Hellenismos ought to learn some things from the Neopagans
I just spent more time than was probably wise replying to a post on a Hellenic email list I'm a member of. Since I put so much thought into it, I figured I'd repost it here. It's in reply to a post from Todd Jackson, but it's part of a longer thread. As such, this repost necessarily cuts out a lot of his context. Please consider this and the fact that Todd's words were not originally intended for this medium before forming any conclusions about anyone's opinions besides my own.
From Todd:
It's a beautiful "machine," Wicca. It very obviously addresses very fundamental human needs: desire for power; desire to be the "cool outsider"; to be "dark"; and then there's its perfectly-pitched response to gender anomie. Its festivals have exactly the right periodicity, about once every six weeks, and they're firmly set-not the wild scramble of Hellenismos festivals. It offers great opportunity for individual expression. You can be fluffy and light as you want, or you can really grow deep, as deep as one would like; something for every IQ level. It features all the Gods ever worshiped, from Apollon to Yoda, and yet doesn't insist upon *belief* in any deity, in anything beyond what you can see and touch-the Earth, the
wind, etc.
And my reply:
I can't shake the feeling that some of your comments here aren't intended to be entirely complimentary. Perhaps that's just the flatness of text interfering with real communication again. Regardless, I think we Hellenists as a group have something to learn from the success of neopaganism.
Power, the "cool outsider," and a "dark" reputation seem to be popular sometimes, but I think those all point to something deeper and more lasting. I have some ideas what that is, but none firm enough to form into a formal thesis. I think that we'd be well advised to understand that draw in our age and learn how it might be harnessed and directed toward something more meaningful than bad eyeliner.
The gender issue is more transparent. There's an undercurrent of gender bias in modern American culture. It's popular to demand that all gender bias is inherently unfair. I don't have the expertise to judge such a strong stance, but it seems plain to me that there are places where the cultural gender bias is inappropriate. Neopaganism in modern America rejects that. Whether it does so formally or as a de facto rule of the broad group is irrelevant: the result is that enough people are proclaiming it loudly enough that those in modern American culture who would get trampled under this bias are more likely to show interest in neopaganism. I think we'd be well advised to understand this cultural gender bias, its rejection, and how we as a religion can minister to those it aims to trample without alienating those undisturbed by it.
I see the festival scene changing in Hellenismos. Frankly, I'm trying to change it. People want dates that they can plan well in advance. You need that if you're going to have more than three people playing important roles in your festival. Whether that's defined according to the Gregorian calendar or the moon phases reported by the USNO website, it must be reliable and understandable to the average worshiper, or the worshiper simply will not attend.
I firmly hold that any religion intended for public consumption absolutely must provide opportunities for worship to those at any level of spiritual development, and it must accept that people do not all progress in the same ways, at the same rates, or toward the same ultimate ends. Modern American neopaganism -- if any generalization can be made about so diverse a group -- seems to expect each person to direct his own spiritual development, with community support often minimal and indirect at best. I feel Hellenismos would be better served by more focus on the gentle support of the spiritual development of its novice adherents, but it's vital to maintain the dignity of the simple worshiper who is happy to carry the incense at ritual and seeks no deeper wisdom.
And on your final point, it's true: modern American neopaganism will incorporate any God ever worshiped and yet doesn't insist upon any particular orthodoxy. Some cite this as one of its greatest strengths. I maintain that we can learn something from this. It would likely be foolish for many of us to try to incorporate the full breadth of this acceptance into our personal practice. Still, if some neopagan neophyte is looking for a deeper understanding of the similarities between Hermes and Coyote, it is more honor to our Gods to give them honest information than to start bitching about neopagan syncretism.
So yeah, I think we do have a lot to learn from the neopagans. They've got some practical basics well figured out, even if I disagree with a lot of their philosophies.
(LJ Spellchecker Genius of the Day: Apollon -> Napoleon)
From Todd:
It's a beautiful "machine," Wicca. It very obviously addresses very fundamental human needs: desire for power; desire to be the "cool outsider"; to be "dark"; and then there's its perfectly-pitched response to gender anomie. Its festivals have exactly the right periodicity, about once every six weeks, and they're firmly set-not the wild scramble of Hellenismos festivals. It offers great opportunity for individual expression. You can be fluffy and light as you want, or you can really grow deep, as deep as one would like; something for every IQ level. It features all the Gods ever worshiped, from Apollon to Yoda, and yet doesn't insist upon *belief* in any deity, in anything beyond what you can see and touch-the Earth, the
wind, etc.
And my reply:
I can't shake the feeling that some of your comments here aren't intended to be entirely complimentary. Perhaps that's just the flatness of text interfering with real communication again. Regardless, I think we Hellenists as a group have something to learn from the success of neopaganism.
Power, the "cool outsider," and a "dark" reputation seem to be popular sometimes, but I think those all point to something deeper and more lasting. I have some ideas what that is, but none firm enough to form into a formal thesis. I think that we'd be well advised to understand that draw in our age and learn how it might be harnessed and directed toward something more meaningful than bad eyeliner.
The gender issue is more transparent. There's an undercurrent of gender bias in modern American culture. It's popular to demand that all gender bias is inherently unfair. I don't have the expertise to judge such a strong stance, but it seems plain to me that there are places where the cultural gender bias is inappropriate. Neopaganism in modern America rejects that. Whether it does so formally or as a de facto rule of the broad group is irrelevant: the result is that enough people are proclaiming it loudly enough that those in modern American culture who would get trampled under this bias are more likely to show interest in neopaganism. I think we'd be well advised to understand this cultural gender bias, its rejection, and how we as a religion can minister to those it aims to trample without alienating those undisturbed by it.
I see the festival scene changing in Hellenismos. Frankly, I'm trying to change it. People want dates that they can plan well in advance. You need that if you're going to have more than three people playing important roles in your festival. Whether that's defined according to the Gregorian calendar or the moon phases reported by the USNO website, it must be reliable and understandable to the average worshiper, or the worshiper simply will not attend.
I firmly hold that any religion intended for public consumption absolutely must provide opportunities for worship to those at any level of spiritual development, and it must accept that people do not all progress in the same ways, at the same rates, or toward the same ultimate ends. Modern American neopaganism -- if any generalization can be made about so diverse a group -- seems to expect each person to direct his own spiritual development, with community support often minimal and indirect at best. I feel Hellenismos would be better served by more focus on the gentle support of the spiritual development of its novice adherents, but it's vital to maintain the dignity of the simple worshiper who is happy to carry the incense at ritual and seeks no deeper wisdom.
And on your final point, it's true: modern American neopaganism will incorporate any God ever worshiped and yet doesn't insist upon any particular orthodoxy. Some cite this as one of its greatest strengths. I maintain that we can learn something from this. It would likely be foolish for many of us to try to incorporate the full breadth of this acceptance into our personal practice. Still, if some neopagan neophyte is looking for a deeper understanding of the similarities between Hermes and Coyote, it is more honor to our Gods to give them honest information than to start bitching about neopagan syncretism.
So yeah, I think we do have a lot to learn from the neopagans. They've got some practical basics well figured out, even if I disagree with a lot of their philosophies.
(LJ Spellchecker Genius of the Day: Apollon -> Napoleon)