For those of you who are too young to get the pop-culture reference, 7•UP was at one time marketed as the “uncola,” and it would seem there are those who are marketing Hellenismos as the unreligion. What does it say when certain individuals and groups will not even say that something as basic and essential as sacrifices and offerings were/are fundamental practices?

We had been talking about the fundamentals of Hellenismos on the Olympianism Yahoo Group, and one person expressed strong criticisms of Reconstructionists and Ethnikoi, stating not only were the definitions we use too narrow, but just flat out wrong. While she had a lot of unsupported opinions about how wrong Reconstructionists and Ethnikoi were, she did not once offer any real alternative. She used a lot of flowery words, but avoided making any statement as to what she considered practicing Hellenismos.

It took some prodding, but she finally stated that the Hellenic religion is “undefined” because it had no “systematic religion”.  She was, to a point, correct in saying there was no “systematic religion”, but she takes that soundbite to an extreme, and represents it to mean there were absolutely no systems in place, there were no traditions and customs, there were no identifiable ethics. She is an example of a certain segment that promote the Hellenic religion as the unreligion.

I asked before, it is all well and good that people want to find common ground to be inclusive, but what is the common ground?

• The person who has a “patron relationship” with a single God/dess, and doesn’t worship other Gods in the pantheon… are they practicing Hellenismos?
• The person who worships two Greek Gods and two Norse Gods in a semi-traditional way for the appropriate Deity… are they practicing Hellenismos?
• The person who doesn’t make offerings or sacrifices because it “doesn’t feel right” or the Gods “told them” they didn’t have to… are they practicing Hellenismos?
• The person who doesn’t worship specific Gods because they claim those Gods did not approach them and request to be worshiped… are they practicing Hellenismos?
• The person who is philosophical but not religious… are they practicing Hellenismos?
• The person who is “spiritual” but objects to religious obligation… are they practicing Hellenismos?
• The person who does not worship Zeus because he is a symbol of patriarchal oppression… are they practicing Hellenismos?
• The person who does not recognize Miasma or attempt to maintain ritual purity because they feel it is antiquated… are they practicing Hellenismos?

There seems to be so many people who want Hellenismos to be something, but don’t want to say what that something is in fear of alienating someone else who may want to identify as Hellenismos. Additionally, there are those who want to say they are practicing the Hellenic religion, but not actually practice it all.

It is so easy to criticize Reconstructionists and Ethnikoi for having too narrow a definition, being too conservative, or suggesting they are just plain wrong. It is easy to pick apart and demonize a person or idea you (the general you) don’t like, but where is the alternative definition that states what Hellenismos is and identifies what a person does as a practitioner?

Getting this specific person to give the definition she uses was like pulling teeth, but this is not unusual, and after she finally gave it you can see why she avoided doing so. Stating the Hellenic practice is undefinable is not a defendable thesis, and in the same breath she was also insisting her personal practice is orthopraxic.

She insisted there are no specific traditions, writings, ethics, lifestyle and so on, that can be identified as defining the Hellenic religion. The question then becomes, how could she or anyone possibly be orthopraxic if there are no identifiable fundamental characteristics? Even if one were to be so liberal as to only identify Hellenismos as ritualism, that would still mean adherence to specific rituals and liturgical ceremonies.

Fundamental practices does not imply an orthodoxy; it implies orthopraxy, and one must understand that orthpraxy is more than ritual style. While there may be philosophical and mythological differences of opinion, there still remains some core beliefs. Orthopraxy devoid of a general way of thinking, lifestyle, ethical standpoint and specific religious views is nothing but irreligious ritualism.

These are some of the big questions regarding when a practice is called Hellenismos:

• At a minimum, how many Greek Gods need to be worshiped for a practice to be Hellenismos, and which ones?
• Does every practitioner of Hellenismos have to honor Hestia? How about Zeus?
• Is there a specific ritual style?
• Can rituals be innovative? If they can, when does innovation cross the line?
• Can a person cast a circle? (There is an actually interesting answer here.)
• Are sacrifices and offerings required?
• Is there a specific ethical system?
• Are there specific sacred texts?
• Can new mythologies be incorporated?
• Is there a specific festival calendar or calendars?
• Can you create new festivals? If you can, what are the limits? Are there limits to what is appropriate?

The list goes on, and each answer requires and deserves a why or why not. Think about this…

• Is a practitioner of Odyssean Wicca to be considered a practitioner of Hellenismos? Why, or why not?

It would seem (for some people) that a person honoring a Greek God/dess using a Wiccan model for practice and calling it Wiccan is then Wiccan and not practicing Hellenismos, but a person honoring a Greek God/dess using a Wiccan model for practice and calling it Hellenismos is practicing Hellenismos. That is really what we are left when we go with “undefined.” Hellenismos is then hollow, and nothing but another Neopagan add-on to a growing list of Neopagan add-ons.

How about…

• Discordians… are they practitioners of Hellenismos? Some of them will tell you Eris took over Olympus in a corporate takeover. We can’t exclude their new mythology, can we?

I still fall back on as unofficial as it may be, people new to the religion rely on and use our work, research and ideas. Those who work to restore and protect the Hellenic religion have a responsibility to be clear and concise. If a person is going to be putting out information and trying to educate those new to the religion, they have to say what Hellenismos “is”. By describing what it “is” you (the general you) will automatically be showing what it is not, and those questions will have to be answered when addressed.

There are people who want to criticize Reconstructionists and Ethnikoi for being caught up in labels and specifics, while at the same time will tell a Wiccan or Druid they are not practicing Hellenismos, when their own definition of “undefined” would say that person is. It is one thing to know the history of Ancient Greece; it is another to apply that knowledge into practice.

Our approach must take these issues seriously because the reestablish and recognition of the Hellenic religion relies on our efforts. Reconstruction is about setting up that common ground with common practices, and answering the big questions. What we believe, and how we may or may not describe faith to the Gods, is independent of that.

Tags: Ethnikoi, flowery words, fundamental practices, God, Hellenic, Hellenic religion, Hellenismos, norse gods, person, pop culture reference, practice, Reconstructionists, religion, ritual, something, soundbite, traditions and customs, uncola, worship, Zeus