Representing the Pagan Community
I had a recent conversation with a friend who is very prominent in the Australian pagan community about the issue of just who should represent pagans at events such as the Parliament of World Religions (PWR).
Organized mainstream religions have the benefit of hierarchies with clearly defined leaders. It is thus very easy for such religions to send either leaders or spokespersons to events, so that all their members can be spoken for. Would it be possible to have generally agreed upon leaders or spokespersons representing pagans in a similar fashion?
In my last couple of posts, I’ve discussed my displeasure regarding the Eurocentric definition of paganism proposed by the PWR, and have pushed my own idea of paganism being an umbrella term for the many small religious groups outside of the world religions. However, because the term pagan was initially one of derision, there are some people who I would consider to be pagans, who dislike the term and refuse to use it.
There are obvious advantages in terms of gaining recognition in being a part of a large group. Consider for instance the victory won by wiccans in the military who are now allowed to have pentagrams on their gravestones. This came about due to tireless lobbying by numerous dedicated individuals and the undeniable fact that wiccans make up the lion’s share of the pagan community. I believe that non-wiccan pagans should “piggyback” the wiccans so that their sheer total numbers enable them to have the recognition that they would be unable to have on their own.
Wiccans can be thought of as either solitaries or as members of covens. There is no one person who could rightfully claim to be the leader of all of the wiccans. Yet this has not been an insurmountable obstacle for wiccans in gaining recognition because of their sheer numbers.
Non-wiccan pagans similarly are either solitaries or become members of small groups. These groups, in general, are not affiliated with each other, and so there is no universally agreed upon leadership for pagans.
How should wiccans and pagans be represented? Could a democratic process such as a vote be used? It is commonly stated that working with pagans is like herding cats – there is great truth in this, and I cannot imagine an election of any sort ever taking place. And even if it did, most voters would be running on pagan time – read late!
There are a number of pagans who have dedicated themselves to working for their community. Some have fought protracted legal battles for pagan recognition and rights. Some of these people are very open about their work whereas others tend to work behind the scenes. There are others who have busied themselves in interfaith work enabling meaningful dialogue with mainstream religions. I believe that it can be argued that their long-term dedication makes them very appropriate as representatives, and legitimizes their claims. Altruistic selfless spokespersons focused on the greater good of the pagan community would appear to be the most appropriate choice.
Assuming that the pagan community was blessed with a number of altruistic spokespersons, would all pagans be happy with their representations? Given the extremely diverse multifaceted nature of the pagan community, I think that there will always be some who will feel like they are being overlooked. How do we stop pagans from feeling overlooked? At the risk of sounding like a broken record, all who want to be included within the pagan umbrella should be included.
Tony Mierzwicki