Religio Romana as eclectic platform?

[Gnaeus Dionysius Draco]

Salvete,

I have somewhat of a theory here for consideration.

Although the Religio Romana had defined priesthoods and was the official state religion of the Roman Republic (and for three centuries, the Empire), could it not be a valid theory to consider it as the basis for many eclectic religions philosophies?

By this I mean that the Religio Romana, due to the absence of many dogma's found in monotheist religions and religious currents, might be suited as the core of one's belief, but that this core may be expanded with religious elements from other systems such as other pre-christian religions or even eastern religions/philosophies like taoism and Buddhism.

It would be an interesting thought excercise, for instance, to combine the basis of Religio Romana (belief in gods or divine powers and connection with these through rituals or artefacts, which I believe are the essence of the Religio, but this again is a personal view) with Hindu meditation.

Or, to make it more concrete: here in Belgium we have the North Sea. Although the Roman Empire stretched to the North Sea they didn't have an original god or goddess for it and 'imported' Nehalennia without completely altering the core of their own religion. I believe that this could still be done today.

Optime valete,
Draco

[Anonymous]

It all depends on Religious Institutions in this instance. Personally I believe that any ancient Pre-Christian European Religion must have a structure and organisation, a core set of beliefs, an ethical and moral code, and rituals and festivities. This is in my opinion required to strengthen the indigenous Indo-European Relgions including the Religio Romana.

The major problem here is individual objections to this, eventually if we allow the Religio Romana to be subjective and open to interpretation by the individual it will be splintered and it will never evolve into a faith at all. Reconstructionists of the Religio Romana must keep this in mind, otherwise it will remain a cultural and traditional interest of individuals. It is also important that Communal Fraternity and Communal Worship is created, that will absolutely strengthen the Faith.

If in the Pagan Reconstructionist circles this is not kept in mind, Reconstruction and Strengthening will never take place. The Religio Romana must be Organised. Like anything else, there is chaos without organisation.

Regarding including other foreign Gods and practices, I think it all depends on the Organisation of the Religio Romana. Personally I am much in favour of removing non-Roman and most importantly non-European influences from the Religion, and I would certainly not include anything new. Obviously my journey into understanding the Religio Romana is still at the beginning, and I already know that there are foreign influences such as the Mithraic cult originating in Zoroastrianism.

These are some questions we must answer:

Is the Traditional Pre-Christian Religio Romana complete?
What are its flaws and what does it lack?
Is our intent in reconstructing the Pre-Christian Faith or simply drawing from it?
What should be included and what should not in the Religio Romana?
Should we preserve the Faith as practiced by the Ancients or should we keep on evolving it?

There are other questions, which I think will arise along the discussion.

[Horatius Piscinus]

Salvete

Regarding the ancient Religio Romana, I think far too much focus is placed on so-called "foreign influences". The ritu Graecae, as one example, was really a Roman manner of performing ceremonies without any actual connection to Greek rites. Before any foreign culti deorum were brought to Rome they had been transformed into Roman culti. Later Rome began to even transform the culti deorum in local areas over to a Roman form. That's the thing about "eclectic" religions, they change what they absorb more so than that they are influenced by what they adopt.

With regard to the modern Religio Romana you have two problems. First is which Religio Romana are you reconstructing? Second is the inescapable fact that you are trying to reconstruct the religio for modern communities. The Religio Romana went through several stages of evolution in the past. There is little point trying to discern what was the religio arcaica when even the Romans had no idea. The religio was reborn and transformed in the fourth century, and then further developed in the third century with several additions to its rites and culti deorum from overseas. The religio at the end of the Republic was quite different from that of the time of Camillus. At that time there is much inquiry into the past religio by antiquarians. The Caesarians were for innovation and reform of the religio, which eventually came about with the Restoration imposed by Augustus, then is the still later imperial religio. There are clear breaks in the various Religiones Romanae between these different periods. Which then does a modern constructionist base his or her approach upon? I think the answer to that really lies with the individual and how they relate to the gods.

Too much study of ancient precepts leads to a formalism that stifles practice. Practice of the religio begins with the individual, but remember that all religions exist within a community. Organizing a community will have to meet the needs of that community, which necessarily is a modern community with modern needs. I think you need therefore to have the community first, and not worry about organization initially. The idea of organizing along the lines of the ancient state religion I think is the wrong approach. You should instead first look at other ancient groups such as the religious sodales as a model for local, modern communities. They will transform the religio Romana to their own needs. Some of that will be good, other parts perhaps not. Eclectic? Not necessarily, but it will not be the archaic or even ancient version of the Religio Romana either.

Valete et vadete in pacem deorum

[C.AeliusEricius]

One problem I have with taking part in the SVR bbs is that the level is just too erudite and elevated for this modern Roman spirit to post any replies that haven't been distilled to the point of flacid sterility.

A highly organized structure in order to have the Religio Romana live in today's world, for today's people? I don't think it will work. Won't happen. ["formalism that stifles practice"]

"A relgion must meet the needs of the community." Okay. What community? If "community" can be those people who think they are Religio Romana, and work towards finding out what they are talking about, okay. Maybe. If it means only those people formed into groups P, Q or R, again too much structure for the present world. The nets of communication now in use are acting more towards people breaking into smaller groups that have common interests, without the need to compromise their beliefs and ethics in order to work under some thing that proclaims itself the big It. There will be, there are, groups that have structures of varying regidity that suits the individuals that are happy to work within htose structures. Such groups will be quite finite, no matter how encompassing the names they give themselves. Wicca makes me twitchy, and want to keep my hand on my wallet, but the concept of a minimum number points of contact with the bedrock beleif might be more in keeping with "ancient religions".

C. Aelius Ericius.
---------
Roman for 50 plus years and counting.

[Horatius Piscinus]

[color=purple]Salve mi Erici

"A relgion must meet the needs of the community." Okay. What community? If "community" can be those people who think they are Religio Romana, and work towards finding out what they are talking about, okay. Maybe.

C. Aelius Ericius.
---------
Roman for 50 plus years and counting.

Em, two old Romani cursing the sun

Yes that is the type of community I refer to, what Marius called "circles" Some will eventually organize, as did the Temple of the Religio Romana in California. What kind of organization that will be is determined by laws of the state. These will necessarily be small communities. Maybe some day they could be brought together in some umbrella association. As for virtual communities, or those who think to call themselves micro nations, those are detached from the real world and lack the kind of personal interaction that individuals need and find in a religious community. So I do not really think any virtual community of internet users will ever develop a real religious community. At best they could support such local circles as may develop, but organization will necessarily have to develop at the local level in the local communities.

Di te semper ament mi amice

[Anonymous]

It seems to me that groups are slowly developing that allow quite a range of eclectic beliefs among individuals. I do feel the internet groups yield too little connection after some time. I've noticed that the Greek reconstructionist actually have a number of demos developing in different cities throughout the U.S. Is that the kind of thing whereby "minimum points of contact" are achieved.

Actually I'd like to here more about the "minimum points of contact" idea. What, if any, are the accepted guidelines on what are minimum connections with others of similar or somewhat similar beliefs?