Apparently, I have been using the wrong word. Buddhism is just another 'ism'.
When Western scholars attached "-ism" to "Buddha" in the 19th century, they brought along a heavy piece of linguistic baggage. Here is what "-ism" implies, both generally and in the context of world religions:
So, for me, the term Buddhism is not appropriate. It implies something that we believe and have faith in. The purpose of an 'ism' is to explain the unexplainable. I prefer to use the phrase 'Dharma Path'.
Distinguishing between Buddhism and the Dharma path (or Buddha-Dharma) is essentially the difference between the box and the presents inside.
One is an external, societal category; the other is an internal, experiential practice.