In the wider field of Pagan studies it has been criticised, most notably by Michael F. Strmiska, who argued that it contributed to the cultural oppression of indigenous peoples.
Exclaiming that paganism should be seen as a religion in itself, he criticises earlier religious studies scholars for failing to devote time to a discussion of this term, whose etymology he then explains.
Putting together a list of five criteria that believes can be used to define "paganism", he then explores a series of seven different religious groups or beliefs and explains how they fit into this category of his: Chinese Folk Religion, Shinto, Primal Tribal Religions, shamanism, American Indian Spirituality, Afro-American Spiritism, and Contemporary Western Paganism.
He furthermore includes two east Asian faiths, Chinese traditional religion and Japanese Shinto, as well as any practices involving shamanism.
Considering Pagan Theology to be a "dense and serious study", that was based upon York's "exceptionally well traveled" experiences, Raphael noted however that it was "not quite what I was expecting.
The main title would have led me to believe that I had found a book on the divine in Western, earth-based neo-pagan religions.
[9] Raphael proceeded to argue that she was "disappointed" that the work "paid little attention to the inflections of gender", in particular considering the prominent role held by female deities in most of the pagan religions described in the book.
She also felt some "disquiet" that the word "theology" was being used by York in reference to certain religious groups for whom "the philosophical and cultural freighting of both logos and theos are categorically and conceptually alien".
On a more positive note, she felt that the book would be a useful text for those studying courses on world religions, aiding students in asking the question as to "what scholars mean by the category of world religion itself, and who is served by maintaining the traditional boundaries which establish those belief systems and practices that count as insider and those which must be cast outside.
"[15] Although accepting that "modern Euro-American Pagans" were often "sympathetic" to Indigenous peoples and "interested in learning aspects" of their "cultural and religious traditions", Strmiska noted that the "contemporary situations" between the two ethno-cultural groups was "quite different" and that this "brutal social reality and the immense historical, economic, and political realities that lie behind it cannot be bridged by a simple labelling process or ameliorated by a unilateral proclamation of spiritual unity between modern Pagans and Indigenous peoples.