A bunch of questions on modern European paganism

[Voyt]

Hello all, I've over the past few months developed a budding interest in our ancient mythos, but the main problem is that modern neopaganism (from the various sources I've found on the internet) seems more like an occasional hobby that disillusioned urbanites engage in rather than a serious day-to-day lifestyle. Which areas in Europe (or even European Russia) would you say have the most serious-minded traditionalist pagan ethos? Or at the very least which are working towards creating a self-sufficient lifestyle away from the trappings of urban life (not technophobic though)?

I have a Slavic background so I wouldn't be averse to learning another Slavic language to the one I already know, nor even to learning a Scandinavian one (although from my research it seems that the Slavic pagans are less LARPy than the Norse ones...).

If all of this is an exercise in futility, at the very least are there any cultural centers in Europe that you would say are more open-minded to traditionalist mythology that isn't Abrahamic? Perhaps Estonia, or Latvia? I'm open to pretty much anything (except for the mediterranean paganism). Or can you point me to a forum for this kind of stuff that could be more helpful?

[Óttar]

Hello all, I've over the past few months developed a budding interest in our ancient mythos, but the main problem is that modern neopaganism (from the various sources I've found on the internet) seems more like an occasional hobby that disillusioned urbanites engage in rather than a serious day-to-day lifestyle. Which areas in Europe (or even European Russia) would you say have the most serious-minded traditionalist pagan ethos? Or at the very least which are working towards creating a self-sufficient lifestyle away from the trappings of urban life (not technophobic though)?

I have a Slavic background so I wouldn't be averse to learning another Slavic language to the one I already know, nor even to learning a Scandinavian one (although from my research it seems that the Slavic pagans are less LARPy than the Norse ones...).

If all of this is an exercise in futility, at the very least are there any cultural centers in Europe that you would say are more open-minded to traditionalist mythology that isn't Abrahamic? Perhaps Estonia, or Latvia? I'm open to pretty much anything (except for the mediterranean paganism). Or can you point me to a forum for this kind of stuff that could be more helpful?

Russian/Slavic Rodnovery translated as "Love for one's own" seems to have the most serious following. They have even constructed some temples. Modern Lithuanian polytheism is known as Romuva and they have a small following. Personally, I like the Ypato Simboulio Ellenon Ethnikon (YSEE), the 'Supreme Council of Gentile Hellenes' (Greek), Movimento Tradizionale Romano (MTR), and Traditio Romana: La Via all'Umanesimo, but you said you weren't interested in Mediterranean polytheism.

[Skjaldemjøden]

Reviving a religion reconstructed on second hand accounts and the guesswork of archeologists is an utter waste of time. You'll be practicing something almost entirely reimagined, as you have no sacred texts and little to no real information on rituals or beliefs. I also don't buy into "reconnecting" with your ancestry by rejecting all your thousands of ancestors in the past millennium who subscribed to Christianity. If you deny them what is your link to their forefathers? Don't get me wrong - I love learning about ancient cultures and lifestyles. But Neopaganism is a waste of time.

[Voyt]

Russian/Slavic Rodnovery translated as "Love for one's own" seems to have the most serious following. They have even constructed some temples. Modern Lithuanian polytheism is known as Romuva and they have a small following. Personally, I like the Ypato Simboulio Ellenon Ethnikon (YSEE), the 'Supreme Council of Gentile Hellenes' (Greek), Movimento Tradizionale Romano (MTR), and Traditio Romana: La Via all'Umanesimo, but you said you weren't interested in Mediterranean polytheism.

I've watched some vids of Rodnovery and while it does have some questionable individuals they still seem more serious about it than others.

It's not that I'm not interested in the Mediterranean pantheon; it's just that I don't have a desire to learn modern Greek or Italian

Reviving a religion reconstructed on second hand accounts and the guesswork of archeologists is an utter waste of time. You'll be practicing something almost entirely reimagined, as you have no sacred texts and little to no real information on rituals or beliefs. I also don't buy into "reconnecting" with your ancestry by rejecting all your thousands of ancestors in the past millennium who subscribed to Christianity. If you deny them what is your link to their forefathers? Don't get me wrong - I love learning about ancient cultures and lifestyles. But Neopaganism is a waste of time.

I do agree with what you say, but I'm not sure that these people's aims are to "revive" something but more to simply recreate a new consciousness based on the ethos of the old. I don't believe that anything that is lost is truly lost forever, as if there is some higher spiritual life force it will reward those who respect it with new consciousness. That's why I'm not that worried about the loss of our history; what I am worried about is the more LARPy groups who have no desire to actually live a self-sufficient lifestyle.


"I also don't buy into "reconnecting" with your ancestry by rejecting all your thousands of ancestors in the past millennium who subscribed to Christianity. If you deny them what is your link to their forefathers?"

It's not that we "deny" their existence; they still are the reason we have the life we do now, why we have the character we do now; it's more that we analyze their decisions and decide upon a different future for ourselves. We improve upon their mistakes.

But do you have any suggestions as to the ideal method of spirituality?

[Blondie]

Paganism is healthy for humans and their behaviour as it motivates them to live natural, honorable and good. Judeo-Christianity is poison for the mind and behaviour of humans as it motivates them to think egoistic, to bow before priests and to punish themselves and others and additionally destroys the natural rule of Natural Selection by false virtiues like confession.

[Voyt]

Paganism is healthy for humans and their behaviour as it motivates them to live natural, honorable and good. Judeo-Christianity is poison for the mind and behaviour of humans as it motivates them to think egoistic, to bow before priests and to punish themselves and others and additionally destroys the natural rule of Natural Selection by false virtiues like confession.

I would agree for the type of confession found in Catholicism/Orthodoxy, but admitting one's faults privately to one's self or apologizing to others when you've wronged them is the more human way to confess (not in a closed space to some random priest that you don't even know)

[Hruodberht]

Reviving a religion reconstructed on second hand accounts and the guesswork of archeologists is an utter waste of time. You'll be practicing something almost entirely reimagined, as you have no sacred texts and little to no real information on rituals or beliefs. I also don't buy into "reconnecting" with your ancestry by rejecting all your thousands of ancestors in the past millennium who subscribed to Christianity. If you deny them what is your link to their forefathers? Don't get me wrong - I love learning about ancient cultures and lifestyles. But Neopaganism is a waste of time.

All religions are creations of man, and this evidently has evolved over thousands of years, has not always been the same, because it is a living thing. Why is a blot more valid a blot for Thor in tenth-century Iceland than an offering to Nerþus in the Neolithic, an oath before Tîwaz in the Germania of Arminius, or the Bodan cult of a Swabian in the sixth-century Gallæcia?

As a living religion, Ásatrú has continued to evolve and after 1,600 years of clandestinity it is evident that there are many historical gaps that we have. Studying the Eddas, knowing the archaeological sources, the texts on how Ásatrú practiced our ancestors ... evidently helps us to know many things, but that does not mean that Ásatrú consists in doing archeology of the faith. No, a religion is not about faithfully recreating how things were done in the ninth century or in the period of splendor that we want, it's about living the faith. It would not make sense for a Christian of our day to dress like the first Christians to hold a celebration or to say that if something was not done at the time of the catacombs it has no validity. Religions, when they are alive, do not stop creating things. Islam in its beginnings did not have any mystical current and later Sufism was born, which today is considered as a part of the most orthodox Islam. In the Middle Ages the Christian masses were in Latin, does that mean that celebrating them in the vernacular languages ​​of today is a New Age innovation? In the age of the samurai, photography did not exist, but today's Shintoists put pictures of their deceased relatives on the altars of ancestors. Does that somehow transgress their tradition? Clearly not.

You could put many examples of this but what I want to say in the end is that Ásatrú, as a living religion that is, evolves and has not always been the same. In the Bronze Age Týr was considered as the High God and now that role is played by Wotan / Odin. The Scandinavian Oðinn adopts the characteristics of a Finnish shaman, something that the Wotan did not have at the time when Tacitus wrote his Germania. Well, in the same way, the new contributions to Ásatrú, provided they are done with a head and knowing what is being done, are valid. The Ásatrú is not a dogmatic religion, there are many schools or currents in this regard. The same happens in Hinduism, where there are polytheistic, pantheistic and even monotheistic currents within the same tradition. There is nothing wrong with the same thing happening in Ásatrú, even the fact that there are universalist visions is not something that is reprehensible even if I do not share it. The problem comes when these visions try to impose their conception of what is and is not Ásatrú to others and they do it with so little coherence.