Worshipping gods in a reconstructionist or eclectic manner

[EclecticWheel]

If you worship ancient gods how did you go about deciding whether to worship them in a reconstructionist or eclectic format?  Do you think one or the other is generally preferable or that it depends on individual preference?

[Sobekemiti]

If you worship ancient gods how did you go about deciding whether to worship them in a reconstructionist or eclectic format?  Do you think one or the other is generally preferable or that it depends on individual preference?

I tend to try to aim for the middle ground. Being informed by historical information and rites, but allowing it to work in a context that works for me. If that's a modern ritual structure, so be it. If it's based on old temple rites, so be it. I don't find either on their own to be entirely satisfying; recon is too strict, eclectic can veer too far into UPG. Finding that balance isn't easy, but it's what I strive for when I'm building rites.

It also does depend on which gods, though. Sobek and Heru, I'm edging more recon with them, even though there's not a lot of actual historical information to extrapolate from, and that necessitates modern rites.

Hekate, on the other hand, wants slightly more towards the eclectic side. Or, well, the modern witchcraft side, at the very least. I mean, the full moon rite I constructed for Her comprises of modern circle casting, and within that, a more traditionally Hellenic style of libation rite, so. It's a work in progress.

[MamaThistle]

If you worship ancient gods how did you go about deciding whether to worship them in a reconstructionist or eclectic format?  Do you think one or the other is generally preferable or that it depends on individual preference?

Well, I tried recon for a while and found that is was too inflexible for me. I do as much research as possible and some of the goddesses I worship have missing/confusing/incomplete myths and stories. For me, I find what works best is that taking all the information I can and fitting into my practice my interpretation. Otherwise I get frustrated and that isn't positive.

Honestly, as long as you are being respectful and putting your best effort out there I don't see anything wrong with either. For example, looking at Christianity, you have Christians that have more flexible interpretations and you have more stringent practices. I don't think either is wrong, as long as you accept that others may do things differently and you don't get into offensive territory.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Goddess_Ashtara]

If you worship ancient gods how did you go about deciding whether to worship them in a reconstructionist or eclectic format?

I tend not to use those words to describe my spiritual-religious system, though many do consider me to be eclectic.

I extract and utilize strength, power, wisdom and beauty, inspiration, and motivation... whenever, wherever, and however I Will.  I have blended ancient and modern ideas and insights with my own ideas and insights, ancient and modern Weltanschauung with my own Weltanschauung, and my practices all reflect my own True Will and goals and ambitions.  The dreams and desires of other people and cultures come second to my own, if at all.

Do you think one or the other is generally preferable or that it depends on individual preference?

Some people feel a strong inclination to follow, especially when it comes to religion.  Some people have a weak and underdeveloped imagination, and little experience in the power of Creation.  I do not expect these people to worship their gods in an "eclectic" manner.  If religion interests them at all, they probably feel content signing up for whatever religion is there for them- or interests them the most- and then experiencing it in the way their religious leaders or creators intended them to.  This is not my inclination.  I prefer to do things my own way.

[Vixen]

If you worship ancient gods how did you go about deciding whether to worship them in a reconstructionist or eclectic format?  Do you think one or the other is generally preferable or that it depends on individual preference?

I'm a historian so I have a strong pull towards the old times. That being said, very little to nothing is known about Cernunnos. So I'm kind of flying blind here.
If more was known I would probably lean towards reconstructionism, but not entirely. Religion and faith are living things, and gods know that. I believe the way we practice grows and shifts during the ages. Some forms of practices are no longer available to us, and others, that we're not available when the belief was first practiced, can be perfect for your deity today.
 

[Merlick]

If you worship ancient gods how did you go about deciding whether to worship them in a reconstructionist or eclectic format?  Do you think one or the other is generally preferable or that it depends on individual preference?

When I began my path it was less a choice but more a neccessity to worship the gods in a personal, modern way because I knw nothing about the historical context. Later when I startest worshipping a different pantheon  I learned a bit more about the culture, habits and rituals from the time if their original worship.

Still I prefer to keep it a mix of old and new. At least the gods don't seem to mind.

[Louisvillian]

If you worship ancient gods how did you go about deciding whether to worship them in a reconstructionist or eclectic format?  Do you think one or the other is generally preferable or that it depends on individual preference?

For me, I settled into reconstructionist methodology because of my predilection for history and tradition. That does not mean that I am inflexible; it does depend on which religion one is reconstructing. I am a Roman recon, and the Romans were known for being syncretic and flexible while adhering to their own customs and traditions. I tried being Hellenist, but I did not like the rigidity of it, and I feel no connection whatsoever to the Athenian calendar. There are a multitude of factors that led me to Religio Romana, but that's not exactly on-the-topic here. Suffice to say, the Romans could be 'eclectic' in a certain sense, blending and adapting local customs into their own framework. And that appeals to me, I suppose, as a middle-way between strict reconstruction and 'grab-bag' eclecticism.

Though as Sobekimiti said at the top of the thread, it does depend a bit on what god. Some of them, we know very little about, and are flying blind. We have to fill the gaps somehow, and often enough the gods don't seem to mind terribly. As long as they get what is theirs, and are not disrespected.

[MamaThistle]

For me, I settled into reconstructionist methodology because of my predilection for history and tradition. That does not mean that I am inflexible; it does depend on which religion one is reconstructing. I am a Roman recon, and the Romans were known for being syncretic and flexible while adhering to their own customs and traditions. I tried being Hellenist, but I did not like the rigidity of it, and I feel no connection whatsoever to the Athenian calendar. There are a multitude of factors that led me to Religio Romana, but that's not exactly on-the-topic here. Suffice to say, the Romans could be 'eclectic' in a certain sense, blending and adapting local customs into their own framework. And that appeals to me, I suppose, as a middle-way between strict reconstruction and 'grab-bag' eclecticism.

Though as Sobekimiti said at the top of the thread, it does depend a bit on what god. Some of them, we know very little about, and are flying blind. We have to fill the gaps somehow, and often enough the gods don't seem to mind terribly. As long as they get what is theirs, and are not disrespected.

Interesting. I should add that my reconstructionist period was Gaelic. Therefore, you are absolutely right, it depends on the religion. There are, of course, many challenges to Celtic recon religions, which (understandably) leads members/leaders to take reconstruction very seriously. I actually got a lot out of the short lived practice, but I was finding that in trying to keep up with some of the more stringent aspects I wasn't actually pleasing myself. That's why I started calling my practice eclectic, because I'm really just doing all the research I can and building a practice from there.

However, I also think eclectic gets a really bad rep, partially because it should (some people make me cringe) and partially because there isn't a better term. I feel like there are a lot of people out their like me, who simply don't fit in a box, yet there are others that are just intellectually lazy. That doesn't seem to be as much of a problem on this forum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Darkhawk]

If you worship ancient gods how did you go about deciding whether to worship them in a reconstructionist or eclectic format?  Do you think one or the other is generally preferable or that it depends on individual preference?

Rituals depend on the religion a person is practicing, not the gods one is devoted to.

[EclecticWheel]

Rituals depend on the religion a person is practicing, not the gods one is devoted to.

I suppose so, but I phrased it this way because some gods whose myths are modern in origin obviously would not be worshipped in a reconstructionist manner, so to some extent the gods chosen will affect the ritual.

[Darkhawk]

I suppose so, but I phrased it this way because some gods whose myths are modern in origin obviously would not be worshipped in a reconstructionist manner, so to some extent the gods chosen will affect the ritual.

A Kemetic reconstructionist, a Tameran Wiccan, a Thelemite, an initiate of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, and a bootstrap eclectic may all honor ancient Egyptian deities, but their rituals will certainly differ.  Religion remains the prime determiner.

[SonOfAWitch]

Honestly,  mine called me out. I worship Freya almost exclusively. Sometimes I go to other gods/goddesses for advice but it isn't often.

Sent from my LG-K330 using Tapatalk

[SunflowerP]

A Reminder:

Hi, SonOfAWitch, Just a quick note:  Please remember to quote, even if you're just replying to the first message in the thread.  It makes the discussion easier to follow, and it's required by our rules. (If you're using tapatalk on a phone, please hold your finger down on the message you wish to reply to until the quote function pops up.) This isn't a formal warning, just a reminder. No reply is necessary, but if you have questions or need clarification, please feel free to contact a member of staff privately. Thanks! Sunflower TC Forum Staff

[Castus]

Some people feel a strong inclination to follow, especially when it comes to religion.  Some people have a weak and underdeveloped imagination, and little experience in the power of Creation.  I do not expect these people to worship their gods in an "eclectic" manner.  If religion interests them at all, they probably feel content signing up for whatever religion is there for them- or interests them the most- and then experiencing it in the way their religious leaders or creators intended them to.  This is not my inclination.  I prefer to do things my own way.

Am I... am I the only one seeing an issue here? I'm honestly a little surprised that no-one else has commented on this but maybe it's just me.

Speaking as someone who does not worship in an 'eclectic' manner -- and as someone who is perfectly content listening to halakhic authorities -- I strongly take issue with your rude and arrogant characterisation of those who tend towards religious orthodoxy or orthopraxy. I certainly don't have a weak or undeveloped imagination; and I doubt that the billions of observant religious folks out there are universally unimaginative. Similarly I have no idea what 'experience in the power of Creation' is supposed to be but whatever it is I don't think it has any bearing on my religious proclivities.

[EclecticWheel]

Am I... am I the only one seeing an issue here? I'm honestly a little surprised that no-one else has commented on this but maybe it's just me.

Speaking as someone who does not worship in an 'eclectic' manner -- and as someone who is perfectly content listening to halakhic authorities -- I strongly take issue with your rude and arrogant characterisation of those who tend towards religious orthodoxy or orthopraxy. I certainly don't have a weak or undeveloped imagination; and I doubt that the billions of observant religious folks out there are universally unimaginative. Similarly I have no idea what 'experience in the power of Creation' is supposed to be but whatever it is I don't think it has any bearing on my religious proclivities.

I would not say they are universally unimaginative either.  It can take a lot of imagination to be a good theologian or to contribute to liturgy -- orthodox or otherwise.