This was the question posted on our Hellenic Polytheist Forum, “What are the main points of conflict in Hellenics? And what are your opinions on them?” My answer was rather simple. The biggest point of contention is answering the question who is and who is not Hellenic. Virtually every single one of the most heated debates can be traced back to that one question. In answering this query, the Neopagans are mostly on one side, while actual Reconstructionists sit on the other. In the end, most every Reconstructionist can be tolerant of the most liberal Reconstructionist opinion. We all draw from the same body of material, and use the same scholarly guidelines. Neopagans, on the other hand, do not want to “limit” themselves. They opt instead for free-flowing spirituality and practice, while at the same time insisting they be considered Hellenic.
We must begin by understanding that Hellenismos has little in common with the modern Neopagan movement. Drew Campbell, author of Old Stones New Temples, wrote, “…members of neopagan religions such as Wicca also worship our gods, although their views of Them are often at variance with traditional Hellenic understanding.” He continued by writing, “The only real link is that they are both non-Abrahamic religions, commonly described as ‘pagan’ (although even this is not universal). Otherwise, they differ as much as Shinto and Christianity differ, which is to say, on almost all counts. They have distinct historical origins, different theological perspectives and worldviews, and very different styles of ritual. In short, the two religions share nothing with each other that they don’t also share with other religions.” [1]
The fact is some Neopagans worship/honor the Greek Gods in name only. They are not objective in their interpretation of history, allowing unreasoned personal opinion, feeling, and desire to guide their religious and spiritual behavior. Beware the Persian in Greek clothing. If we were to be completely honest, Roman Catholicism has more in common with Hellenismos than most of modern Neopaganism. Catholic ritual structure is based on and closely mirrors Greek and Roman styles. Catholicism adopted large portions of Neoplatonism into their theology. Catholic sainthood can be said to reflect Divine Heroes. Even Catholic virtue is based on Greek concepts. Using the most liberal sliding scale of what is and is not Hellenic, many Neopagans (who want to be seen as Hellenic) fall far short.
In a thorough analysis, Hellenismos has far more in common with Catholicism, Judaism, Islam, and groups like the Church of Latter Day Saints in terms of actual practices, ethics, and sense of obligation than it does or ever will with the Neopagan movement. Where we find ourselves differing from these Abrahamic religions is in our philosophy and theological opinions. In this regard, Hellenismos has more in common with Eastern forms of Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, and Shinto. The modern Neopagan movement places no emphasis on ethics or obligation, and only a passing emphasis on practice. Their varied philosophies and theologies are eclectic (and sometimes unreasoned) New Age reinterpretations of Eastern, Classical, and First Nation beliefs & philosophies. Overall, Hellenismos has nothing in common with the modern Neopagan movement except being non-Abrahamic.
In the article “The Top Ten Reasons Not to Practice Hellenismos,” Sannion cites a number of reasons why Hellenismos is not favorable to the modern Neopagan. [2] Understanding five of those reasons are critical to this conversation.
The first three should probably be lumped together:
- ‘Creative’ names discouraged.
- No fancy titles.
- No super powers or dreadful conspiracies.
Frankly, if one believes “living the religion,” means being a participant of a Hellenic version of the Renaissance Fair, or Fantasy Role Playing game, they are sadly mistaken. Hellenismos is a religion that requires one to face reality, not escape from it. Hellenismos is a religion of reason, whether one embraces philosophy or not. While many of us opt for reasonable Greek names as an online alias, this has nothing to do with the religion, real life, or any type of special magical, spiritual, or religious name. This also extends to fancy titles, hubristically anointing one’s self most favored, or claiming to be privy to special revealed knowledge.
The fourth item we take from this list is “personal responsibility.” This concept extends far deeper than was originally discussed. You are responsible for doing the right thing, at the right time, and for the right reasons. You are responsible for living a harmonious and virtuous life. You are responsible for not bringing harm, misfortune, and suffering to yourself or others. Hellenismos mandates that virtue becomes habitual. We are responsible to strive for excellence in every way, every day, and in a way that creates tangible results. Since there is no consensus on the hereafter, Hellenismos can be said to be more concerned with this world than the next. Our focus is on living this life to the fullest; striving to be the very best we can in all aspects of our lives.
The number one reason Hellenismos is not favorable to the modern Neopagan is “the burden of being an heir to Hellenic culture.” Hellenic means of the history, language, or culture of the ancient Greeks; while Hellenismos embodies the character, thought, culture, and ethical system of ancient Greece. [3] Hellenismos is not just the worship of the Greek Gods, “using” Greek names for the Goddess and God of Neopagan religions, or injecting them into some magical system. To be a practitioner of Hellenismos, one must be practicing based on the history, culture, traditions, thought, and ethics of ancient Greece. This does not imply that there is one absolute way, but it does mean that we all draw from the same common well of information, in the same reasoned approach.
The idea that one’s practice should not have to embody the traditions, thought, and ethical system of ancient Greece, to be considered a practitioner of Hellenismos, is as ludicrous as saying a practicing Muslim is as much a Roman Catholic as a Roman Catholic. Does every person need to be participating in active reconstruction or a scholar? Of course not, but there is an expectation of one being erudite, reasoned, and virtuous. Labels have meaning, and are used to convey a great deal of information about the characteristics of a person, place, or thing in few words. A subject is defined, not by its label, but by its characteristics. If a person’s practice does not possess the characteristics identified in the scholarly study of ancient Greek history, culture, traditions, thought, and ethics then they do not practice Hellenismos.
Let us not be confused. Reconstruction is not the religion; it is the method by which we use to restore the Hellenic tradition in the modern world. It is the set of standards used to clearly identify the most plausible interpretations of the ancient Greek religion. This is an essential qualifier for Hellenismos. Making use of rhetorical sleight-of-hand and ambiguities of language in order to support unfounded arguments is unscrupulous. Anyone can argue anything; it does not make it true. With all the flexibility that Hellenismos provides, there is no reason to devalue key aspects of our tradition to accommodate the unreasoned. Those in active reconstruction must attempt to stay within accepted research and academic guidelines, avoiding unjustified personal opinion and pseudosciences, when documenting and defining our religion, and those attempting to undefine Hellenismos must be repudiated.
Having come this far in my essay, some Neopagans may be thinking we are trying to make us appear superior. Be assured, no such thing is happening. The simple fact is Hellenismos has its paradigm and the Neopagan movement has theirs. Think about this seriously for a moment. How often do we see an Orthodox Jew insisting he should be accepted as a Muslim cleric? How many Buddhists do you think you will find teaching Sunday school for a Southern Baptist church? The real question we face is not if Hellenismos should be made undefined, but what motivates those who attempt to undefine it? What motivates needing a label that does not fit?
1) Nomos Arkhaios (2002) About Hellenismos: Some Frequently Asked Questions. http://www.nomos-arkhaios.org/faq.htm, Retrieved April 22, 2008.
2) Sannion’s Sanctuary (2002) The Top Ten Reasons Not to Practice Hellenismos. http://www.winterscapes.com/sannion/top_ten.htm, Retrieved April 22, 2008.
3) Neufeldt, Victoria, David B. Guralnik (1994) Webster’s New Word Dictionary, p. 627.
Scampian
on Apr 13th, 2008
@ 2:21 am:
Thinking on my own before and with a bit of gauidance from this thread, now I understand the truth of the matter, neopagans are not Hellenic, for they do not worship the greek gods, they worship their names. They worship the image instead of the persona.
astalon
on Apr 13th, 2008
@ 7:34 am:
I think one of the reasons NeoPagans fail to realize that Hellenism is not NeoPaganism is owing to their own serious and deep misconception that all Non-Abrahamic religions and cultures are actually just one religion or one superculture known as Paganism and that titles within these religions be it Hellenism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Asatru etc.. are merely paths within this mega religion or mega culture.
Buddhists and Hindus who operates in the West are extremely used to NeoPagans who comes to the Buddhist temples wondering why we are so different from them when we are all supposed to be one super religion. Oftentimes we would have monks sighing as to where people come to the idea that the Buddhist and Hindus religions are a Pagan religion or are merely “paths” of Paganism.
The reason for this is that among NeoPagans there is this popular myth ( and false expectations ) that all non-Abrahamic religions are supposed to be one mega religion. You see many prominent NeoPagan authors avoiding the word religions to describe Asatru for example ( until very recently when the Asatruars themselves demand that they be described as a religion and not as a path within Paganism ) and then label the Asatrus who refuses to be labelled as Pagans or Wiccans as starting a witch war when in fact there is no witch war. The NeoPagangs entered a turf which they did not belong, and they were merely booted out.
I think Hellenism, Asatru, Kemetism, Religio Romana, CR, Shinto ( Shinto have to be careful as I am seeing many people now claiming to be Shintos when their practice I have to say is very far from Shintoism ) and the Dharmic religions needs to be more vocal about what is their religion and cultural practice and what is NeoPaganism.
patch
on Apr 13th, 2008
@ 10:25 am:
See, I completely disagree with you scampian.
Whilst there are some neopagans who do worship greek gods in name only, it simply is not universal, or even very common.
Neopagan is an umbrella term for so many faiths and practices after all.
One can be a neopagan but also have a relationship with a greek gods and worship them in a culturally appropriate way as an entire being.
—
In general with this article, I can see the points trying to be made, but I find it hard to get past the generalisations made about neopagans. Not all neopagans are eclectic newager soft polytheists after all.
Twinkle
on Apr 13th, 2008
@ 1:38 pm:
I would say it’s fairly common to see Neos worshipping Hellenic Gods, Patch, but not universal. While it’s true that Neopagan is an umbrella term…I think it’s very clear that this article is addressing Neopagans that *think* they are Hellenic. That would include *some* Ceremonial Magicians, Dark Witches/Dark Paganism/, Wicca, Druids, Spiritualists, Satanists, and those that fully admit they make it up as they go. I’m sure I’m missing some others. It’s not a rare thing at all.
Timothy Alexander
on Apr 13th, 2008
@ 2:00 pm:
Patch,
Twinkle provided a good response, but I would like to add that this is not an issue of whether a Neopagan can or do have relationships with Greek Gods. It is not a debate over who owns the Gods, or which way is better. It is who is practicing the Hellenic tradition and who is not. Like my example of finding a Buddhist teaching Sunday school for a Southern Baptist church, if one wants to learn about Hellenismos and the Hellenic tradition, is it fair to the newbie that a Neopagan or Neopagan organization masquerade as Hellenic and try to set themselves up as an authority or teacher? Hellenismos has its paradigm and the Neopagan movement has theirs. It is as simple as that.
Kadynastar
on Apr 13th, 2008
@ 7:07 pm:
I still say that defining what is Hellenismos and what is Hellenic are two totally separate things, and I think it’s a mistake to use the terms interchangeably as has been done here.
Hellenismos has a much more narrowly defined definition than the word Hellenic… As Tim said in response to my forum post (and inadvertantly furthered my point) just about anything could be called “Hellenic.” A chair, or a vase, or a gown, etc. Hellenic essentially means anything “relating to” ancient Greece, it’s history, culture, etc. and thus by definition is going to encompass a lot of different things. Hellenismos on the other hand was more specifically defined by the one who coined the term.
As I said before, the term “Hellenic” is not a “recon-only” term… it’s pretty much an adjective used to describe “all things Greek” and has been firmly established in that usage well before the Reconstruction movements came about. It doesn’t relate specifically to the religious practice of the ancient Greeks, ancient or modern Recon.
So for everything you’ve said above, I would say that it applies to Hellenismos. But something can be “Hellenic” and not necessarily be “Hellenismos” or “Reconstructionism.”
And just for the record, I am on the Recon side of this debate.
Timothy Alexander
on Apr 13th, 2008
@ 7:26 pm:
I do believe the idea that anything could be called Hellenic is an inappropriate conclusion. The Roman Religion obviously became Hellenistic (resembling the Greeks), but it was not Hellenic (pertaining to or characteristic of the Greeks). Even with the use of Hellenistic there requires the embodiment of certain characteristics. Therefore, you will see many similarities between Hellenismos and Religio Romana. As I stated here and in my response on the forum, even using the most liberal sliding scale of what is and is not Hellenic, many Neopagans (who want to be seen as Hellenic) fall far short. Many do not even reach the level of being Hellenistic, let alone Hellenic.
Scampian
on Apr 13th, 2008
@ 11:37 pm:
The term Hellenic can not be used to describe anything similar to ancient greece, if the characteristics of one thing is removed and in place put the characteristics of another then it is no longer pertaining to that thing. You cant say green is yellow, even though it contains it yellow. The same way you cant call Neo-pagan beliefs hellenic, even it they contain hellenic elements.
raven
on Apr 15th, 2008
@ 10:07 am:
ya know i’ve often wondered if the ‘attachment and the desire’ to worship the ancient greek gods for a lot of neo-pagans has alot to do the fact that a lot of them may have just recently or within the last few years learned in school about the greek pantheon? i know around here in 7th and 8th grade in english lit. you study abit on the greek and roman pantheons with a bit more emphasis on the greek side. i think often what may happen is they learn abit about the ancient greek myths and basic pantheon and history lore but not any real indepth details. they then go off to high school where often is when teens start exploring paganism. which very often starts with neo-wicca or neo-paganism. needing a god/goddess to worship/honor or have as a matron/patron deity i think they are simply going with the most recent and most often the only pagan pantheon they know of which is more than likely going to be the greek (sometimes roman) pantheon. they then take the very tiny bit of info they have learned on them apply it to their beliefs/religion and firmly latch on. later when they do encounter real hellenics who discuss worshiping and honoring the greek gods the neo-pagans assume that because they are supposedly worshipping the same pantheon or from the same pantheon that they are automatically hellenics as well. when true hellenics attempt to explain to them why this thinking is incorrect and that hellenismos is more than just worsipping a deity from the greek pantheon, they just don’t seem to get it. they stubbornly keep focusing on the fact that they worship a deity or deities from the greek pantheon neglecting to learn or accept the fact that being hellenic isn’t just about the name of the deity or what pantheon the come from it is also about how and why you worship them. it’s about the methods and tools used in the worship, it’s about honoring not only the gods but also the holidays, rites, passages, ethics, morals and the whole of the religion in it’s proper form. it is the practice in it’s entirety that make one hellenic (or any religion for that matter).
Scampian
on Apr 15th, 2008
@ 6:25 pm:
@Raven, very good point…. and actually here it is 9th and 10th grade when we encounter mythology, including mostly greek myths, a few native american myths, a roman myth and a norse myth.
Alexandra
on Aug 11th, 2008
@ 9:19 pm:
I’ve liked it so much that I’ve decided to translate your essay to Portuguese, and then I posted it here: http://helenismo.forumeiros.com/depoimentos-e-relatos-f12/vivendo-a-fe-que-defendemos-sobre-as-diferentes-opinioes-t265.htm
I hope it’s OK. If it’s not, tell me so I can take it out of there.
Thanks!
Timothy Alexander
on Aug 12th, 2008
@ 2:27 am:
That you very much!! I’m happy you found it worth the effort to do that.
Alexandra
on Aug 13th, 2008
@ 12:05 am:
No problem, it’s always a pleasure to share artciles like this with other people who doesn’t read English but need to know more about our religion.
Alexandra
on Aug 13th, 2008
@ 12:06 am:
*articles/essays