OK, so you are interested in becoming a Pagan. But where do you go? If you accept “Pagan” as an umbrella term defining some kind of ethnic or ancient religion, you are already in trouble. In trouble because more than likely, that is not what you are going to find if you go trawling the net or buy books.

What you are likely to find instead is a modern religious-construct built around what is pretty much an indeterminate deity and spell-weaving.

But I am afraid that this is not exactly how the ancient pagans viewed religion. For them, religion meant showing proper devotion to the gods, so casting a money spell hardly qualifies. Neither did ancient religion revolve around Tarot cards, scrying, crystals, candles or astral travel, but these are the elements of Paganism any newcomer will be introduced to if they look for information on Paganism.

I am not saying that some books about “Earth-centred religions” might not contain some useful information, only that ritual tools for your personal altar were probably not a major concern for most ancient Pagans - and the authors never mention that links to the past are often tenuous and that they borrow concepts and practices from a myriad of spiritualities. And now Pagans speak of traditions as though there is some general form of Paganism which can be shaped and reshaped into a personal religion, Look how we can mix and match gods and goddesses to have Egyptian Paganism or Celtic Paganism or Norse Paganism or whatever we wish.

Are Pagans “cargo cultists” worshiping the memory of something their ancestors knew as real? Has Paganism become some kind of instantaneous religion: “Two-minute-Paganism”. I am pretty sure that this is not what our ancestors would have thought about when reflecting on the customs and traditions of their ancestors. Obviously, we must make a distinction between modern Paganism and revivals of ancient paganism. I would say that the modern Paganism we have been introduced to, and find in numerous modern books, should be labelled “inspired by”. At the other end of the spectrum are the “reconstructionists” who are attempting to bring back to life the actual ancient religion, piece by piece, by sifting through the historical record.

Clearly, we have two completely different conceptions of Paganism here, if not two completely different religions. One is centred on the modern world and current realities. The other can lead people to live in the past, to try to resurrect a religion that, I feel, in reality no longer quite fits into the modern world.

I always argue that some of the customs and traditions of our ancestors are no longer relevant. For better or worse, their world is gone. Still, there are Pagans who attempt to retreat into the past and honour kings and lords and who use an archaic language to communicate and for titles. And of course, there are also those who think that all our ancestors flipped Tarot cards, read palms, stared into crystal balls, cast spells and worshiped butt-naked.

Personally, I prefer a middle approach, but I would not go so far as to claim that either of the extremes I have mentioned is wrong - there are indeed different ways of honouring the gods and the forms of Paganism most often described in modern works on the subject favour (albeit often unknowingly) a modern approach. But we should also not forget that there are levels of modernism and modernisation, from people who think they are wizards out of some swords and sorcery game, to those who think walking around chanting with a crystal slung around their neck, a ritual dagger slung to their waist and calling themselves “Silverbearwolf” or “Raindrop” but with no knowledge at all of historical Paganism make them Pagan, to those who take very seriously their devotion to the deities of old but who simply have a different, more modern, more eclectic way of going about showing it.

I think one problem anyone is going to have in finding ancient religion is the prevalence in modern literature of references to Wicca. Wicca is the largest Pagan “tradition” in the world, and for many many people, Wicca IS Paganism. But this is simply not true and is a gross misrepresentation of ancestral customs and traditions, and indeed a distortion of Wicca itself.

Wicca is indeed a Pagan movement or tradition but it is not all Paganism is. Wicca is not an ancient religion, it is a modern religion and claiming otherwise just shows ignorance. I have the same problems with Wicca that I do with some Asatru, Shaman, Celtic, Druid, etc groups, and that is the claim that what they believe in and teach is exactly what our ancestors believed and taught. They make this claim on, at best, some very tenuous grounds, but of course, it is in print so it is too often believed, and any newcomer will not know any better and believe that she/he is indeed following the Ways of the Ancients.

I am not saying that the ancient people did not believe in magick and spells. Ancient people certainly did, as archaeology has demonstrated. But their religion and their practice of it did not come down to getting together and forming a circle, summoning the watchtowers of the four cardinal directions and dancing widdershins (or the other way around). Religion and magick are not identical; they do not have identical goals. Religion relies on prayer and sacrifice whereas magick is manipulative and applies “means to specific ends”.

Getting together, even in circles, is perhaps probably something born out of necessity as Pagans have indeed been reduced to being a sort of counter-culture group, practicing their religion outside the norm, and a people still facing discrimination in many countries. And we as Pagans no longer have access to temples, sacred groves and public spaces - actually we as Pagans do have to take some responsibility for that for although interest in building temples is there, the true Will to build them isn’t. The “missing” temples so to speak, are, as far as I am concerned, one of the many ways in which our world has changed and which may make it no longer conducive to ancient practices.

However, I do think we have to be reasonable and accept that there have to be some adjustments made. I do not think we should accept that it must always be this way, and I do not think we should come to believe this is all our religion is. For myself, I do indeed want to know what my ancestors believed and I want to know what forms their devotion to the gods took. But, once again as far as I am concerned, I want to adapt those beliefs and those practices to the modern world for although I do believe in the Ancient Gods, I do not, nor do I want to, live in ancient times.

When it comes to magick, I am leery, in fact highly sceptical, of ritual magick, or so-called high magick; with wands and staves and robes and inscribed floors, for too much of this ceremonial magick reeks of the Christian Middle Ages and of the 19th century. I do not know of archaeologists finding any ancient floors inscribed with magick circles in the Theban alphabet. I would suggest instead if somebody is interested in magick as it was practiced in the ancient world to not refer to the Rosicrucians, who sometimes pass themselves off as descended from the ancient Egyptian priesthood, or the Golden Dawn, a truly eclectic group who were influenced by Christian mysticism, Qabalah, Hermeticism, the religion of Ancient Egypt, Theurgy, Freemasonry, Alchemy, Theosophy, Eliphas Levi, Papus, Enochian magick and Renaissance grimoires.

The Golden Dawn was not Pagan and not descended directly or indirectly from ancient Paganism. Yet it is the Golden Dawn's magick and ritual that has become a core of many modern-day magickal traditions, none of which have any direct link to our ancient past.

I personally feel that “magick” has assumed a more prominent role in contemporary Paganism than it possessed historically. Yes, people believed in it. Yes, they wore charms and yes they believed in curses. But this was not part of religion but outside of it, more complementary to than a necessary or main component of religion.

Ancient Pagans worshiped the gods without recourse to what we portray as magick, I think too many Pagans confuse religious rituals with magick rituals. Many Pagan books do include chapters on celebrating various festivals but also things you do not find mentioned in any ancient sources: meditating, rhythmic breathing, charkas and “The Circle” My ancestors did not need to cast a circle to honour their gods, and they did not need to meditate or to practice rhythmic breathing. In fact I am certain that most people of the ancient (western) world would be totally mystified if they were introduced to some of our modern Pagan ideas about what constitutes religion.

If that is the stuff you are interested in, fine, but as far as I am concerned it is not necessary and it is not historical. Sure, I can not say one approach is right and one approach is wrong because religion is about showing proper devotion to the gods and if that is what you are doing through your breathing and meditating, who am I to criticise? But then these things should not be passed off as ancient wisdom or ancient practices, and this type of Paganism should not pose as ancient, as it so often does.

Also, the modern “tenet” that each and every Pagan is a priest/priestess in his/her own right is to my mind nothing more than a form of political correctness, and this “principle” is largely based on a misconception and misunderstanding of an ancient Roman practice.

Within the privacy of their homes each Roman family honoured its ancestors and tutelary gods/daemons/local and familial spirits/spiritual essence, etc. The venerable paterfamilias (the highest ranking family status in an Ancient Roman household, always a male position. The term is Latin, literally, for “father of the family”) was the high priest of his own household religion; he honoured his fathers and the gods of his fathers, and it was expected that his sons would honour his spirit and his gods when the time came. The father was thus the link between the family and its tutelary gods and spirits. So, having the act as priest was pretty much part of what was a domestic cult… …Meanwhile, back in the temples were the real Priests and Priestesses.

Even worse, and I know this is also not going to be very well-received, anyone looking at contemporary Paganism could get the mistaken idea that all ancient Pagans were witches. They were not. In fact witches were as distrusted then as they are now, as were most practitioners of the magicks - the problem was not their beliefs but simply the fact that then, as now, there were a lot of charlatans floating around. Playing witch does not make a witch.

Also, perhaps we need to escape from the idea that at some time in ancient times there was some kind of “universal matriarchal society” filled with peace and brotherhood (or should that be sisterhood?) until the malevolent male patriarchal types came along and ruined everything. That is not history; it has been debunked. But it is still contained as fact in too many modern books about Paganism. Our basic premise must be founded more firmly on fact, and not fancy. We must take a realistic appraisal of our Pagan past and recognise that there was no Golden Age, no time pre-Christianity when all were happy and content. There has always been strife and Pagan societies produced criminals and charlatans just as frequently as do other societies - we should acknowledge that the basic nature of humanity has not changed much over the millennia.

I think that which is not ancient should not be given an “ancient label”. Otherwise we are merely fooling ourselves, or have we become a politically correct religion to the point of the ridicule? And perhaps this is why there is so much uncertainty, disorganisation, in-fighting and controversy within the Pagan community - in fact even the term “community” is an euphuism for a concept which, sadly, has yet to take on any substance.

I would argue for moderation and for a degree of realism and pragmatism in our thinking. I would argue that we have to show the same tolerance for different beliefs as our Pagan ancestors did and not fall into petty bickering. I am sure that our ancestors also shook their heads at the practices of Pagans from other lands. The difference for us has to be that we must be more accepting of innovation than our ancestors were. Partly this is out of necessity. We can’t recapture the past in its entirety, and translate the ancient religions wholesale into the present. We have to make do with what we have, and this will include introduction of some things our ancestors were unfamiliar with, and adoption of others so that they may fit into the modern world.

So while we can call our religion(s) Paganism, we must be careful not to make too strong a claim on the past unless that claim can be substantiated with some proof. We can say “this is what we believe” but we should not transpose those beliefs onto those of our ancestors and claim that we are reviving ancient practices. Some of us are indeed doing the best they can with what they have in the way of source material (which ranges in general from scant to non-existent), but let us not fool ourselves, we are also (more often than not) pretty much making it up as we go along.

As I said, that is fine, but let us at least represent ourselves and our beliefs accurately and not pretend to be something we are not. I think that we owe it to our ancestors to try to “get it right”, particularly if we are going to make any claims with regards to ancient and original paganism. In other words, I can’t, for example, adopt a Wiccan template, superimpose Norse Gods over the identities of the Celtic Gods, throw in a little ritual magick and claim that I am a Heathen. I wouldn’t be, at least not the way how our ancestors understood it.

Perhaps it is true that if we do not at least accept the basic beliefs of the ancient Pagans then we are not Pagan at all, but rather creators of our own new and unique religions. The names of the gods and goddesses may be the same, but very little else. If we are going to change them that much, we might as well invent new names for our deities while we are at it.

I do, however, acknowledge that religion is often messy because it is subject to the truths of humans struggling with others and more often than not struggling with themselves. Religion is the outward, observable, manifestation of our inner world, it is how spirituality incarnates - and incarnation is never easy. It is in fact a lengthy and arduous work filled with progress achieved by the “Wheel of Error and Insight”.

So, do we as Pagans really need to focus with such intensity on the past? Are we as Pagan, in some cases, perhaps guilty of viewing the past through rose-tinted glasses? Sure we are, but that might be half of the fun, the other half is realising that we are twenty-first century Pagans who are inspired by the past but who do not have to live in it. I, for one, do not seek to recreate spirituality for I am already living one, a modern one “based” on the past but no longer part of the past

As Pagans we should realise and know that our practices are not the very same as that of our ancestors, but we should equally realise and accept that it does not actually matter. The past should inspire us to develop new ways of expressing ourselves for as Seekers as long we keep ethics and clarity of intent in both mind and spirit we will remain positioned to be Awakened by all things, even by those things we do not understand or always agree with.

(Sources: Mos Maiorum - Finding Life in the Light of our Ancestral Traditions; Wikipedia; Wicca and Ancient Paganism; Wisepagan.com; Mind Body & Spirit; The Practical Pagan)