Talk:Hellenism (modern religion): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 96: Line 96:
In short, Wicca is not synonymous with 'witchcraft', and is not the same as Neopaganism, and there is a world of difference between Wicca in its traditional form and the "Eclectic Wicca" that's become popular largely in the last 10 or 15 years. In the wider neopagan community we can find plenty of examples of embarrassing ideas, cultural misappropriation and the like, but to use these to snipe at Wicca is hardly reasonable. In fact I don't know why there's any sniping at Wicca at all, since we're not trying to tell the Reconstructionists how to conduct their religion. We wouldn't presume. I think what the article should do rather than emphasise this kind of ankle-biting is to simply make clear what the ''differences'' are between HPR and other popular forms of (neo)paganism — don't single out Wicca (we're just as unhappy with the crass popular views of neopaganism as you are), and don't make it a complaint. [[User:Fuzzypeg|Fuzzypeg]][[User talk:Fuzzypeg|★]] 00:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
In short, Wicca is not synonymous with 'witchcraft', and is not the same as Neopaganism, and there is a world of difference between Wicca in its traditional form and the "Eclectic Wicca" that's become popular largely in the last 10 or 15 years. In the wider neopagan community we can find plenty of examples of embarrassing ideas, cultural misappropriation and the like, but to use these to snipe at Wicca is hardly reasonable. In fact I don't know why there's any sniping at Wicca at all, since we're not trying to tell the Reconstructionists how to conduct their religion. We wouldn't presume. I think what the article should do rather than emphasise this kind of ankle-biting is to simply make clear what the ''differences'' are between HPR and other popular forms of (neo)paganism — don't single out Wicca (we're just as unhappy with the crass popular views of neopaganism as you are), and don't make it a complaint. [[User:Fuzzypeg|Fuzzypeg]][[User talk:Fuzzypeg|★]] 00:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


: The section [[Hellenic_Polytheistic_Reconstructionism#Hellenic_polytheism_and_Wicca | Hellenic polytheism and Wicca]] has existed within this article since [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hellenic_Polytheistic_Reconstructionism&oldid=31577701 December 2005]. The tension and issues with Wicca, Popular Neopagan culture, and Hellenic Reconstruction has been documented by the [[Supreme Council of Ethnikoi Hellenes]] dating back to at least 2001, by Drew Campbell on his website nomos-arkhaios.org (now archived on ecauldron.com), expressed on Hellenismos.us, and discussed in a number of books on the subject. Documenting these types of controversies exist in most articles regarding religion (and other subjects) on Wikipedia. It is fact, not opinion, that much of the Hellenic Reconstruction attempts to distance itself from Wicca, witchcraft, occultists, and Neopaganism in general. Frankly, as I understand it, traditional Wicca has much of the same issues with Popular Neopagan culture, having had their identity stolen and their beliefs and practices misrepresented. Gardnerian and Alexandrian Wiccans, true Gardnerian and Alexandrian Wiccans, seem to have little tolerance for (Neo)Wicca from my experience. What you are calling "Wicca" has now been relegated to BTW, and labeled a ridge, dogmatic, and elitist subset of Wicca by much of Neopaganism. For all intents and purposes, "Eclectic Wicca" is Wicca today. There is no way to turn the clock back on that one. In any event, this artice is not that place to debate what is and is not true Wicca. --[[Special:Contributions/151.201.147.161|151.201.147.161]] ([[User talk:151.201.147.161|talk]]) 03:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
: The section [[Hellenic_Polytheistic_Reconstructionism#Hellenic_polytheism_and_Wicca | Hellenic polytheism and Wicca]] has existed within this article since [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hellenic_Polytheistic_Reconstructionism&oldid=31577701 December 2005]. The tension and issues with Wicca, Popular Neopagan culture, and Hellenic Reconstruction has been documented by the [[Supreme Council of Ethnikoi Hellenes]] dating back to at least 2001, by Drew Campbell on his website nomos-arkhaios.org (now archived on ecauldron.com), expressed on Hellenismos.us, and discussed in a number of books on the subject. Documenting these types of controversies exist in most articles regarding religion (and other subjects) on Wikipedia. It is fact, not opinion, that much of the Hellenic Reconstruction attempts to distance itself from Wicca, witchcraft, occultists, and Neopaganism in general. Frankly, as I understand it, traditional Wicca has much of the same issues with Popular Neopagan culture, having had their identity stolen and their beliefs and practices misrepresented. Gardnerian and Alexandrian Wiccans, true Gardnerian and Alexandrian Wiccans, seem to have little tolerance for (Neo)Wicca from my experience. What you are calling "Wicca" has now been relegated to BTW, and labeled a rigid, dogmatic, and elitist subset of Wicca by much of Neopaganism. For all intents and purposes, "Eclectic Wicca" is Wicca today. There is no way to turn the clock back on that one. In any event, this artice is not that place to debate what is and is not true Wicca. --[[Special:Contributions/151.201.147.161|151.201.147.161]] ([[User talk:151.201.147.161|talk]]) 03:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:12, 8 September 2008

Archive 1 Archive 2

The Journal of Hellenic Religion

Should this still be considered a valid link? It is suppose to be an annual periodical, but there has only been one released, 2006. There looks to be no activity on the site, with no updates as to the status of future publications. I'm not sure this can be considered a legitimate source, if it ever really was. --141.158.54.153 (talk) 20:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks dead to me. I'm going to go ahead and take it out. - AdelaMae (t - c - wpn) 18:08, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hellenic Polytheism and Reconstructionism

This is in regards to the statement, "Not all modern Hellenic polytheists use a Reconstructionist methodology. A 2004 survey of 94 American Hellenic polytheists by Sarah Winter showed that 64% considered themselves to be Reconstructionist." The book provided no data analysis, and there was no weeding out of respondents. All respondents were included in the presentation, and no minimum standard for what a Hellenic Polytheist is and is not seems to have been used. Those who identify as Witch, Ceremonial Magician, Eclectic Pagan, Pagan, and Religio Romana had their answers included with those who where specifically a Hellenic Polytheist. Almost corresponding exactly to those who are not Reconstructionist are those that did not even identify as Hellenic. I do not believe this source can be used to prove the assertion made.--151.201.149.33 (talk) 17:10, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed statement and edited section because statement is not supported by cited source. --151.201.149.33 (talk) 14:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hellenion (USA) Redirected Here

Hellenion (USA) redirected here after failing to meet general notability guidelines. --151.201.147.150 (talk) 17:04, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hellenic polytheism in Wicca?

Is the section "Hellenic polytheism in Wicca" at all appropriate in the context of the greater article? It seems to imply a link between the Hellenic tradition and Wicca, when one does not exist.

There is no real link between Hellenismos and Wicca other than each being non-Abrahamic. They are not linked with any form of shared ethical code, set of practices, core values, institutions, common traditions and rituals, recognized sacred texts, or history. Religions that share some closer link with Hellenismos include many Reconstructionist religions such as the Asatru, Religio Romana, Romuva, Celtic Recon, and some other indigenous religions. (Hellenismos Frequently Asked Questions)

I think it should either be removed or reworked. I'm leaning towards deleted since Hellenic Polytheism implies the Ancient Greek religions, and the modern Hellenic religious movements, of which Wicca is neither.--151.201.147.150 (talk) 18:03, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hellenic Neopaganism or Hellenic polytheistic reconstructionism

Shouldn't Hellenic polytheistic reconstructionism be this article's primary identifier, rather then Hellenic Neopaganism? The article seems to make the point that this is the case, with most groups rejecting the identifiers Pagan and Neopagan for various reasons. --151.201.147.150 (talk) 18:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Completed move from Hellenic Neopaganism to Hellenic Polytheistic Reconstructionism, and corrected double redirects. --Pagebird (talk) 19:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't quite agree with this move. "Neopaganism" is a neutral categorisation, quite independent of "endorsement" or "rejection" by individual groups. "Polytheistic Reconstructionism" is a much (much) more narrow concept and only applies to a tiny minority of Neopagans. We can quote hellenismos.us as documenting the viewpoint of (some) adherents, but they do not have terminological superiority: already by calling Asatru "Reconstructionist" they show that their terminology is completely skewed. Not even Icelandic Asatru claims to be reconstructionist, and much less the US variants which are much more into racial mysticism and/or New Age syncretism than anything related to reconstructionism proper. dab (𒁳) 14:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A similar statement is made on the The Cauldron Hellenic polytheism FAQ (used as in this article as a source).
"Some members of neopagan religions such as Wicca also worship our gods, although their views of Them are often at variance with traditional Hellenic understanding."
"To the extent that our religion is a reconstruction and adaptation of ancient religious practices in the modern world, one could argue that the label 'neopagan' is both accurate and descriptive, and some Hellenes embrace it. However, the terms 'neopagan' and 'paganism' have become so closely linked to eclectic Wicca that many people now treat them as synonyms."
"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."
Also, the largest portions of this article's information is based on the YSEE and the movement in Greece, which the notability of this article relies, and they and other groups make similar statements and firmly make the distinction between the Hellenics and the modern Neopaganism movement. The modern Neopaganism movement is distinct from what is going on with these groups, and they should not be lumped together. Based on your reasoning Hinduism, Buddhism, Daoism, Native American Spirituality, and every other ethnic tradition should included as part of the Neopagan for their eclectic adoption of Gods and concepts. Heck, this article wasn't even being categorized under Category:Neopagan traditions.--Pagebird (talk) 20:09, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Neopaganism2

I believe adding the Neopaganism2 template is inappropriate for this article. While in a very technical sense Hellenic reconstruction is Neopagansim (New non-Abrihamic religion), it is as appropriate to classify it in such a way as it is to Classify Buddhism and Hinduism as Pagan. Popular Pagan culture (which the Hellenic tradition is being lumped into here) promotes a very eclectic and very individualistic form of practice based primarily on unverified personal gnosis blended with Wicca-ish, NeoDruid-ish, and/or HOGD-ish methodologies. Modern Paganism also has an exclusionary attitude toward more well defined religions that are traditional or reconstructionist. It is inappropriate to imply that Hellenism is Greek flavored Neopagansim. --151.201.148.127 (talk) 17:50, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since there has been no disagreement, I will be removing the template. The term 'Neopagan' has a specific connotation that is not conducive with Hellenic Polytheistic Reconstructionism. --151.201.147.161 (talk) 12:42, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Political controversy and discrimination

The section on Political controversy and discrimination is a bulleted list. It should be reformatted. --N-k, 23:45, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Elaion, Hellenion, and HellenicPagan Yahoo Group

While at one time at the forefront of the Hellenic Polytheistic Reconstructionist movement in the United States, these groups can no longer be considered as authoritative sources for the movement today.

  • Elaion exists primarily only as a website. Most of the founding members have moved on from the group, it is not active, not accepting new members (I believe there are only two official members), and attempts to revitalize have failed.
  • Hellenion is in a similar, but not so dismal, situation. While still maintaining legal non-profit status, the organizations growth can only be described as stagnant or in decline (currently only about 35 official members). All but one of the few satellite congregations exist in 'proto' status (less than 3 members) and show no verifiable activity.
  • The HellenicPagan Yahoo Group has long since moved on from Hellenic Polytheistic Reconstructionism. It is an eclectic group of individuals, and their group description actually refers those specifically interested in Hellenic Polytheistic Reconstructionism to another site.

I believe this article needs to either clarify these groups and organizations current status or remove reference of them. --151.201.147.161 (talk) 13:04, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Groups and self-designations

I question the statement "There are no standardized naming practices for this religion, and individual practitioners and groups use a variety of names, often reflecting subtle differences in belief or practice." In looking at much of the listed sources for this article, it would seem the phrases Hellenismos, Hellenism, the Hellenic tradition, the Hellenic religion, and Hellenic Polytheism are all used interchangeably to refer to the religion, and are synonymous. The phrase Hellenic Polytheistic Reconstructionism refers to the overall movement and the methodology used to revive the religion, but is not the religion itself. The words Dodekatheism and Olympianism refer to specifc "denominations" that serve as branches focusing on specific schools of thought or the public practices of a specific polis, yet are still referred to as being included under Hellenismos, Hellenism, the Hellenic tradition, the Hellenic religion, and Hellenic Polytheism, and are part of the Hellenic Polytheistic Reconstructionist movement. --151.201.147.161 (talk) 15:04, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Further reading' dispute

I am disputing the inclusion of Kharis: Hellenic Polytheism Explored by Sarah Kate Winter and A Temple of Words: Essays culled from five years of "Sannion's Sanctuary" by H. Jeremiah Lewis.

  • Kharis: Hellenic Polytheism Explored by Sarah Kate Winter
    • The author has made public statements, prior to the books release, she no longer considered herself or her practice to be Reconstructionist.
    • The book is vague and ambiguous in identifying what is and is not "Hellenismos" or "Hellenic Polytheism" and clearly states that the book's goal is not Hellenic Polytheistic Reconstruction, though does not exclude the movement in its discussion of worshiping the Greek Gods.
    • Previous references to the claims made in the first version of the book where deleted for not being credible. These claims are reproduced in the second version.
  • A Temple of Words: Essays culled from five years of "Sannion's Sanctuary" by H. Jeremiah Lewis
    • The book is little more then a collection of uncited blog style opinion pieces from a website that a previous contributor removed for violated Wikipedia's 'repository of links' policy.
    • The accuracy of information provided is completely in question.
    • The comprehensiveness, scope and coverage of the work is limited.
    • The books is not specifically in regard to Hellenic Polytheistic Reconstruction, and refers to the movement in a trivial and incidental manner.

Neither of these publications can be considered reliable reading material in regards to this specific article and topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.201.147.161 (talk) 16:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Misrepresenting Wicca

The section on Hellenic polytheism and Wicca seems to be treated by some as a dumping ground for any dissatisfaction with Neopaganism in general, and these people seem to be bringing more opinion that fact to it. Recent edits did a great job of misrepresenting the Wiccan view of the deities, conflating traditional Wicca and "Eclectic Wicca", and ultimately conflating Wicca and Neopaganism. I'm happy to believe that this comes down to ignorance, and I'll try to explain some of the problems here a bit better.

A lot has been said about Wicca by the uninformed, particularly in the ridiculous publishing industry that has shot up around Charmed, Buffy and Silver Ravenwolf. Wicca, as understood by initiates and as described in earlier works, tends to be rather different to the views espoused in this generic dross. The gods are seen as one Goddess and one God, and potentially a greater godhead who is so remote from human concerns as to be virtually of no interest to us. The Goddess and God are not necessarily seen as connected with all other gods from other cultures, although Wicca is an orthopraxy rather than an orthodoxy, and some initiates understand things in these terms. But it's surprisingly uncommon to find (traditional) Wiccan covens invoking any gods but our own beloved God and Goddess (names withheld).

In the early literature (Gerald Gardner's books, for instance) our God and Goddess are hypothesised to be the tribal gods of the witch cult, and there's nothing universal about them at all. There are still plenty who see things in this way.

And of course these hypotheses have a certain amount of historical support; for instance Georg Luck, Professor Emeritus at Harvard University describes the fusing of the Roman Pan and the Celtic Cernunnos to form a powerful deity around which the pagani, resisting conversion to Christianity, rallied (Arcana Mundi, pp. 6-7); Carlo Ginzburg, Gustav Henningsen and other academic scholars have demonstrated the long survival in Europe and the British Isles of goddess worship and surrounding ecstatic/magical cults, and shown how they substantially contributed to the diabolised stereotype of the witches' sabbath. Ronald Hutton has probably been the most vocal historian arguing a lack of precedents for Wicca, but then, his is a very ideosynchratic view, and he takes a number of extreme positions rather distant from usual academic consensus in the fields of witchcraft history, pagan antiquity, pagan survivals into the Christian period, and the history of hermeticism and ceremonial magic.

Of course this is hardly of vital importance to most Wiccans, since we are not even attempting historical reconstruction. We simply commune with our Gods by our traditional methods or whatever way works best. I understand that in reconstructionism there is the concept of "gnosis" and "shared personal gnosis" that helps validate the path you're going down; this kind of stuff is the very brick and mortar of Wicca, and any serious coven works with this constantly; it's what mysticism and magic are all about. Criticisms in terms of historical accuracy just don't make sense.

In short, Wicca is not synonymous with 'witchcraft', and is not the same as Neopaganism, and there is a world of difference between Wicca in its traditional form and the "Eclectic Wicca" that's become popular largely in the last 10 or 15 years. In the wider neopagan community we can find plenty of examples of embarrassing ideas, cultural misappropriation and the like, but to use these to snipe at Wicca is hardly reasonable. In fact I don't know why there's any sniping at Wicca at all, since we're not trying to tell the Reconstructionists how to conduct their religion. We wouldn't presume. I think what the article should do rather than emphasise this kind of ankle-biting is to simply make clear what the differences are between HPR and other popular forms of (neo)paganism — don't single out Wicca (we're just as unhappy with the crass popular views of neopaganism as you are), and don't make it a complaint. Fuzzypeg 00:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The section Hellenic polytheism and Wicca has existed within this article since December 2005. The tension and issues with Wicca, Popular Neopagan culture, and Hellenic Reconstruction has been documented by the Supreme Council of Ethnikoi Hellenes dating back to at least 2001, by Drew Campbell on his website nomos-arkhaios.org (now archived on ecauldron.com), expressed on Hellenismos.us, and discussed in a number of books on the subject. Documenting these types of controversies exist in most articles regarding religion (and other subjects) on Wikipedia. It is fact, not opinion, that much of the Hellenic Reconstruction attempts to distance itself from Wicca, witchcraft, occultists, and Neopaganism in general. Frankly, as I understand it, traditional Wicca has much of the same issues with Popular Neopagan culture, having had their identity stolen and their beliefs and practices misrepresented. Gardnerian and Alexandrian Wiccans, true Gardnerian and Alexandrian Wiccans, seem to have little tolerance for (Neo)Wicca from my experience. What you are calling "Wicca" has now been relegated to BTW, and labeled a rigid, dogmatic, and elitist subset of Wicca by much of Neopaganism. For all intents and purposes, "Eclectic Wicca" is Wicca today. There is no way to turn the clock back on that one. In any event, this artice is not that place to debate what is and is not true Wicca. --151.201.147.161 (talk) 03:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]