celtic pagan ?
The only reason I ask ..is that I've been a lurker in this tribe for awhile and you all seem very educated in the religious aspects of it all and are well read in the mythos of cauldrons and things that I would, I guess call wiccan !
I'm 100% Irish born in Canada ..my family comes from the county Mayo of Ireland and I don't believe in any of the organized religons as such..although I guess there are some ...good points in they're dogma !
I don't know if it's because I'm Irish with deep gaelic celtic roots or not....but the little I have learned is that the belief system of the Celts in the Earth and Mother Nature and the natural laws of life and death and what goes on around us holds alot more water than any Christian ..Muslim..or even Buddist ideas !
When someone asks or if I'm filling out a questionarie and it asks my religion...I simply state ...Celtic !
I don't really know if they get me or not...it just seems to be the right answer !
I don't like the word Pagan...its a Christian term that seems derogitory and insulting !
Sorry...had ta spout off cause I just don't know where I fit in !
The only reason I ask ..is that I've been a lurker in this tribe for awhile and you all seem very educated in the religious aspects of it all and are well read in the mythos of cauldrons and things that I would, I guess call wiccan !
I'm 100% Irish born in Canada ..my family comes from the county Mayo of Ireland and I don't believe in any of the organized religons as such..although I guess there are some ...good points in they're dogma !
I don't know if it's because I'm Irish with deep gaelic celtic roots or not....but the little I have learned is that the belief system of the Celts in the Earth and Mother Nature and the natural laws of life and death and what goes on around us holds alot more water than any Christian ..Muslim..or even Buddist ideas !
When someone asks or if I'm filling out a questionarie and it asks my religion...I simply state ...Celtic !
I don't really know if they get me or not...it just seems to be the right answer !
I don't like the word Pagan...its a Christian term that seems derogitory and insulting !
Sorry...had ta spout off cause I just don't know where I fit in !
posted by:
|
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Sun, May 4, 2008 - 10:37 PMHi Confused Friend,
I'll start on a light hearted note. Someone who says they are 100% Irish...Born in Canada..proves their Irishness through a comment like that. Alot of my Irish family and friends are up in arms when anyone from across the pond says that, but in a good natured way...It's the weird sense of humour we have over here!
I understand your frustration. I am half German, quarter Irish, quarter English but 100% Celt. I come from one of the oldest lines of Dryads in existence and no-one questions me anymore, but it was an uphill struggle. i had to state my case time and again to Americans, mostly Christians, who saw me as evil for what I believe in. I pointed out that the Christians stole all our festivals to make their doctrine more acceptable to Norse, Germanic and Celtic tribes which have very similar beliefs and festivals. i had all the info to back me up but in the end I found you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. i only get annoyed when people call me wiccan, because I'm not! That's not to knock wiccans, they are free to do their own thing, as am I. When people in the past have accused me of devil worship I just laugh. I know who and what I am, and feel blessed that people come to me when they need help and support, that's what I do. And I feel your frustration so I will say a few things which I hope will help you.
Most people with a drop of Celtic blood in them usually feel the pull to the mystical side of nature, and are more accepting of things that are not understood, instead of rushing around to find an explaination. they just know there is a reason for everything, even if we don't understand it at the time.
You are unique, so celebrate it. Don't feel insulted when someone calls you Pagan, it is not derogratory. Just smile and say 'Thank you,' and the thanks is that you don't posess the same narrow-mindedness.
You are a child of the Goddess, and blessed by her, as we all are, whether we believe or not.
You are of Celtic origin, but it would not matter if you came from a Himalayan hill tribe if you felt that the Celtic way is right for you. It is how YOU feel and what is right for YOU that's important!
It's ok to be different, it is what makes you special and unique!
if you want to discuss this further you are most welcome at the tribe I started just over a week ago, Followers of the Celtic Way. The members are excellent people, very warm and kind, all with different levels of knowledge of the old ways and we are all learning from each other. We'd be happy to welcome you and happy to learn from you, too. Even if you don't join the tribe I hope that some of my words have helped you. No-one can tell you how to be, you're you and special as you are!
Blessings, Michy -
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Sun, May 4, 2008 - 11:02 PMplease post a link ...! -
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Sun, May 4, 2008 - 11:03 PMI'll send you an invite! -
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Sun, May 4, 2008 - 11:11 PMLink tribes.tribe.net/celticway
Hope you join and find it useful. -
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Mon, May 5, 2008 - 12:00 AMI'm wondering..based on information from wikipedia...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celts
would things be different if the Celts had been able to organize and cooperate better....could the Romans have been stopped at the Alps ?
why was there such a feudal state between Celtic tribes that prevented tribal cooperation ? was it just power politics between the chiefs of these tribes ?
I'm just thinking that the world would be such a different place if indeed the Roman Legions could have been stopped from crossing the Alps ! -
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Mon, May 5, 2008 - 12:08 AMI think you are right, it was the feuding of the warlords and Queens that prevented them to unite to face a common enemy. But history is full of examples where petty squabbling about power has prevented unity. if the Romans hadn't come the christian faith would have taken alot longer to establish itself in North West Europe, As it was, Christianity had been around for 1000 years before it really took hold, but the old ways and superstitions still live on to this day in some regions. -
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Mon, May 5, 2008 - 11:35 AM......And 'Feuding' and 'Feudal' are two entirely different concepts. :-)
-
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Mon, May 5, 2008 - 12:58 PMAnother point to ponder, the Romans were a disciplined, unified army. Without individuality, as it were. Whereas in Celtic society, while warriors often fought on the same side, each warrior was fighting for honor and glory and not well trained in large group strategies. I think I read this in another thread somewhere and it impressed itself in my brain. :) -
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Mon, May 5, 2008 - 2:56 PMGood point. The Celts were fighting for their tribe or family - which was often the same thing. A loose confederation of these tribes would go up against a legion - and legions were so disciplined that they could go from marching to fully functioning camp with tents, guards, streets, kitchens and latrines - in half an hour.
Still the Celts kept the Romans busy for almost 1,000 years. So they were formidable in battle.
-
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Mon, May 5, 2008 - 9:11 PMIt's a very interesting question: could the Romans have been stopped at the Alps?
The weird thing - and I don't want to get too much into this - is that the Romans weren't targeting the Celts or Germans to begin with, but the Carthaginians. The problem was that the land routes to Carthage were occupied by Celts - those in Southern in Gaul and the Celtiberians of the Iberian penninsula. Almost all campeigns until Julius Caesar's were justified as a combination of the need to secure those routes, to quell the Celtic tribes client to Carthage (I've seen few note the two odd centuries of vicious warfare between the Romans and the Celtiberians of the 2nd Punic War) and to save the world for the freedom of Romanitas' upstanding sense of civic duty against the dark depravity of Germano-Celtic barbarism (blah blah blah).
It's very easy to lay the eventual eclipsing of continental Celtic culture by Romanitas at the feet of rapscalious and feuding Celtic warlords, but remember that the Celts were always able to mount enormously effective joint actions. Look at Vercingetorix's army, Boudica's freedom-fighting, the sacking of Delphi under Brennus and even the sacking of Rome in the 390's. Even Mons Graupius would have required enormous degrees of cooperation.
But all this doesn't say that the Romans could or couldn't be stopped at the Alps - though let's not forget that they had to quell Celts before they even got to the Alps. 'Cisalpine Gaul' means "Gaul on this side of the Alps" - as opposed to Transalpine Gaul. The process of Roman cultural advance took centuries even if the actual conquest of Gaul was a matter of decades, so I think their conquest of Gaul would have been as difficult to stop as the Industrial Revolution. Possible, but it didn't happen. -
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Mon, May 5, 2008 - 9:55 PMIf the Celts could have organized alittle differently though would it not have drawn Roman troops away from the middle east ?
and if Roman troops were drawn away from the middle east would'nt that have changed the whole Christian mythos?
I was ask'd a question in another tribe...If you could go back in history and change 1 thing..what would it be ?
I said ..help the Celts stop the Romans at the Alps ! I guess it'd encompass more than one event but I can't help but wonder what a different course organized religions would have taken and how different things would be without Catholic plunder and pillage in Europe !
I think the Celts had the skills to stop Caesar's army's but just lack'd the tactical leadership to pull it off before Europe fell !
Maybe if Boudica was around at that point...
who knows ..it's all water under the bridge...but it'd be kinda fun to see how things may have turn'd out ! -
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Tue, May 6, 2008 - 10:35 AMHm. One thing? I think I'd save Edward the Bruce's life. I know it's a bit late and I am sure if I thought more about it that I would find something more influential to change, but I think Edward's death in Ireland was a tragic blow to Gaelic culture. Edward had already achieved the High Kingship of Ireland, but died before he could really do anything with it. With one Bruce as the High King of Ireland and another as the King of Scotland - both with strong ties to the Lord of the Isles, England wouldn't have had a chance. With England hemmed in and harried from the North and West, Edward II & III would never have maintained the powerbase to sustain the hundred-years war as long as they did - resulting in a much stronger France and internationally dependant England.
Moreover, it's questionable if the Black Prince would have died since England would not have been pressing its claims in France, obviating the War of the Roses. Without the War of the Roses, the Tudors would never have come to power and there'd be no Elizabth I to firmly establish the Angilcan church and James VI may not have needed to become James I. Without the Tudors and the shift to the Stuart dynasty, you probably wouldn't have had the plantations, and Ireland would have maintained its Gaelic heritage.
I think you can take it from there. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: What exactly is a....
Tue, May 6, 2008 - 12:47 PMExcellent, Morchu!
If I could change one event in history I would see Constantine choose Mithraism instead of Xianity as the state religion.
Trickle it down from there!
Though, I only know a little about Mitraism, we could have been much worse off than we are now. -
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Tue, May 6, 2008 - 1:39 PMWow! That's one of those tectonic shifts that completely changes the course of the world.
Just think ... no crusades!
But then, how would the collapse of the Roman political order into a series of Germanic kingdoms play out? Would there be orthodox Mithraism or was the extreme orthodoxy of early Western Christianity resultant of its persecution? Wow, it makes the head spin! Nice one, Coyote! -
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Wed, May 14, 2008 - 9:46 PMIf you could change one thing of history, why go for something as small as longer life for the Bruce ? How much better off would the world be if oil had never been discovered. ...Not because of "climate change", but because of the resultant industrialization.
Or how about if you went back and sprinkled a little blue cohosh on Mohammad's mothers dinner salad, eight months before she gave birth ? How much better off would the world, and especially women, be without 1400 years of sheria law. -
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Wed, May 14, 2008 - 10:38 PMWell, technically it was longer life for his brother, Edward, whose success in Ireland would mean a united Gaelic front against England. This would have meant that the Gaelic order would never have collapsed (skipping a few steps here) and the essentially rural societies of Scotland and Ireland would have continued unchecked. This would mean that the Anglicization of the Highlands probably would not have happened, and thus the Scottish Enlightenment would have been severely limited, possibly meaning no Adam Smith or Edinburgh Medical program. In other words, a number of thinkers central to the development of ideas necessary for the Industrial Revolution would never have flourished. I could go on for ages, but hopefully you get the idea ....
I suppose you could attribute my selection to a kind of (false?) modesty. I can think of no one event that would completely derail industrialization - unless you wished a massive plague on Europe that would kill off only those who advanced it and the ideas that supported it. Also, without industrialization there is no reason to think that we would (all) be here. For example, my father's life was saved in his childhood by an experimental drug, penicillin, which was only available because the industrial revolution provided the means to develop and disseminate it through the medical system - itself a product of the Industrial revolution.
Now I am no fan of this so-called revolution and I do feel that we would all be generally better off in an essentially agrarian world, but I am loathe to wildly champion a change that would eliminate myself. Call me selfish. Besides, industrialization didn't happen because oil was discovered. The rise of the oil industry really happened because of WWI and was at the deliberate expense of fuels based on alcohol. This was a full century after industrialization, which occurred in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Even the discovery of coal was not a cause of the revolution, but necessitated by it. The revolution was first a revolution of thought, beginning with changes in systems of logic in the sixteenth century (Francis Bacon), 'scientific thought' in the seventeenth (Descartes, Newton, etc.), and economic thought in the eighteenth (Smith, Hume, etc.), and second a revolution of mechanics which allowed the fostering of major factories and the resultant social changes involved.
It's a long chain of thought that brought on industrialization. You want to break that chain, you need to derail the whole project, which means derailing the Protestant Reformation and the resultant political and social changes involved. The two events are tied together in my opinion.
As for Mohammed's birth and sharia law, I respectfully decline to comment. -
-
Re: What exactly is a....
Thu, May 15, 2008 - 9:49 PMWell, ok. Let's go back even farther.
Let's never have domesticated "dogs". Then we humans would have been much less efficient hunters. That would have put the end of all kinds of foolishness that has happened since. Or we could have a conversation with God, and ask God to not invent the horse. If we didn't have any horses, the Mongols would have had to ride sheep. Would have made life in parts of "Europe" ever so much more pleasant. And josting on goats probably wouldn't have caught on.
.....Or, we could go back and bump off the guy that first brewed "beer". No fermenting the fun stuff, and there may have never been the developement of cities. Some people believe that use of fermentation allowed for the first efficient storage of excess calories, which allowed for the leisure of developing specialities, which allowed for cities.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
