Pagans, what are your views on Eclecticism?

Question

I've read several essays and commentaries in the past week that describe eclectic paganism/wicca as insulting to those who follow a strict traditional path, comparing it even to theft.

Is this a commonly shared thought amongst the Pagan community? I didn't realize that there was such animosity between Pagans.

Here's one essay I read, on Witchvox, if any of you are interested in reading it.

http://www.witchvox.com/va/dt_va.html?a=usal&c=words&id=12091

Answer 1

Some of us equate "eclectic" with "dabbler." They are seen as someone who doesn't take their religion seriously, isn't disciplined in their practice, or is too lazy to do the research. Eclectic = Fluffy Bunnie. You see this attitude especially with Reconstructionist Pagans. I used to think this way. But having done my own research, I have found "eclecticism" has been prevalent in Magickal practice since ancient times. (Though, for the above reasons, I prefer the word Syncretic) Look at the Greek Magical Papyri, a collection of spells and magical texts written in the Greek language, mostly from Egypt from about 300 BCE to 300 CE. These writings draw from many different sources -- Greek, Roman and Egyptian Paganism, Judaism, Gnosticism, and Christianity. The Romans were also known for adopting Gods of different pantheons into their own. So, eclecticism in and of itself isn't the problem -- there is pleanty of historical precedent for it. The problem is sloppy eclecticism -- doing something just because it "feels right" without doing the research to find out the best or right way to do it. There are those who call themselves "eclectic" because they find many traditions "too complicated," or "too hard," or "too dogmatic." This is spiritual and intellectual laziness, and it also shows that some Pagans still have a lot of baggage held over from Christianity that is holding them back spiritually.

Personally, I could be called eclectic. I have studied several traditions, and have incorporated aspects of those traditions into my own practice -- not simply because I like them, but because they work. But I have a tradition -- Thelema -- which acts as a framework to build on. My spiritual practice has an internal consistency. It makes sense.

So, what I'm saying is that eclecticism is OK, so long as you do the work and know what you're doing, and aren't just using the word "eclectic" as a cop-out for spiritual and intellectual laziness.

Answer 2

Greetings!

Fortunate that I was introduced to Comparative Religion before committing time and energy to a specific Path.

The Eclectic Pagans out there who join "eclectic" groups get the chance to learn about other Paths in a Way that is more than just an impartial classroom environment.

One problem that I have seen, is that some Eclectics are convinced that any Religions Systems Tenets, Beliefs, and Rituals are up for grabs---that attitude can lead to Folks not giving any respect to those who use the "grab bag" style.

To say that you "follow a Religion" brings with it the responsibility to faithfully recreate the Way that the Founders of that Religion had in mind. If you decide to create your own System, don`t name it after an actual Faith-that WOULD be an Insult, and perhaps theft, if you are selling the information as a representation of an actual Faith.

G.B.G. combined several Faiths and called it by a Name that he felt would cause no consternation-now, "Wiccans" are left with a mess, that is not being sorted out, is Historically vague, but is being relegated to "eclectic" definition in order to Calm the Waves.

Wicca will continue, with many Folks not agreeing with one another, and some getting very upset-but there are other Religions that are going through the same Evolution, and we will see what results come from it.

My Path learns all it can about other Systems, there might be a "one way", but that is yet to be seen.

Probably right after the End of the Play.

Answer 3

While the author of the article makes a valid point that many take a hodge-podge of beliefs that sound good to them, call themselves eclectic, and really don't understand what it is that they are doing, that is not the essence of true eclecticism.

In my own beliefs, I recognize that people all came from a single origin. I was taught (and recognize) that with the migration of the people, the Goddess and God migrated along with them. As cultures changed, the systems of belief were altered, names were changed, and purposes mutated.

Perhaps for some, true Eclecticism is a search for something more primal, something older. Perhaps it is a search for the unity among the diversity of belief; something that might just be "all to many".

While I recognize that the idea that one cannot actually be a "Christian Celtic Pagan following an Egyptian mythos", and that it does sound ridiculous, there are aspects of each that can support each other. The problem comes in the naming, and in determining what the person who said this really means. Today, I have a hard time doubting that the person claiming that particular heritage was confused. Still, it might be possible that an individual could develop a tradition including much of these seemingly divergent systems.

Obviously a person can't be an orthodox Christian and a Pagan at the same time. However, it is possible to study the teachings of Christ, while rejecting the necessity of salvation. It is possible to recognize that the Celtic pantheon may have evolved from an earlier system of belief which migrated North from the area of Egypt, as the glaciers retreated after the Ice Age.

Do I like mish-mashes of religions that are passed off as a truly enlightened system of belief? No. Do I think that real Paganism requires a great deal of study and dedication ? Absolutely.

Just like other religions, some are babes, not yet ready for the real meat and potatoes. They are fed milk and fairy-tales, with the hope that some day they will be able to digest that which will sustain them in the long run.

I agree with the author about Silver Ravenwolf, and the abundance of fluff and misinformative "do-it-your-own-way" attitude that fills her books. I disagree that Scott Cunningham was a hack though. I think that he did some serious study before he wrote, and I wish I had had the opportunity to meet him prior to his death.

On the other hand, Gardiner himself borrowed much from many sources to create modern Wicca. A mix of Qabalah, Masonic teachings, Old European systems of belief, Christianity and more are our heritage. Wicca was not built on anything that could be considered finely distilled, but was rather a cocktail. Certainly it is a fine one, with flavors that meld well, but it is still a mixed drink. We have the God and Goddess of Paganism, but call on the Archangels. Many use YHWH. These are all included in traditional Wicca. Wicca itself is somewhat eclectic in its heritage.

What I prefer is not less eclecticism, but greater understanding of what it is that one is doing. If one relates to the Egyptian Gods or Celtic pantheon, then work with them. But take time to study so that you actually have a "system", something that is at least internally consistent. Understand the correspondences in your system. Understand why you cast a circle the way you do. I wonder how many people cast a circle having no idea what direction they are actually facing when they do so...

Anyway, I guess I've got different views on this ... maybe even my opinion is eclectic ...

BB,

--Dee

Answer 4

There is some tension between _some_ eclectic and traditional Wiccans. I don't think we have any more internal strife than your average religion. And we've yet to kill anyone over it.

Personally, I understand the arguments of the strict traditionalists, but I disagree with them. I think responsible eclecticism is a natural evolution of Wicca. I do, however, distinguish between eclectic Wiccans and people who are just making things up because it sounds cool and slapping the word "Wicca" on it.

The idea of "stealing" a religion makes zero sense to me. Religions are ideas. You can't copyright them. You can't say "I'm already doing that, so you can't!" New religions always borrow from existing religions. Always. Now, should eclectic Wicca be known as something other than Wicca? That's a more reasonable discussion, and perhaps us eclectics will eventually find that another term describes us better. Until then, however, we're all Wiccans whether we like it or not. We're proud of our lack of central authority. The drawback (if you'd even call it that) of that is that there's no body to kick out the "not-real" Wiccans.

Answer 5

I've heard some occasional mumblings in that direction in the letters to Pagan Dawn over the years.

I myself am a Pagan, and refer to myself as a Wiccan, occasionally as a Witch. I'm certainly an eclectic one {and somewhat eccentric, too :) }

I don't see why it should be offensive. I come from a family of Christians & Catholics, and as such have no known Wiccan heritage or set path to follow.

When I first became interested {10 years ago}, I didn't like the look of the structure of either the Gardinian or Alexandrian paths, and decided to be true to myself, and follow my own path. I worship Gods and Goddesses from various mythologies {though my Celtic roots win out a lot}, and also believe in Angels {which pre-date all religions}.

Pagans are supposed to be more open-minded than most, but you will find stubbon, opinionated people in every religion.

Answer 6

Hmmm tricky question.

There are those who do not "approve" of taking gods from different pantheons. That is a very "popular" thought for many recons. But at the same time I've never heard blatent disrespect for mixed pantheons. Just more of a "don't understand" attitude.
Insult is a strong word, but in some cases true. Tell a Heathen that Frigga is the same and Isis and there is going to be a fight. For some, it is an insult to thier gods to make them into aspects of other gods. I try really hard not to get offended with that because I do believe everyone's path is thier own. But I admit, I wince when someone lumps Frejya in with say, Aphrodite. The two couldn't be more different.
I am seeing a split between Recons and Eclectics. But I think there is a lot of respect there as well. They are both valid paths. I have many eclectic friends and I don't doubt thier experiences in the least.

Answer 7

I've come across this attitude before. It mostly comes from those who are from the Old British traditions. Just like any other religion you are going to have people who disagree on practice and doctrine as well as origins.

Religions of all kinds have gone through their evolutions and blended with those of others when human populations came into contact with each other. I never understand why this disturbs so many.

I am eclectic and I only have gotten flack for it once from a from a Brit Trad. Other than that everyone I've met and shared my views with has been cool with it. Of course I think here in CA eclecticism is very common.

Answer 8

Eh, he's one of the younger CR folks, and, well, as a whole, CR tends to take a semi-dim view of eclecticism. Wasn't always that way, mind you - back when CR started to form and get off the ground, eclecticism was perfectly okay, because the folks who did it, did it *right*. They'd study, poke at things, experiement, and understand something before trying to incorporate it. They'd treat things with respect, make sure that it made actual sense, didn't contradict other things in their beliefs, etc.

Somewhere along the way - tail end of the 90s or so - that slipped, majorly. Folks came along and decided they were going to, more or less, grab whatever wasn't nailed down and toss it into a blender. This became rather evident when dealing with the Native American tribes, with folks treating sacred items and ceremonies as if they were just fads.

The CRs got pretty heavily involved, because the Celtic cultures got hit pretty heavy too. For a while, anything with a "Celtic" label slapped on it sold like hotcakes - which led to people making stuff up whole cloth in order to turn a buck. (Look up the "Ancient Irish Potato Goddess" if you want a blatant example.) That contributed to the perception that CRs are all just a bunch of meanies, and so we got in on the ground level of being called FMPPHs (Fascist Meanie Poo-Poo Heads.)

All told, in the Reconstructionist communities, ethical eclecticism normally gets an okay, as does syncretism, though a few folks still get their hackles up. In the Pagan community in general, a lot of folks don't have a problem with eclecticism in any form, but it's still one of those simmering conflicts.

Answer 9

Unfortunately, there are a greater number of those "traditionalists" who get vocal (sometimes abusively so) of those who walk a more eclectic path.

Ironically, many of those walk paths that can't even be traced back a full century... but don't tell them that, or you're in for an ear-full!

The Pagan community is just like any other group - it is a collection of individuals with varying ideas and interpretations, mixed with a number of strong personalities. When all you hear/see/read are the ones who 'feel the need' to push their own agendas, you're going to perceive a lot more "animosity" than probably exists in the group at-large.

Take everything you read with a grain of salt - sometimes a whole wheel - but read objectively and keep in mind one of the primary rules to judging the "evidence" about any group... it's the loud ones that get heard - the troublemakers that sell newspapers and boost six-o'clock ratings.

Answer 10

I am eclectic for many reasons. One, I have ancestors from many cultures. Two, my soul is not bound to this one body. I believe I've been around and I was not always a white American chic. Three, there are many traditions that claim to extend back to the dawn of time or some such, but none of them really do. We are all of us working this out ourselves. We are reclaiming and rebuilding. While history should not be objective, spirituality is. Four, I'm not what you'd call a true polytheist. I think there is a good chance that all gods are one god and that ultimately deity is a mystery and certain to stay that way. Whatever it is, it lives in us all, is accessible to us all and being unknowable does not make it unlovable.