What Subforums would you like?

I have added the amount of forums here that my imagination is capable of, if there is anything you would like to see on here let me know and I will considere them.

I have some suggestions:

1. A section for hymns and prayers, sub-divided per deity? (I see there's one for ancient hymns, how about a place for modern?)
2. Another section for music appropriate for ritual? (Ancient and modern)
3. Devotional arts and helpful tips (e.g., making useful things like images for altars, incense blends, votives; how to remove candle wax etc.)

Callisto wrote:I have some suggestions:

1. A section for hymns and prayers, sub-divided per deity? (I see there's one for ancient hymns, how about a place for modern?)
2. Another section for music appropriate for ritual? (Ancient and modern)
3. Devotional arts and helpful tips (e.g., making useful things like images for altars, incense blends, votives; how to remove candle wax etc.)

Yep, yep!! We need those sections.

Lisa wrote:

Callisto wrote:I have some suggestions:

1. A section for hymns and prayers, sub-divided per deity? (I see there's one for ancient hymns, how about a place for modern?)
2. Another section for music appropriate for ritual? (Ancient and modern)
3. Devotional arts and helpful tips (e.g., making useful things like images for altars, incense blends, votives; how to remove candle wax etc.)

Yep, yep!! We need those sections.

I too concur....

Perhaps a topic for hellenic art.

I've recently been amusing myself with taking cell phone snaps of the god statues I find around, and they sure are a lot when starting to look. From the impressive Athena and Hermes outside a bank to an itty bitty Pan in a park. And perhaps I'll get around sharing them.

Since we have a "Sermo Latina" subforum, I think it's only fair we should also have an Ancient Hellenic one.

That was debated, but Akhrelos decided against it, I think, due to the absence of anyone here who knows the language.

I think Akhrelos was planning on nixing the Latin language forum anyway due to the fact that it's only been a chatroom for him and I — which, although that's fun, isn't all that communally beneficial.

But it's for him to decide.

Yes, I thought heavily on both languages but as was said, not enough people know the languages to make it worth while having the subforums. I would say at least four members and either at least one moderator or myself has to know the language before it is an option.

I was reading thru the "Deciding Appropriate Practice" forum and in some ways getting completely lost since I know very little about any of the different schools of religious thought that it seems some here know much more than I about. I was reading the last post on that string and thinking that some kind of basic knowledge of some of the more well known, like Orphism (which I know nothing about) would be a very good idea for those of us that haven't the time or bank account to look into to discover if it is the kind of path we would want to follow.

I think there should be a group of forums where maybe someone who follows one path, maybe Orphism, and knows something about it could start a thread saying "ok, other than the basics, this is how an Orphic views the beginning of the universe/world, this is how we feel on X, etc." That way those of us that have no knowledge of these paths (like me! ) could gain some idea if it would be a path they would be interested in following at all. Then either more questions could be asked on the forum to get more specific or they could go on to spending the time and money to dig up the research material needed to continue on that path.

I do not think this would be a hard or wasteful thing for some floundering in a sea of information and discussions they may not be able to follow due to simply not being able to understand the basic ideas behind anothers path. In some ways this would also help those that really don't know anyone that could me a "mentor" to them in X path.

Any religious path that is based (in general) on another can be broken down in a basic set of sentences that tell how it expands on the "original". If all the different Judeo-Christian sects can be explaned this way (and they can) then I think this could be done for the different Hellenic paths.

I was pondering the idea myself, but I'm not aware there are enough people who are knoladgeable in each school to start these. If enough people with base knowledge in a vast amount of schools come forward, I will start to add these. For now, you can ask questions and find these in the "Philosophies" section.

Fair enough. Maybe someone people with at least a working knowledge of different paths will eventually be willing to take on the role of semi-mentor and start a forum discussion on their own for the path they follow. One can only hope. Right now my path seems to be "There are different paths?"

If you have questions about, and likewise if anyone follows, a specific path, the philosophies section is where you would ask/talk about them. And if I could get three people of different established traditions willing to talk, id grant the request. I'm sorry and I hope that helps a little.

Andromeda Amethyst wrote:I think there should be a group of forums where maybe someone who follows one path, maybe Orphism, and knows something about it could start a thread saying "ok, other than the basics, this is how an Orphic views the beginning of the universe/world, this is how we feel on X, etc." That way those of us that have no knowledge of these paths (like me! ) could gain some idea if it would be a path they would be interested in following at all. Then either more questions could be asked on the forum to get more specific or they could go on to spending the time and money to dig up the research material needed to continue on that path.

I think that is certainly a good idea — but I agree with Αχρηλος, this is sort of something we already have in the form of the Philosophies subsection; there are already threads there where you could pose such questions as these, and even if not, you can always start a new one. There are just so many such potential questions that people can have, that I think, beyond having a basic introduction available, it's best just to wait for questions to come along.

If you have questions about, and likewise if anyone follows, a specific path, the philosophies section is where you would ask/talk about them. And if I could get three people of different established traditions willing to talk, id grant the request. I'm sorry and I hope that helps a little.

This is complicated by the fact that the feasibility of this depends heavily on what particular tradition you are seeking to learn about. It's hard to find experts on the whole of the Platonic tradition, for instance, because of its breadth and the large number of equally intricate subschools of which Platonism consists — but there are numerous resources available if one wishes to study Platonism, or Aristotelianism likewise. Hellenistic philosophy is, for whatever reason, not very popularly studied (Stoicism, Epicureanism, Cynicism), and the second two are probably understandably unpopular for the connotations they have acquired over the centuries, and unpopular in religious contexts because of their de-emphasis on religion.

In terms of Mystery cults, this is my field of relative expertise — the focus of both academic/university study and personal/religious discipleship. However, as I also mentioned in another thread, the amount of study that is even possible regarding most of these, especially for someone who is only exploring out of interest and simple curiosity, is very limited. Of the roughly nine Mystery religions that existed in the Roman Empire and Hellenistic world, only about five of them have any contemporary survival (and varied levels of ability to trace their lineage).

Furthermore, the reality is that, although these traditions are absolutely Hellenistic and a huge feature of Graeco-Roman religion of Antiquity, none of them bore or bear much of a resemblance to the Classical and Archaic period religion of Homer and Hesiod with which many people pursing Greek religion seem primarily concerned. Orphism is sort of ambiguous in character as to whether it is a variety of common Greek religion, or a different religion entirely (reasonably analogous to whether Christianity is its own religion or just a very 'heterodox' form of Judaism), while for some others, it is a relatively straightforward conclusion that they are entirely different religions.

For reference, here are the popular Mysteries of Classical Antiquity:
Local/Site-specific Cults (i.e. tied inextricably to a very specific cult site):
i. Eleusinian Mysteries
ii. Samothracian Mysteries
iii. Andanian Mysteries (in many ways, a blend of Eleusis and Samothrace)

'Ecumenical'/'Catholic' Cults (i.e. universal, not tied to any one site, and usually open to all people):
i. Isiacism
ii. Mithraism
iii. Orphism
iv. Gnosticism & early Christianity
v. Hermetism
vi. Manichaeism
vii. Cult of Attis & the Mother
viii. Esoteric Judaism

"Cult of Attis & the Mother"

>> In his "The Cults of the Roman Empire" (1996) Robert Turcan refers to the cult of Attis and Kybele as "Phrygianism". But since there seem to be also a christian fellowship with this name, it might lead to misunderstandings... though "Phrygianism" is quite accurate. Another could be "Kubism"... but well... that wouldn't be very seriously and would lead to even greater misunderstandings?

I miss Dionysism, or is it already inculded in Orphism?

In his "The Cults of the Roman Empire" (1996) Robert Turcan refers to the cult of Attis and Kybele as "Phrygianism". But since there seem to be also a christian fellowship with this name, it might lead to misunderstandings... though "Phrygianism" is quite accurate.

This is partly why I speak against using names for religions that are derived from particular places. 'Phrygianism' for instance, would mean 'the way of Phrygia'. But what constitutes the 'way of Phrygia' at one point in time may not at another. Additionally, the cult of Attis and Agdistis/Kybelē, though originally Phrygian, spread all over the Empire. 'Phrygianism' does make sense, but at least in the education I've received, the cult is usually just called 'the cult of Attis and the Mother', or sometimes 'the Phrygian Mysteries'.

And yes, there was also a very eccentric Christian cult (in many ways similar to modern Pentecostalism) that developed out of Phrygia called 'Montanism', 'the New Prophecy', or just 'the Phrygian Church.'

I miss Dionysism

'Dionysianism' is usually not included as a specific mystery cult because it was never much of a cohesive movement; it's a more general term. There would have been many different Dionysiac cults around the Empire. Furthermore, these cults were not normally organized Mystery religions, but simply local Bacchic cults, just as there would be for any god. When some scholars talk about 'Dionysian Mysteries', they are usually referring to Orphism — which is, of course, a Mystery religion that is heavily focused on a god equated, typically, with Dionysos. M.H. Luther, as I recall, argues that it is really not possible to speak of 'Dionysiac mysteries' apart from the Orphic religion.

It should probably also be noted that, as time went on, in the world of Late Antiquity (roughly the 250s CE to about 1000 CE), and people's religious sensibilities evolved, and teachings of salvation became the dominant and popular religious theme, and Christianity grew increasingly prominent, Orphism was increasingly equated with Graeco-Roman religion as a whole. By the 3rd-4th centuries CE, its following was evidently nearly universal among those  educated religious who were not Christians, to such an extent that Christian writers and evangelists like Clement of Alexandria, Iustinus, and Eusebius, when arguing against other religions and trying to encourage conversion to Christianity, repeatedly reference Orphism, in both teaching and practice, both in support and opposition to the arguments they make. By that time in history, if you were an educated religious person who was not a Christian, you were probably Jewish, Orphic, or Manichaean. By the 4th-5th centuries CE, it was no longer even necessary to speak of Orpheus by name; if you were not a Christian and you mentioned 'the Prophet', 'the Theologian', or 'the Teacher of Mysteries' it was understood of whom you were speaking. The way things were headed in the 4th century, had history taken a different course and had Christianity not been given the throne, the dominion over the Western world would probably have gone to the Orphics or the Manichaeans.  

On a side note, I think anyone would benefit from reading the works of Clement or Iustinus or Eusebius — on one hand, they paint a vivid picture of what religion was like in the Roman world, and on another, they raise interesting, and often not entirely unreasonable, objections and criticisms of different practices of the non-Christians of the time. They're the words of individuals who, though Christians, were typically Christians by choice, not birth, who were often themselves raised with or in the religions they were disavowing, and were familiar with them inside out and backwards. These were not at all like the ignorant Christians that are the stereotype today.

Thanks! That's amazing. I'm really longing to learn more about the "Theologian".

And instead of asking for Dionysism, I just could have read another work of Reinhold Merkelbach: he also wrote about the cult of Dionysos (Die Hirten des Dionysos). he siad just the same things as you did :s