it's steeped in Wicca but there's so much more to it that it isn't exactly Wicca either (though in any given mood I may just say I'm Wiccan as that's from whence my personal eclectic path sprang). My path is very diverse but based in nature, so I use the very broad term of Pagan most often.

Being part of the local pagan community here, I find that it's not sufficient when others ask and then when you start talking, they give you a label whether you want it or not and often it doesn't fit what I think that means . . . yada, yada, yada.

I think I am asking a rhetorically unanswerable question but still, it helps to muse on it.

I wish there were an English term which sufficiently summed up the general idea of what I believe without having a load of baggage associated with it. Even the word Pagan has that and doesn't mean what it did back in Roman times.

 

[Milfoil]

Key sentence: I don't care

But I do. I do care how others perceive who I am and what I believe. Perhaps it's a vanity I need to work through? It's less about having a label and more about fitting securely into a framework which others can identify and, therefore, understand. When someone says to me, "I am a Mormon", I immediately have a good idea of what they believe etc. I guess it is about identity.

 

[ThunderWolf]

Being part of the local pagan community here, I find that it's not sufficient when others ask and then when you start talking, they give you a label whether you want it or not and often it doesn't fit what I think that means . . . yada, yada, yada.

Well, to be honest with you I take ownership of myself and my spiritual path in life. If others want to call me something else, that's on them. But the fact of the matter is that I'm the only one I allow to define my path. Nobody else is allowed that privilege. They can call me what they like, but I am not in any way beholden to conform to their ideas of what I or my path happen to be.

 

[Milfoil]

I understand what you're saying and agree Thunderwolf, I wasn't meaning that anyone else defines me, more about the misunderstandings that ensue when there is no universal name or concept.

 

[Zephyros]

But I do. I do care how others perceive who I am and what I believe. Perhaps it's a vanity I need to work through? It's less about having a label and more about fitting securely into a framework which others can identify and, therefore, understand. When someone says to me, "I am a Mormon", I immediately have a good idea of what they believe etc. I guess it is about identity.

Let me be uncharacteristically cryptic and "new age" for a moment. "In the beyond" or when you reach the pearly gates or achieve Nirvana or communion with your HGA, does it really and truly matter who he (they/it/) is called? From a young age we are taught that words give things substance and meaning and depth. Then you reach spiritual thinking and try to "unlearn" those words and get into abstract feelings, ideas and emotions. God (I'm using the term in a non-denominational way) isn't in Shakespeare, he is beyond that, beyond anything we can, at this stage of development, conceive of.

Beyond all, there are no words, there is only Silence.

I don't think you're vain, I think you're wonderful, it is other people who feel safer categorizing you in terms of what they think they understand, because it makes them feel more in control both of you, and of themselves. Remember when Samuel`s mother came to the temple and prayed for a son, and the priests mocked her for praying silently. God (again, non-denominational) doesn't need our primitive constructs to know us. In the end, though, Hannah got her son, one of the greatest prophets in the Bible, all through silence.

Definitions are meant to give the singular person strength in numbers, but I don't feel you need you categorize yourself for the sake of others. If they are confused, that is their problem, don't make it yours. That is how religions form, strength in numbers, an outdated and flawed concept, in my opinion.

Like I said, definitions are human, and beyond this world, have no meaning.

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."

 

[Milfoil]

Yes, I also feel much the way that you do Closrapexa in that, deep down, I truly wish that none of this mattered but when others are not at that place yet where they can see anything outside their own box, it does have some bearing.

Trying to elucidate what it is that I believe is like trying to knit fog, the moment I find something that seems cohesive, something else comes along to change it, transform my ideas, break them down and teach me. It all morphs as I grow (older) so keeping any kind of definition is difficult but then trying to explain it to anyone then gets hampered by lack of definition.

The whole New-Age thing has it's good and bad points. Distancing myself from the negative, fluffy, everything is light and good stuff feels necessary but it seems as though even in groups with shared views about this and other things there are difficulties of interpretation and misunderstandings.

Having any kind of title (priest, priestess, wizard, shaman etc) suggests a need for one not merely by the person but by those around who need to have some way to define what that person is or does yet not having one can lead to confusion, ignorance and misinformation, it suggests not simply no need on the 'enlightened' level but no need on a personal level too - like a wishy, washy, non descriptive, circling round the drain with no particular direction, simply being washed along by nature kind of attitude.

Even if there were a new or old word that would encompass all this without dogma, baggage or tradition, it would soon aquire some I guess.

 

[ThunderWolf]

I understand what you're saying and agree Thunderwolf, I wasn't meaning that anyone else defines me, more about the misunderstandings that ensue when there is no universal name or concept.

Perhaps you could simply tell them that it would take much too long to explain and that they'll have to be satisfied with the label eclectic?

I'm not meaning to talk down to you, so if this comes off that way please forgive me. I just tend to be direct and never know just how someone is going to take my text. That said, I must admit I'm not understanding the importance of others understanding your personal path. For me the focus should be on those last three words as it is a personal path, and it is yours. So long as you understand your path I honestly just don't understand the importance you're placing on others understanding it.