How successful are Pagan groups at restoring pre-Christian religion?

Question

g o - I had no idea that my question was insulting! I know that Pagan is not a derogatory term because I've heard many a person call themselves that proudly. It should not be seen as derogatory.
I wish you would explain a little better where you are coming from, and what is so offensive about my wording? There was a time when Christianity didn't exist, so that would be called "pre-Christian." How else would I say it? It is Christianity that destroyed all the indigenous religions of Europe.

Answer 1

A lot has been lost and there is a lot that I wouldn't want to restore. My goal is to bring forth the concepts and possible practices that are fit for our modern world and use what I can in my practice. In my religion, we study history, mythology, archaeology, and linguistics to learn more about the cultures of the gods that we honor. I find spiritual inspiration through academic study as well as through meditation and prayer. My path is Celtic Reconstructionism. To learn more: http://paganachd.com/faq/index.html
There are also reconstructionist groups for other cultures like Greek, Roman, Baltic, Germanic, etc. For more info on them: http://www.thetroth.org/memsvc/stewards/flyers/benw/reconflyer.pdf (article has links at the bottom)
How successful we are is subjective. My path is successful enough that we have a close and fulfilling relationship with our deities. Isn't that what's really important?

Answer 2

Pagan is only seen as derogatory by a select few, but most of us truly do not care what you call us so long as you do not call us Satan worshipers. I personally am not trying to reconstruct anything, because there is very little written documents that cover what I believe in. I would say that of the groups that are trying to restore the old ways there has been some good progress. I live in the Bible belt of the U.S., and find it refreshing that I am not the only Pagan in my town. All though some Jehovah's Witness would not leave my friends alone we do not feel as though we are being hit over the head with the Bible.

Answer 3

Many pre-Christian polytheistic religions are gone and will never be restored. Bits and pieces may have found their way into folklore and current religions, but there's little scholarly evidence that these "pagans of old" or whatever romantic phrase you'd like to use have been hiding out underground for hundreds, if not thousands of years. Wishful thinking, I suspect.

Most of those religions were heavily integrated into the government and culture of the times and were widely practiced. There were practices for large groups of people and temples with clergy that supported those rituals. Even with the religions that we know an awful lot about (Roman, Greek and Kemetic, for example), there are still gaps in knowledge. For these reasons and more, I sincerely doubt that the ancient polytheistic religions that have died out will ever be restored.

However...that doesn't mean that there haven't been attempts at reconstructing ancient practices. Some pagans have worked very hard at taking what we know of these ancient religions and incorporating the pieces that reasonably fit with modern life into polytheistic practices (reasonable as in- honoring ancestors with libations of wine and burnt offerings= OK, human sacrifice= not OK). It's not restoration though, it's reconstruction. These are dedicated folks who are creating new religions that are heavily inspired by ancient religions.

Most people who call themselves pagan though are not reconstructionists. They're not trying to restore an ancient polytheistic religion. Many have bits and pieces that are ancient in origin, but their approach is very eclectic and overall pretty modern (pulling from the Freemasons and modern feminist spirituality, for example). The validity of either approach is not in question, it's simply a methodological difference.

Answer 4

No one will ever be able to answer that question as we have no reliable observers from that period. We do have many writings, biased on either side, and people who claim to have been reincarnated, or received messages from the spirit world, but those cannot be assumed to be 100% accurate (If we assume the information they are given is accurate as far as the person is concerned, it is still undoubtedly biased.) Therefore, much like the creation/evolution argument, the answer is simply, we will never know. Unless, of course, we master time travel.

I am Pagan and I understand that faith must change with the times. We will never be 100% accurate in restoring the old ways because the world is a different place. Most modern Pagans are seeking new ways to honor the old Gods. This is wholey appropriate in my opinion.

Currently the Pagans of Greece are fighting for their rights to worship at ancient sites. We should support them in this, as if Greece cares what we have to say!

Answer 5

The success of any particular group depends upon the amount of information left by the original practitioners. Some pre-Christian religions left abundant information, and some, like the Celts, didn't write, and so it's pretty hard to reconstruct.

Reconstructionism is the term given to pagan groups who are attempting to recreate as accurately as possible any particular pre-Christian religion. Most neopagans are not reconstructionists, but the numbers of recons are growing. Wicca, in case anyone reading this doesn't know, is not a pre-Christian religion, although it takes influences from several. Most modern Druidry groups are not actually restoring pre-Christian druidism, either.

Some religions never died out and don't have to be reconstructed at all, as it sounds like you know. Hinduism, Buddhism, Shinto, and Taoism are just examples.

Of the religions that did die out, the ones easiest to reconstruct accurately are probably Ancient Egyptian religion, Sumerian religion, Roman religion and Greek religion. Why this is so: these groups wrote everything down, and we have their accounts, as well as the accounts of their enemies, to go on as far as what their religion was about and looked like. We also have archeological records to confirm or deny what we think based on the historical record.

Recons of Egyptian religion call themselves Kemetics, recons of Greek religion call themselves Hellenics, and those folowing Roman religion call their group Religio Romana. The New Sumerians haven't come up with a cool term yet.

The Norse and Saxon recons (Asatruar) do a pretty decent job of it too, thanks to the Sagas, the Eddas, the other writings of the historical record, and the fact that worship of the Norse pantheon didn't die out all that long ago.

Aztec Recons are doing all right, largely thanks to the fact that the Aztecs weren't conquered until comparatively recently, and a monk did us the HUGE favor of writing an account of what Aztec religion looked like, so that the Spaniards would know to stomp it out if they saw it. Thanks to him, modern worshippers of the Aztec gods can do it properly (to the best of the limits of the law). We also still have their myths in their entirety.

Celtic Reconstructionism is a tricky business. The myths were written in the Christian era, and the Romans did their absolute best to stomp out Druidism wherever they saw it. It is an odd example, because the Christians actually wanted to preserve the old stories, but the Romans wanted the Druids dead. We have the myths, and we have the archeology, but we have very little idea what the religion actually looked like when practiced. There is a lot of educated guessing. I'd say this is an example of mixed results as far as restoration goes. Also, a lot of people who think they know what they're doing regarding Celtic religion don't, since a lot of the information out there is very, very bad.

An example of a religion that I don't think can be reconstructed at all (but people are trying) is Etruscan. We don't have their myths except as a matter of guesswork from what Rome incorporated, and we don't know what their rituals looked like. We have a wealth of archeology though, so that's a start.

This is not a detailed listing of all the groups that exist, but these are some active ones, and my estimation of how well we are doing at re-creation of religions outshone by other religions- not always Christianity.

Answer 6

According to the book, The Joy of Sects, most of modern-day pagan practices, including Wicca, are relatively modern-day creations that draw on a body of trandition that may have deeper roots. There are relatively few pre-Christian religions still out there. For instance, Zoroastrianism is practiced only in small enclaves in India, having been driven out of Iran centuries ago. pre-Christian religious traditions in Europe have all but disappeared.

No doubt the real-life examples set by some thick-headed and angry Christians (not all of them!) have given rise to the interest in pre-Christian and non-Christian religions. I am not sure that the objective of modern-day alternatives to Christianity is to restore anything, except perhaps a sense of balance.

Answer 7

No need to restore anything. The true pagan religions, like that of native Americans, has not ever gone away; therefore, it doesn't need to be restored.

Pagan isn't necessarily bad; it just means nature-based or "non-Christian, " which, of course, Christians think is bad.

Answer 8

Pagan is a derogatory term and your question in it's wording is insulting. I can't wait for the post-christian version of our way of thinking.

Answer 9

As long as any human needs to look outside of themselves for taking responsibility for what they themselves as humans do, religion will always be here, whether it be Pagan, Christianity, Buhdism, Judaism, etc.

Answer 10

Pretty successful. :)

We are the fastest growing religion over the last three years. We're right up there with Islam... except we don't kill people. We have radicals... but, not killing ones. Or religion-pushing ones. Just really religious ones.

... yeah. We're pretty successful, thanks for asking!

I hope you're still strong as ever in your Hindu beliefs!

- 16 yo Pagan