• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Reconstructionism vs. Revivalism

lovesong

:D
Premium Member
How do you guys differentiate between these two approaches? I've considered myself a reconstructionist for a long while, but only more recently learned about revivalism as a separate thing. I'm still struggling with understanding exactly what the distinction is, and so far my experience with the terms suggests they're fundamentally the same with slightly different levels of strictness, but I'm curious how you all see them. Are they different? What are the differences and similarities? How do you identify around those terms and why?
 

Bear Wild

Well-Known Member
How do you guys differentiate between these two approaches? I've considered myself a reconstructionist for a long while, but only more recently learned about revivalism as a separate thing. I'm still struggling with understanding exactly what the distinction is, and so far my experience with the terms suggests they're fundamentally the same with slightly different levels of strictness, but I'm curious how you all see them. Are they different? What are the differences and similarities? How do you identify around those terms and why?

I am rather isolated so had not heard that they were two approaches but from what I have now read they seem complimentary. The reconstructionist attempts to understand what we know about and feel is accurate about the religion of the past but because the pre-christian religions were oral traditions and much was lost in translation by Christian authors the revivalist attempts to fill in what was lost into a meaningful practice. The two together seem more meaningful for a current religion of today.
 

Callisto

Hellenismos, BTW
How do you guys differentiate between these two approaches? I've considered myself a reconstructionist for a long while, but only more recently learned about revivalism as a separate thing. I'm still struggling with understanding exactly what the distinction is, and so far my experience with the terms suggests they're fundamentally the same with slightly different levels of strictness, but I'm curious how you all see them. Are they different? What are the differences and similarities? How do you identify around those terms and why?

I'm late to the discussion so I'll just say in short that revivals are concerned mainly with the spirit ("the why") of a tradition and have little to no emphasis on whether the form of their practice bears resemblance to a tradition. Whereas reconstructions are concerned with restoring the tradition in a modern context, reestablishing the form and the spirit, albeit in a modern context. The intent is not to reinvent the wheel but to take an existing wheel and restore it to function in a modern environment.
 
Top