Reconstructionism (Recon) is the attempt by modern peoples to reconstruct part of an ancient culture in the context of modern life. Reconstructionists rely heavily on historical materials, classical literature, and intellectual treatises to learn as much as possible about the culture or religion they wish to reconstruct.

To discuss these issues, I'm offering some working definitions to describe how I'm using the words in this essay.

"Reconstructionism":
a. The activity of constructing something again; 
b. An interpretation formed by piecing together bits of 
    evidence; history;
c. Recall via mental reconstruction.

This process is quite common in religion, particularly in modern Paganism, 
many turn to history and anthropology to learn about their culture's history and tradition. They also read everything they can get their hands on. This is because they are separate from the culture they wish to reconstruct. 

For instance, Reconstructionists of ancient Greek religion research through history, literature, archaeology, art, etc in an attempt to worship the Greek Gods as closely as they were worshipped in ages past. Recon emphasizes integrating daily devotions and religion into ones daily life, which is always a good thing! The biggest problem however, is that when there are gaps in the history, they kind of have to guess what the ancient Greeks would do.

This is different from Eclecticism, another modern movement, in that it doesn't pick things up as it goes along. Eclectics mix cultures, pantheons and histories without sticking to historical accuracy, while Recons are serious sticklers for historical accuracy. 

For example, Gardnerian Wicca allegedly holds Aradia, Cerrunos, and Hekate as the "big three", if you will. Aradia is Etruscan, Cerrunnos is Celtic, and Hekate is Greek. This ideology as it recreates a system of worship as opposed to maintaining cultural accuracy. Modern Witchcraft is quite eclectic for the most part...a lot of "worship whatever Gods you want, however you want." 

"Eclecticism":  
Making decisions on the basis of what seems best instead of following some single doctrine or style.    

When most Eclectic Pagans think about theories of the Gods, the main theory they seem to gravitate towards is "Universalism". This is an accepted Eclectic Wiccan view of the Gods. This is why, for example, it is so easy to mix and match Gods from different pantheons in ritual or just refer to the "Lord" and "Lady" generically and fill in the names where appropriate. This "soft" Paganism, is not, however, the only way to view the Gods. 

"Universalism":                                                                 
a. The theological doctrine that all people will eventually
    be saved, all paths lead to salvation; 
b. All Gods are one God, all Goddesses are One Goddess.  
c. All Gods and Goddesses are different aspects of the
    same Deity.

Reconstructionism is a "hard" Paganism. What this means is that the Gods are all separate and distinct entities with distinct personalities, spheres of influences, likes, dislikes, etc. Each God has a different birth, different relationships with other Gods, and is never referred to generically on a regular basis.

"Traditionalism":
a. Adherence to tradition, especially in cultural or religious
    practice. 
b. A system holding that all knowledge is derived from
    original divine revelation and is transmitted by
    tradition.

Traditionalism is "hard" Paganism, similar to Reconstructionism. Traditionalists rely on historical materials, classical literature, archaeology, art, etc. to maintain cultural accuracy as much as possible. Traditionalists also have the historical gaps, with which some things are assumed.

The differences are listed above. To me it seems most Pagans are comfortable to point out the differences in the Pagan paths. Many seem to relish the differences instead of embracing the similarities. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------

In -- my opinion- this makes Pagan Rights harder to attain. If we cannot agree to find common ground, united ideology, things with which we can agree to present as a group, we are damned to be misunderstood by the majority - Hell, it is hard to get even one person to try to see something from a different viewpoint, even one person on this list.

"Ideology":
a. The body of ideas reflecting the social needs and aspirations 
    of an individual, group, class, or culture. 
b. A set of doctrines or beliefs that form the basis of a
    political, economic, or other system.

"Pagan":
a. One who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew; especially a 
    worshiper of a polytheistic religion. 
b. A non-Christian. 
c. A hedonist.
d. A Neo-Pagan. 

"Paganism"
a. Religions that are characterized by a connection and 
    reverence for nature, and are usually polytheistic i.e.
    have many Gods and/or Goddesses.
b. Pagans are responsible for their own actions.
c. Pagans have no concept of sin and no Satan. So there is
    no fiery hell to worry about either. They have their own
    values and ethics.

Neo-Paganism
a. Revived, reconstructed, or new paganism.
b. A modernized Old Religion, which borrows and adapts
   from the best of pre-Christian Pagan religions, sometimes
    with additions from contemporary religious thinkers.

All Pagans, by these definitions, are also Neo-Pagans, regardless of whether their path is Reconstructionism, Traditionalism, Universalism, Druid, Shamanism, Eclectic, or Wiccan. If we can start by accepting this are our most basic ideology, we can begin to find other things that unite us and present a united front to further Pagan Rights.

Can we agree to disagree, yet agree to try to accept and look for the similarities?

Autumn Dawn
Used with permission.

Autumn's essay raises critical and classic Theological questions. 

Creed  
? Did Pagans ever have one? 
? What problems tend to arise in communities with creeds?
? Can a religious community endure and be effective 
   without imposing a creed on it's members? Has it ever been done? How?
? Would Pagans ever tolerate imposition of a creed?
?  If we don't share a creed, what can we share?
?  Will anything else be enough to unify us so we can act together? 

Organizational Development
? Paganism is currently a movement, rather than an organization.  
   (Movements can't expel people or control who speaks for them, 
   because they have no boundaries.) Could we become a single organization?
   Should we?  
? Can we function effectively as coalitions of many small organizations?
? If we don't have largely supported organizations or coalitions, how can we
   prevent hate groups and others from appropriating our identity?