Orthopraxy or Orthodoxy

[Meritmut]

I thought it would be interesting to discuss this topic, as a reconstructionist faith do you view Kemeticism as an orthopraxic faith or an orthodox faith?

Orthopraxy -

correctness or orthodoxy of action or practice.

Orthodoxy -

the condition, quality, or practice of conforming, especially in religious belief.

So is Kemeticism in your view more about correct practice or not necessarily correct belief but about having faith in the Gods?

I view Kemeticism as a mixture of both, coming from a Hellenic and orthopraxic point of view, the Kemetic faith seems to me to place emphasis on both correct practice but also on the faith or devotion of the practitioner as well.

[Setnakht]

So is Kemeticism in your view more about correct practice or not necessarily correct belief but about having faith in the Gods?

I view Kemeticism as a mixture of both, coming from a Hellenic and orthopraxic point of view, the Kemetic faith seems to me to place emphasis on both correct practice but also on the faith or devotion of the practitioner as well.

I do not think these terms are particularly helpful or useful in our modern context. Both terms carry a great deal of baggage. Typically one dominant form of the monotheistic religions (such as Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox Christianity, Sunni Islam, Shiite Islam, Mormonism, and fundamentalist Christian sects) each claim to be orthodox--"true belief"--
as well as orthopraxic--"true/right practice") claims that it's interpretation is THE correct interpretation. We see what suffering these notions have brought
to their adherents as well as those labeled heretics, apostates, and infidels.
As pagans we can avoid these pitfalls by honoring and respecting the variety of ways we Kemetics choose to worship. Although I try hard to do the ancient rituals to the best of my ability, I do not look down on others who may practice their Kemetic path and undertand that path in ways different from my own. We have Tameran Wicca, Kemetic Reconstructionist, Kemetic Revivalist, Kemetic Orthodox, and other forms and permutations of the modern attempt to worship the gods of ancient Egypt. In our hearts we may each have our differences in how we understand and worship the Netjeru.
As I stated at the beginning, the terms orthodox and orthopaxis are not entirely helpful, in my estimation.

[Meritmut]

I do not think these terms are particularly helpful or useful in our modern context. Both terms carry a great deal of baggage. Typically one dominant form of the monotheistic religions (such as Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox Christianity, Sunni Islam, Shiite Islam, Mormonism, and fundamentalist Christian sects) each claim to be orthodox--"true belief"--
as well as orthopraxic--"true/right practice") claims that it's interpretation is THE correct interpretation. We see what suffering these notions have brought
to their adherents as well as those labeled heretics, apostates, and infidels.
As pagans we can avoid these pitfalls by honoring and respecting the variety of ways we Kemetics choose to worship. Although I try hard to do the ancient rituals to the best of my ability, I do not look down on others who may practice their Kemetic path and undertand that path in ways different from my own. We have Tameran Wicca, Kemetic Reconstructionist, Kemetic Revivalist, Kemetic Orthodox, and other forms and permutations of the modern attempt to worship the gods of ancient Egypt. In our hearts we may each have our differences in how we understand and worship the Netjeru.
As I stated at the beginning, the terms orthodox and orthopaxis are not entirely helpful, in my estimation.

I understand why you say that, however Hellenic Reconstructionists for instance do use the term Orthopraxic to describe their faith. I see Kemeticism as much more being a religion about faith and belief in the Gods rather than on set ritual and guidelines. Religio Romana is for instance very orthopraxic, even in ancient times. They believed that if you did ritual in an incorrect way then you would offend the Gods and the ritual had to be erased and re-done the correct way, and if you did the ritual the wrong way on purpose then not only would you offend the Gods but also endanger your community of their anger. So that person was shunned. I really don't see a problem with using the terms (although I completely understand your point) but I do see a problem with the concept when taken to a fundamental level in any religion.

[SatAset]

I thought it would be interesting to discuss this topic, as a reconstructionist faith do you view Kemeticism as an orthopraxic faith or an orthodox faith?

Orthopraxy -

correctness or orthodoxy of action or practice.

Orthodoxy -

the condition, quality, or practice of conforming, especially in religious belief.

So is Kemeticism in your view more about correct practice or not necessarily correct belief but about having faith in the Gods?

I view Kemeticism as a mixture of both, coming from a Hellenic and orthopraxic point of view, the Kemetic faith seems to me to place emphasis on both correct practice but also on the faith or devotion of the practitioner as well.

Most ancient faiths were orthopraxic faiths. If you did the rituals, what you believe in/as/of the gods didn't matter so much. In Ancient Egypt there were times when some gods were more prominent than others and different deities were worshiped in different towns. But the majority of rituals had the same core components and were modified to fit that deity within that town. And even some beliefs about the Netjeru themselves changed over time too.

I'd like to note that Kemetic Orthodoxy/House of Netjer is orthopraxic even if it uses the term Orthodox in its label. I don't know of a religion that is actually called Religion Name Orthopraxy.

I also agree with Setnakht that it is limiting because it is putting a Abrahamic lens on a religion that doesn't really fit into that model of religion.

[Setnakht]

I'd like to note that Kemetic Orthodoxy/House of Netjer is orthopraxic even if it uses the term Orthodox in its label. I don't know of a religion that is actually called Religion Name Orthopraxy.

It might be stretching it a bit to say that HoN is orthopraxic. In Tamara's prayer book she says that she borrowed the words for a libation in her follower's senut rite from what she calls "an analogous African tradition: the mojuba," (p.. 25) a Yoruba practice. She also claims that surviving Egyptian temple wording is "incomplete and contradictory in places." Factually that's just not accurate.
I have found in the scholarly literature words for a water libation. Those recitations had nothing to say about "cooling" a god. Anyway,
be that as it may, another HoN practice is divination by cowrie shells--again,
that's a practice of some African tribes, not ancient Egypt. She also teaches that the departed do not become divinized. That squarely flies in the face of
ancient texts. See Jan Assmann's Death and Salvation in Ancient Egypt,
which gives countless examples of ancient texts referring to the shining akhs as divinized. Don't get me wrong, if Tamara wants to mix African tribal practices in with ancient Egyptian ones, she certainly has that right. it's just not really orthopraxic. Does it make it bad? Not at all.

[RandallS]

Don't get me wrong, if Tamara wants to mix African tribal practices in with ancient Egyptian ones, she certainly has that right. it's just not really orthopraxic. Does it make it bad? Not at all.

As I understand the term "orthopraxic" simply means the religion is more concerned that its followers perform the rituals the religion requires correctly than it is that their beliefs match those considered correct by the religion. It has nothing to do with where the beliefs or practices came from.

[Helmsman_of_Inepu]

...If you did the rituals, what you believe in/as/of the gods didn't matter so much.

That's something I have found very interesting. In Christianity, for instance, there is a huge emphasis on "belief" and strength and quality of faith. Belief and baptism are the two requirements of being saved, people should have a child-like, unwavering faith, etc. etc.

This doesn't come up in Kemetic writings, as far as I know. There are certainly a number of "pessimistic" writings that question the existence of an afterlife. Writing something like that in Medieval Europe would have gotten you in a lot of trouble!

I would think it would be perfectly acceptable for an "agnostic" person to do Kemetic rituals. I also get the impression that it would be possible for anyone to get into Kemetic "heaven," believer or not, as long as they lived in accordance with Ma'at.

[Carnelian]

I view Kemeticism as a mixture of both, coming from a Hellenic and orthopraxic point of view, the Kemetic faith seems to me to place emphasis on both correct practice but also on the faith or devotion of the practitioner as well.

I do not think these terms are particularly helpful or useful in our modern context. Both terms carry a great deal of baggage. Typically one dominant form of the monotheistic religions (such as Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox Christianity, Sunni Islam, Shiite Islam, Mormonism, and fundamentalist Christian sects) each claim to be orthodox--"true belief"--
as well as orthopraxic--"true/right practice") claims that it's interpretation is THE correct interpretation.

I agree with Setnakht that these terms aren't very helpful. Even from a Hellenic background, I don't think they are very relevant. The word "orthopraxic" gets thrown a lot among Hellenic pagans, probably to emphasize that there is no strict doctrine, but it's still not very accurate. In Athens, people with "innovative" religious ideas would be tried for impiety and would be exiled or executed, so belief wasn't irrelevant. Practice wasn't so much a religious mandate, but a social expectation during public festivals. People could do what they wanted in the privacy of their own homes, as long as they took part in public sacrifices for the good of the community, and the method had more to do with cultural tradition rather than what was religiously correct worship. Ancient cultures had no "religion" (as a distinct, self-contained entity), only the worship of the gods within a given culture and its traditions.

[drekfletch]

In Athens, people with "innovative" religious ideas would be tried for impiety and would be exiled or executed, so belief wasn't irrelevant.

I was under the impression that piety wasn't a function of what you believed but of what you did. If you didn't do the right thing, you were being impious.

as long as they took part in public sacrifices for the good of the community, and the method had more to do with cultural tradition rather than what was religiously correct worship. Ancient cultures had no "religion" (as a distinct, self-contained entity), only the worship of the gods within a given culture and its traditions.

Bolding mine.

Except that in a cultural tradition based religion, the traditions Were the religiously correct worship.

From what I know of ancient Egyptian religious practices, a central concept was the reinforcement of Ma'at, recreating the pure foundation present at Creation. It was important to do the rituals or else the gods wouldn't be able to do what they do, and the world would end. With this perspective, I find it hard to believe that "Orthopraxic" would be a bad word to describe the ancient religion.

[Carnelian]

I was under the impression that piety wasn't a function of what you believed but of what you did. If you didn't do the right thing, you were being impious.

Here is a quote from "Magic in the Ancient Greek World" by David Collins, Associate Professor of Greek at Latin at the University of Michigan: "Impiety was a serious and actionable charge in classical period Athens, as the example of Socrates' famous trial attests, but the charge itself usually centered on claims of introducing unorthodox views of the gods that were formally recognized by the state or of innovating in divine matters."

Except that in a cultural tradition based religion, the traditions Were the religiously correct worship.



From what I know of ancient Egyptian religious practices, a central concept was the reinforcement of Ma'at, recreating the pure foundation present at Creation. It was important to do the rituals or else the gods wouldn't be able to do what they do, and the world would end. With this perspective, I find it hard to believe that "Orthopraxic" would be a bad word to describe the ancient religion.

What came first the chicken or the egg, the religion or the culture? Yes, I think "orthopraxic" can be accurate, although it is kind of limited. The practice depends on the belief in the concept of Ma'at, which itself is informed by cultural ideals.