Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Hearth Witch Down Under

Home
About

Home
Pagan
Polytheism Isn’t Yours

Polytheism Isn’t Yours

Last updated on: January 24, 2018 at 1:33 pm by Bekah Evie Bel

Polytheism Isn’t Yours 2018-01-24T13:33:29+10:00 Bekah Evie Bel

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The debate about polytheism rages on. I have to be honest, this debate is one of the more stupid ones I have seen in the department of definition debates within Paganism. I mean, polytheism has a definition, a simple and broad definition.

The belief in or worship of more than one god.

Pretty clear, cut and dried. Right? Seems to me this leaves it open to anyone who believes in more than one god. They don’t even have to worship those gods, or any gods, just believe in them. It doesn’t tell us what gods are, it doesn’t tell us what we must believe the gods to be, where they reside, what they do, where they came from. It only tells us, more than one.

The definition of polytheism is simple and broad. In my opinion, we don’t get decide that the old definition is missing bits and pieces and actually means something far more narrow than is actually written out. The definition is broad, we can’t change that, not easily and not today. We can’t change an old word, we can’t change the definition of an old word. We can only create new words and new definitions for old and new words. We cannot change what was.

If we could – we wouldn’t still have people making assumptions about our beliefs when we say, “Oh hi I am a Pagan and a Witch!” The new definitions for Pagan and Witch do exist, but the old definitions remain the same. We cannot change old words and old definitions.

But we can create new ones, or better yet, we can expand on old ones with other words. This is why I like two word labels, I like the new “divisions” in polytheism.

Devotional Polytheism – for the devoted ones, generally those who believe in distinct, individual beings.
Archetypal Polytheism – for those who have a Jungian view of the deities.
Monistic Polytheism – for those who believe all is part of the One, all Deities are also therefore part of the One (whatever that One is, the Universe, an Over God, whatever).
Dualistic/Duotheistic Polytheism – for those who believe in One God and One Goddess or just two deities of any sex I suppose.
Henotheistic Polytheism – For those who believe in, or accept the possibility of the existence of, multiple deities but are devoted to only one deity and have no dealing with any other deities.

Obviously that’s not all of the expansive labels that can exist for polytheism, it’s just an example of how this can work, how it already does work. Some of these can even be merged as three word labels – Duotheistic Monistic Polytheism is kind of a thing. People who believe in the Ultimate Feminine and Ultimate Masculine but also believe that these two Ultimates are part of the One (usually of no specific sex or gender).

But some polytheists, usually the Devotional Polytheists (which I technically am, probably), have a problem, or a few problems with this idea.

They Will Just Try to Take My New Label

John Beckett over at Patheos points out the following,

Would the problem be solved if I and others like me called ourselves hard polytheists or devotional polytheists, as I often (but not always) do? I wish it would – I’m really not interested in fighting over ownership of labels.
But how long would it be until someone said “my archetypes genuinely exist, so I’m a hard polytheist too”? Or “I’m devoted to my metaphorical gods, so I’m a devotional polytheist too”?
The problem is not that we don’t have or don’t use language to describe our differences. The problem is that too many people are unable or unwilling to recognize our differences and to understand why they matter.

Well, three word labels are not impossible, as I have already demonstrated above – clunky perhaps, but not impossible. In this case, Archetypal Devotional Polytheist – and it’s not impossible to be devoted to Jungian archetypes.

I don’t disagree with him here really, there are some people who just want to use the labels of others without any thought about what the label really means, whether the label is really fitting for them. But there is nothing that can change this. Nothing can fix it. People are people and they do this, no matter what you try to do to stop it from happening. Even if we could, somehow, make a very strict definition for the word “polytheism” it will not stop this from happening.

It’s All the Same Thing

The other issue I have seen brought up is, “It’s all the same underneath anyway”. Many Devotional Polytheists get pretty pissed off about this one, and I can understand it. Because it is so very wrong. But the ones arguing against it are often wrong too – at least wrong in how they argue against it, but maybe also in what they have read/heard.

The problem here is in wording and perception. I am not sure I have ever actually seen anyone say/write that it’s all the same underneath, or all the same in the end, or any other variation therein. I really haven’t seen it. The only time I see it is when the Devotionals mention it as a point in their arguments.

I am not saying it hasn’t been said by non-devotionals, it may well have been. But I wonder if it is being read wrong, interpreted wrong – or maybe people really are that daft and I am naive.

Polytheism is a concept with only one restriction to it – single god = not polytheist. There is no expansion on what this all means. More than one god = polytheism. It doesn’t tell you what “god” means, so archetype is just as legitimate as definitive being. Multiple gods being separate beings but also just parts and aspects of one Ultimate being, also acceptable, because the “multiple” part is still there. Duotheism/Dualism, two gods is more than one, so also technically polytheism.

So, when people say that it is all the same – do they mean it is all the same deep down? Or do they mean it is all the same on the surface?

I don’t know. But I see it that way. All these different forms of polytheism are all the same, on the surface – it’s not until you dig deeper that you see all the differences.

So, in the end they are all the same thing – ON THE SURFACE. They are all polytheism. But deep down, they become different and that is where qualifiers become necessary within Paganism and related systems.

They Are Tricking Us

I have seen it pointed out that this difference in what polytheism may mean can cause problems within group rituals and the like. An Archetypal Polytheist could be a potential problem in a ritual that is calling on distinctive beings, for example. And the accusation pops into peoples heads (and posts) that the Archetypal Polytheist has lied and tricked their way into the ritual. By calling themselves a polytheist they have made everyone else believe they are suitable for the group.

Firstly, I would ask, What are you doing allowing people into your group ritual with only a surface understanding of their beliefs? People who you only know by their labels? Perhaps you should learn more about a person before you engage in such an important ritual with them! And if it was a group ritual at something like Pantheacon, then really, you should have expected that and need to get over it, or stop going to things like that.

Secondly, who says the deity in question really cares what the Archetypal Polytheist believes? Do you think maybe the deity in question still responds to that Archetypal Polytheist and just, you know, pretends to be an archetype because the deity knows the human in question can’t handle a real definitive deity? But that’s a post for another time.

“I am polytheist” means, I believe in more than one deity. That is all it means, that is all the person is saying when they tell you this. They are not telling you anything else. They are not pretending to be anything. They are telling you one simple thing. They believe in more than one deity. They are not even saying that they worship any of these deities.

Labels exist so that we can quickly, easily and concisely tell people about some aspect of our life, beliefs, opinions etc. But they only give us a surface picture, they are not meant to give anything more than that. Just the surface. When someone gives us their surface self we can then make the determination of whether we want to go a bit below the surface. Because sometimes, we get to see the surface and realise, very quickly, without hassle – no, I don’t want to dig deeper. And this is a good thing, it saves us time in our very short lives.

That is what labels are for. Saving time.

So if someone shares their surface with you and they say, “I am a polytheist” try not to make any assumptions. Ask for clarification if you are interested by this surface, move on if you aren’t interested. Clarification (usually expanded labels) will tell you how much deeper you want to go. But if you don’t ask for clarification, if you don’t seek to go even a bit below the surface then it’s not that persons fault if you make a stupid assumption.

If you hear “polytheist” and assume “devotional polytheist” or “Hellenic polytheist” then that is on you and any disappointment that you feel after finally learning the truth is on you – not on them. They didn’t lie, you assumed. They didn’t trick you – you tricked yourself. It is your problem and they shouldn’t have to deal with it. If they ruined your ritual, it’s your fault for not finding out more about them. Unless of course you clearly defined what sort of people/beliefs you wanted as part of your ritual and they didn’t bring up that they believed differently – but that is not a problem with different polytheisms, that’s just a person being a jerk.

Conclusion

This post is getting long, so I’ll try to wind it down.

There are a lot of points that are being made on both sides of this issue, and in between, that I happen to agree with. There a lot of points on all sides that I happen to disagree with. I tend to end up on the fence like that all the time, it’s not a comfortable place, but it is where I sit.

So this is my take on various issues, in short point form (I accept the risks inherent in bullet point posts).

Polytheism has a simple and broad definition, and we don’t get to make that definition narrow.

There is nothing wrong with two word labels, they should be encouraged as a way of digging below the surface.

Don’t blame other people for your own assumptions.

Some people are jerks, but they are not representative of everyone who has the same label or beliefs as them.

There are different types of polytheism, and that’s okay. But it’s not okay to say something is not polytheism because you don’t like it.

Boundaries are important when it comes to religious practice and associations. If you are clear about your boundaries and your labels, then the onus is on others to be true about whether they are in or out of your boundaries.

You don’t have to welcome people who are not “your type of polytheist” into your practice, your rituals. But you can’t exclude them from something you don’t own – ie. polytheism-as-a-whole, as opposed to polytheism-your-version-of-it.

All the same thing, doesn’t always mean it’s all the same underneath – it may mean it’s the same on the surface only.

Apples are awesome. Dessert is nice. Apple pie is yummy.

Previous Post

April 16, 2016

Her Sacred Fires

Next Post

April 20, 2016 Book Review - Kharis

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Australia Calendar, Events and Festivals General Hellenism Hellenismoz How To Lore and Myth Multimedia Pagan Blogosphere Pagan Community Pagan Parenting and Homeschooling Paganism 101 Personal Practice Religious Philosophy Resources and Material Ritual Uncategorized Witchcraft 101

Select a Month January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz