The second tin the series is “What is Paganism? Part II: A Spiritual Taxonomy” which gives a more scholarly definition rooted in the basic story that unifies Pagan religion. It also explains when this kind of definition is useful, and when not. It generated considerable comment of a rude and abusive sort, but that finally calmed down and some good discussions can be observed over there, especially between me and P. Sufenas Virius Lupus, with whom I have had significant disagreements in the past. The dialogue between us is in my mind a great example of how informed and courteous discussions can deepen the knowledge of all involved.
Then today a third in the series was posted at Patheos: “What Is Paganism? Part III: Pagan Religion from a Historical Perspective.” Good definitions are more than classificatory schemes. They also help shed new light on interesting questions. The definition I am supporting, is not unique to me except perhaps for some of the framing. It also sheds light on many interesting issues, and religious history is one of them. The next will do the same with regard to contemporary interfaith relations.