-ISMs

[freesprouts]

I'm a Religion major and one of the classes I have to take is "Christianity." The other students are generally non-intellectual reactionaries (if you're interested, that's about all I talk in my journal nowadays). But we've recently been talking about Wicca since I'm the only non-Christian in the class and one question someone posed was actually

Comments

[hexeengel]

(Note: I'm not a member here as of yet, just poking around, and thought I'd post an answer :P)

This is excerpted from a much longer piece on my own personal beliefs and views, I've just posted the relevant portion:Many words can apply to my personal view of Deity, that may or may not be shared by others;

Monism: I believe that, ultimately, all Divinity and existence stem from a single source of “God stuff,” that both encompasses and transcends name and form (this differs from monotheism, in that I do not claim there is one God, but instead that all is One, and all is God/Divine).

Duotheism: I believe in the Divine Couple and Union of the God and Goddess, and that all life and Divinity spring from this Union (the Union itself being a dualistic manifestation of monism, as was explained above).

Polytheism: I believe there is more than one God and more than one Goddess, that the names and faces recognized by other cultures and paths are further expressions of the Divine Couple.

Pantheism: I believe the physical universe itself is Divine, and thus infuses all forms of existence with Divinity, with that “God stuff.”

Panentheism: I believe there is more to the Divine than the physical universe, that Divinity is comprised of, encompasses, and transcends this plane simultaneously.

Animism: I believe all entities have their own spark of Divinity that is uniquely theirs, yet all made up of that same "God stuff."

Henotheism: I believe all views of the Divine are valid, even if they differ from my own; I contend that all God-forms exist, even if my specific practice does not focus on Them.

But perhaps the most important term is nondualism: I believe all these views are not only valid, but accurate, and not at all in conflict with each other. I don't see the nature of the Divine as either/or, but rather this/and.

For clarification's sake, think about the concept of Divinity as being like the ocean. In the ocean, there are innumerable drops of water, broken down further into molecules and atoms even. Each atom, each molecule, each drop is indeed an individual entity unto itself. However, they are all still simultaneously part of the ocean, are made up of the same “ingredients” as the rest of the ocean, and can also split and come together in different ways (i.e., two drops can become one, then join with a third, then split back into only two, etc.). It's all still water, but can be viewed and appreciated in its more individualized forms as well.

There are those who practice what is beginning to be called “hard polytheism,” believing that every Deity is separate and individual unto Themselves, without a pan- or panentheistic idea of a higher source. My view, in contrast, can be described as “soft polytheism,” since I do see the Gods as separate, yet still pieces of something greater, and in that way united. However, in most practices it doesn't matter if all involved agree on the "true" nature of the Divine's existence, as long as they can agree on the specific God forms being honored. If all participants in a ritual can agree that the God and Goddess they are calling on are, say, Isis and Osiris, and it's understood what these Gods represent, it doesn't matter if one person views Them as wholly individual and another believes They are part of something greater.

[animamea]

Well, shit. You just said everything I wanted to say, but better. ^_^