|
|
|
|
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/27/2006 8:55:31 PM | I wonder if anyone has any insight into the following dilemma. Whether it be based on opinion or on scriptural/historical evidence. I’d be excited to hear what people think about the following topic.
The differences and similarities between pagan and neo-pagan faiths…
Let us define…
pa•gan - Show Spelled Pronunciation[pey-guh n] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. one of a people or community observing a polytheistic religion, as the ancient Romans and Greeks.
2. a person who is not a Christian, Jew, or Muslim.
3. an irreligious or hedonistic person.
–adjective
4. pertaining to the worship or worshipers of any religion that is neither Christian, Jewish, nor Muslim.
5. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of pagans.
6. irreligious or hedonistic.
Main Entry: neo-pa•gan
Pronunciation: -'pA-g&n
Function: noun
: a person who practices a contemporary form of paganism (as Wicca)
- neo-pagan adjective
So here we have already determined that a pagan can believe in any number of ancient viewpoints as well as modern viewpoints. The secondary, neo-pagan, suggests that in order to be considered neo-pagan your faith must be of a more modern nature. It must be a newer religion, and not an ancient faith rekindled.
I am curious to the views of those who practice varying religions in regards to the differences and similarities between the pagans and the neo-pagan movement which has popped up over the past 50 some years.
I think there is a distinct difference in the spirituality of those who practice ancient faiths, versus those who practice the more modern ones.
What are your thoughts on the matter?
Please no (insert religion) thumping of any kind…cause it doesn’t have to do with the topic anyway. So we may as well all just get along.
If there are differences and/or similarities between these two, state them…and the reasons for which you feel that way and wherever possible the sources for your arguments…(I always need new reading material :P) | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/27/2006 9:23:03 PM | I've always held Neo-pagans somewhat derisively, mostly from my dealings with those who claim that particular ideology. When I try to engage in profound conversations regarding some of the bigger questions of existence, neo-pagans I've dealt with always sound a little too much like wannabe Harry Potter guys and Charmed girls. Not my cup of tea.
Pagans, on the other hand, are a much rarer encounter. I have had almost no dealings with archaic pagans, except at Ren fairs and the like. In that regard, they come across as old-fashioned, even a little backwards. But then, I tend to be very cynical in how I deal with others. I suppose either ideology is fine and dandy, provided a person actually looks into it and doesn't just read Dragonriders of Pern and announce "I'M A DAGRON RID0R!!1" | |
|
| |
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/28/2006 5:37:31 AM | Well, there are a few different ways of disecting the giant of modern day paganism in modern Teutonic philosophy.
First we would be wise ditch the Christian notions of paganism; which is pretty useless and denotes pretty well everyone that isn't of the Abrahamic religions without discrimination and regardless of poignant differences. And next, we should also draw a distinction between the predominantly rural, ethno-cultural specific paganisms of Western history and the urban "pagansim", ie. *eclectic polytheistism*.
The term *pagan* is of course Latin in origin -- the Germanic equivalnet would be *Heathen* -- and refers specifically to the countryside and the spirit of locality. As mentioned, they are intimately connected to specific ethno-cultural groups, eg. Germanic, Roman, Sioux, Aztec, etc., etc. This is true historical pagansim.
It's counterpart in the ancent Roman mind was the urbs, from whence we get the term *urban*. The growth of the urbs was largely stimulated by Roman trade, and then Roman Imperialism, and involved the influx of a variety of different ideas and beliefs. The blurring of the lines between Greek deities and Roman deities was largely brought on by Rome's conquest of Greece and the adoption of it's Hellenistic culture, prior to which Roman deities were as different from Greek as Germanic deities are from Celtic.
It is from the urbs that the spirit of universalism first stirred, with Alexander the Macedonian, and the conquored were forced to acknowledge the supreme divinity of the Emperor. They could have no gods before "Him", but were otherwise free to mix and match and concoct whatever struck their fancy as individuals, and make a "religion" out of it.
It is also from the culturally chaotic/eclectic climate of the urbs that the urban salvation cult was largely born, of which Christianity was but one manifestation.
Now, in reflecting specifically on Teutonic Belief, Anglo-Saxons philosophy divides Heathenism up into 3 different categories... arch-Teutonicism, neo-Teutonicism, and retro-Teutonicism.
Arch-Teutonicism was the beliefs/culture as our preChristian, preHellenized ancestors knew it. It was intimately connected to our their history, values, vision, and overall cultural identity... with each component or sub-tradtion therein related on deep, subtle and intimate levels with every other component.
Neo-Teutonicism represents any number of modern pop varieties of elder Teutonicism. It is generaly defined by a lack of knowledge and/or respect for the integrity of the overall system of belief as known by the arch-heathens, and wrapped in customs, practices and ideologies of various cultural origins with little to no relation to each other... and at times standing in contradiction to each other, eg. there is no stark separation between spirit and nature, but ethnicity/ancestry is spiritually irrelevent.
Virtually anything can masquarade as neo-Teutonic, from forms of Wicca to Feminist Fundalmentalists to White Supremicists. Anything goes. Not surprisingly, much of this form of modern Teutonic belief has it's origins in the urbs.
Retro-Teutonicism is an attempt to undestand the beliefs of our arch-heathen ancestors on their own terms, not ours, and to pick up where they left off before the advent of that Judaeo-Hellenistic belief. Of course, understanding the spirit of arch-Teutonicism, such folk are not just fleeing into the past in a vain attempt to live in some by-gone era, but rather are recycling the elder beliefs, even as the arch-heathen themselves did, bring forward what is best and most applicable in order to both meet the challenges of this age AND regain/maintain our wholeness as a people.
Not all retro-Teutonic folk are rural, but a few are and more than a couple of those have been very influential amongst North American Heathens. | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/28/2006 9:06:19 AM | Neo is just applied by other religions in an effort try to make their other religions more established. It's an insecurity thing. When Celtic Druids and other Pagans were around before Judeo-Christianity, the Judeo-Christians try to remove the established base of Pagan relgions by calling them "New" or Neo.
The fact is the word Pagan dates from the Latin use for existing European religions of the day, so trying to say Neo- in fron of them is simply not accurate. It would be like a Pagan calling a Born Again christian as Neo-Christian. It just not an accurate word to describe Paganism today in our times.
There is nothing "Neo" about Pagan religions, they've been around longer than the word prefix Neo. There is no "Neo" to "Neo-Paganism", there are recent sects and recent branches of established Pagan religions that have been around for thousands of years, but I would not call recent offshoots "Neo" any more than I'd call Clavinism "Neo"-Christianity.
Do we call Calvinism "Neo-Christian" religion? Not many people do.
Do we call Protestantism "Neo-Christian" religion? Not many, though people are free to say what they want.
Are the Mormons "Neo-Christians"? No, they call themselves Latter Day Saints.
Respect is usually calling the person's religion what they want it to be called. If they want to be called LDS instead of Neo-Christians, then we respect that. It they want to be called Pagan, then we respect that. If they want to be called Norse Druids, then we respect that. We really can only honestly question our own religions, otherwise it's authoritarian and negative to criticize or question other people's naming of their religions.
There are recent specific Pagan sects, but the proper wording would be to call them what they term themselves, Protestantism, Clavinism, Ulster Brighids, etc.
Pagan/Neo-Pagans are both words made up by other religious groups to try to label the early religions of Europe as Latin is a European language. Pagan, the Roman Latin word, was meant to place outside of commercial society the existing religions of Europe, it was a word meant to ostracize the existing spiritual community and place them in the mind of the people on the outside, in the countryside, as we all know pre-existing European religions were already inside the cities of Rome, Cologne, London and Dublin. It was about economic and political force, the word "Pagan", "Neo-Pagan" are vestiges of political and economic societal control.
If we put ourselves in the shoes of Roman Etruscan Bacchuses living in the urban city of Rome, or Greek Pythagoreans living in the urbane city of Delphi and we see these people wandering in from the Middle East with their provincial religion, then it's the Christians who are the Pagans, as they came from the countryside of the Middle East into the cities of Rome and Delphi. Christians are actually the Pagani, the countryside people we call Pagans.
So a Neo-Pagan would be a Born Again Christian, Jew or Islamic according to Latin language and history. As Pagan is a Latin word from urban and urbane Rome, Etruscan region of a place called Europe. Pagan is a word for Christian, it has been misused in common parlance however. | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/28/2006 9:33:55 AM | Please forgive my ignorance if I offend any Pagans, but I always felt that Paganism was very close to the Red Path in that Mother Earth was respected and recognised as the wellspring of all life, and worshipped as such.
Is my perception close? I'd love to know.
Cheers, Raven | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/28/2006 9:36:33 AM | mother earth is indeed respected in a great many pagan paths.
For my own personal beliefs, it is nature which I have the utmost respect for.
Though you will find some who are more concerned with bending the nature of things to their will, than respecting its simplicity.
So, it really all depends on which person you talk to :P
***
On another note, interesting viewpoints so far :) | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/28/2006 9:38:35 AM | http://www.sacred-texts.com/pag/
The article is quite lengthy, but here is a partial quote:
Neopaganism covers a wide range of belief systems which have emerged in the past 50 years, primarily in the UK, Europe, and the United States. This includes the better known Wicca, which is a synthesis of traditions from the British Isles, as well as many less visible groups which draw inspiration from other parts of the world. Based on folk-lore, traditional spiritual practices, anthropology, and a synthesis of esoteric systems, Neopaganism does not have any sacred texts of the same vintage as other religions, although unverifiable claims have been made in a couple of cases (e.g. Aradia, and The Gardnerian Book of Shadows).
Rather, the books presented here are source texts of Neopaganism, and other books which deal with related topics. Many of these books contain outdated or speculative material, and some of the texts here are the product of the Renaissance witch hunters. As a whole, the books here are of historical importance rather than a roadmap to modern pagan practice, and shouldn't be construed as such. As always, we encourage readers to think critically.
*****
Neo is just applied by other religions in an effort try to make their other religions more established. It's an insecurity thing. When Celtic Druids and other Pagans were around before Judeo-Christianity, the Judeo-Christians try to remove the established base of Pagan relgions by calling them "New" or Neo.
This is a very interesting perspective. I wonder if it could be defended.
I would be interested in seeing material citing references by judeo-christianity to celts and germanic pagans as 'neo-pagans', or any labelling of a pre-twentieth century pagan belief system as 'neo-pagan'. Was this term 'neo-pagan' even used before the twentieth century?
Perhaps the prefix 'neo' was created by established pagans seeking to draw a distinction between their centuries old traditions and the more self-indulgent modern practices of people like Gardner and Crowley? | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/28/2006 9:40:41 AM | The OP asked about Neo Pagan and Pagan. I don't think there is a difference.
There is no "Neo" about "Neo-Paganism", there are recent sects and recent branches of established Pagan religions that have been around for thousands of years, but I would not call recent offshoots "Neo" any more than I'd call Presbertyrian "Neo"-Christianity.
Pagan is the Christian Latinized word for the Religous definitions such as Odinism, Druidism, Asatru, Wicca, Heathen, etc. To many it is a derogatory word, and likewise Neo-Paganism is a derogatory word. That being said, Neo Paganism and Paganism are the same, just as different Christian branches are the same, based on Christ.
There is much we in humanity are learning about ourselves and our ancestors. The Red Path is very interesting as we are learning about ancient Ogham writings in "North America" and evidence of very early migrations and cultures from Europe into North America at 15,000 B.C., I think the BBC once aired a special on those early Europeans who settled in what we now call North America.
The "Pagan" and "Neo-Pagan" religions themselves didn't name themselves those words in the Latin "Pagan" or Latin anything. "Neo-Pagan" is not a European relgion word in either Ogham. Lepontic, or Runic written languages. Neo is just applied by other religions in an effort try to make their other religions more established. It's an insecurity thing. When Celtic Druids and other Pagans were around before Judeo-Christianity, the Judeo-Christians try to remove the established base of Pagan relgions by calling them "New" or Neo. The "Pagan" religions themselves didn't name themselves Latin "Pagan" or Latin anything.
Does anybody know about Easter Island? That would seem to be the Red Path being a Peruvian Pagan culture.
The fact is the word Pagan dates from the Latin use for existing European religions of the day, so trying to say Neo- in fron of them is simply not accurate. It would be like a Pagan calling a Born Again christian as Neo-Christian. It just not an accurate word to describe Paganism today in our times.
There is no "Neo" about "Neo-Paganism", there are recent sects and recent branches of established Pagan religions that have been around for thousands of years, but I would not call recent offshoots "Neo" any more than I'd call Presbertyrian "Neo"-Christianity.
Are Seventh Day Aventists "Neo-Christian" religion?
Are Lutherans "Neo-Christian" religion?
"Neo-Paganism" is a Judeo-Christian slur against religions that have been around far longer in Europe and it's not calling them by their perticular sect.
Are the Mormons "Neo-Christians"? No, they call themselves Latter Day Saints.
Easter Island, along with Jericho, Jordan, definitely both qualify as Pagan religion locales. As the urban Roman pagans and urbane Delphi pagans would call both Easter Island and Jericho, both relatively pagani or countryside birthplaces of religions. One can't really get any more pagan than wandering in the desert writing on tablets of stone.
Easter Island definitely is in the countryside (so it's Pagani as the Latins would say), I think it would be awesome if somebody found the Red Path pagan Rosetta Stone at Easter Island.
Neo Odinism versus Odinism? They are pretty much the same.
Neo Druidism versus Druidism? Again, they are the same.
The word prefix "Neo" doesn't add anything definitive to the word "Pagan".
From a distance Neo-Pagans are new converts to Pagan religions and as such they are still learning and attempting, very often, to soften the ancient religions to make them feel good. For example some Neo-Pagans will say a person from outside the heritage of the Odinists or Druids can become a member, and that depends on how orthodox that particular Pagan sect is. Reform Pagans could be called Neo-Pagans. For example you can convert into a Reform Judeo-Christian sect, but not into an Orthodox Judeo-Christian sect, for example. It's similar with Reform Paganism (Neo-Paganism).
Neo-Pagan versus Pagan is similar to Reform versus Orthodox. Both are considered legitimate by various sects to various degrees. That should help people understand. | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/28/2006 10:30:01 AM | This is very true, the terms could indeed be synonymous.
As you said...
Are the Mormons "Neo-Christians"? No, they call themselves Latter Day Saints.
But then, this would not account for some sects of Christianity to consider the Mormons as NOT falling under the heading of Christianity. Where they themselves DO consider themselves to be Christian, just a different branch thereof.
That being said, it is an opinion thing within the Christian community whether or not a mormon is a christian or a mormon/LDS is simply a mormon/LDS.
Just as within the pagan community you may have a pagan who considers a NEO-pagan faith to be neo-pagan or simply pagan, as an umbrella term.
Or those who believe the newer forms of paganism, to be worthy of their own umbrella term, neo-paganism. New forms of religion that are different from that of the original forms, which still fall under the general definition of pagan from the Christian standpoint.
That being said, these terms which are applied by others are now used frequently by those of the "pagan" community. Whether originally they were deamed to be upsetting to some or not is irrelevant at this point in time. Due to the fact that we are discussing the differences and similarities between pagan and neo-pagan as it stands today.
If they are the same, and i grand you it is a possibility that they are, then fine. This is of course not how all people think/feel and thus gives way to the possibility of debate/discussion.
There is no end-all, be-all to any faith. Obviously there are differences of opinion even within a community whose standards are similar. Regardless of whether you are discussing Christian, Celtic Pagan,Ancient Roman/Greek/Egyptian beliefs or what have you. The differences were always there. The values of one God over another, in polytheist views. Or in Christianity the debate over whether Jesus Christ was one in the same to God, or merely the son of God. The differences in opinion are noted throughout the world.
Therefore - when we discuss the similarities and differences between the terms pagan and neo-pagan, we discuss varying viewpoints within the community. The umbrella term quite obviously gives way to a pluthera of differences in opinion. As such we are discussing those differences, as well as the similarities. | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/28/2006 10:52:58 AM | I really think that most Christians of more recent branches who are often called "Born-Again" take no offense to us using Born Again Christian to them, and we should not take offense to them calling some Pagans... Neo-Pagans.
As I was getting at, I think there might be a real comparison paradigm between Pagan and Neo-Pagan, and Orthodox and Reform. The Orthodox people say the Reform people are "not really such and such". But the Reform people really don't care or mind, to them their reform neo sect is perfectly fine and works well for them.
I do think there are similarities between the Pagan/Neo-Pagan developments and conventional Orthodox and Reform developments.
Perhaps we should look at Reform religious branches versus Orthodox and directly compare then to Pagan and Neo-Pagan branches. That will help us understand the developments in our Pagan religions.
Pagan/Orthodox: Heritage and Ancestry. Theological Orthodoxy.
Neo-Pagan/Reform: Contemporary living and Flexibility. Surface changes, Theological Reforms.
I think Neo-Pagan and Pagan go through cycles, much as Buddhism and Shinto-Buddhism. On the surface they change but deep down they are the same. An offshoot is called "Reform" or "Neo-Pagan" because it's surface texture has changed to accomodate more people, but deep down, it's the same religious Gods and ethics.
It would seem that Pagan and Neo-Pagan (Orthodox/Reform) are like Yin-Yang, or Celtic Triskele, different on the surface trappings but the same in the core spiritual system.
I think the really wise Orthodox religious figures in all religions, including Pagan ones, see Reform branches such as Neo-Paganism as a circular part of the whole like Yin-Yang, and not an offshoot to be cursed and damned as a dead loss to the faith. wise Pagan preists know the cycle of life and the changes in the spiritual condition, including Neo-Paganism.
I think when the larger religious communities begin to see that Pagan and Neo-Pagan are both very ancient cycles that they will understand Paganism as an organic whole and feel more at ease that's why I'm trying to put Neo-Paganism in the Reform perspective because it helps them understand and get it, that it's not "New" but part of a very long cycle, like the Celtic Triskele or Buddhist Yin-Yang in many religions. | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/28/2006 11:54:47 AM | Mike, a lot of Recons (like myself) do distinguish between "pagans" and "neo-pagans". There is a difference, a subtle difference, but it is there.
Recons, who tend to view Wicca as neo-pagan, view themselves as continuing or reestablishing (in some cases) the religious practices and mores of the society/culture they are involved in. For example, someone who self-identifies as a Norse Heathen, will research and try to be as accurate as possible in their approach to the divine. They take not only the religious practices, but also the attitudes. I know a number of Asatru practitioners who take oaths seriously, and being an oath-breaker is an anethma to them.
For neo-pagans, you can lump in groups like Wiccans and Eclectics. They draw upon older sources, but instead of following a "liturgical outline appropriate to a culture" they tend to force the practices into their own ritual format - the whole calling the 4 quarters and the casting of a circle with the athame/sword/wand and the chalice & blade bit.
It's the approach to religious practices which differentiates a pagan from a neo-pagan. For neo-pagans there tends to be a hightened emphasis on the 3-fold Rule and the Wiccan Rede (Do what Thou Wilt, Harm Ye None). For a pagan it's the religious practices and devotions to deity and to community which have the greater emphasis, while with neo-pagans there is this whole energy work that gets mixed into it.
Don't get me started on eclectics (grin)... the mixing of pantheons is not a happy concept for a recon. | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/28/2006 12:03:33 PM | Druie - Do Recons accept varying cultural formats or is it eclusive to one part of the world? And if so, do you go with your own heritage, or one you simply prefer? How would that work for those of us cross-breeds whose heritage is of many different areas?
I'm curious - and I can't message you cause I'm too young and I'm a girl :P | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/28/2006 12:23:21 PM | Druie, I do see the difference, but I see it with respect to time. For now they seem different, but like the Triskele three-fold wheel of life, what appears different now is not going to be different tomorrow, things move and change with time.
In other words, I see a difference between some Pagan and some Neo-Pagan unique faiths, some fricton perhaps, some conflict in dogma or history, but I accept it because I know time will heal it. Time is the magic glue becuase it gives us the opportunity to think and understand the reason why differences exist inside the very large Pagan group of religions.
Time changes how we perceive differences, thus the Triskele three-fold design.
There are specific differences with Pagan and Neo-Pagan with each pagan sect and religion, I just think time makes a difference in how we perceive them.
For example the Orthodox Druids of the Brighid Druids sect pray over fourteen times a day and the Reform Druids of the Brighid Druids (Neo-Pagan Druids some would say) sect pray four times a day.
The Triskele three-fold wheel can heal the differences, in time, between Pagan and Neo-Pagan belief systems. That is why we have it. It is our Yin-Yang. Time, change.
I just think generally, Neo-Pagan/Pagan is the same as Orthodox/Reform, that way people can undestand the basic dynamic and know what to expect. Neo-Pagan, like Reform, tries to adapt and modernize the particular Pagan faith to a New or Neo way. | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/28/2006 1:42:45 PM | hey mike, your argument does have a bit of a flaw inasmuch as you make some faulty comparisons. the division of designating pagan from neopagan can be seen as something similar to the way we have separate designations within the overall term christianity, orthodox, catholic, gnostic, protestant, etc.
You keep trying to say that neopaganism is no different from paganism, but it is.
Neopagans for the most part are all very new manifestations, and try to lump in as many different old practices together, and see no problem in this. they **stardize cultural traditions and beat them into a mold that fits their purpose. Claiming these to the same ancient traditions as the pre-christian practices is like putting a statue to great chthulhu on your alter and still calling yourself a good catholic.
I always like to say that neopagans are to ancient western traditions what the new-agers are too eastern. | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/28/2006 10:06:49 PM | | Due to Christian persecution in Europe Pagan religions were mostly wiped out. Neo-Pagans have tried to rekindle those Pagan religions, but little is known of what they were really like. I think they try to do that in a very respectful manner, but they neccessarily have to make educated guesses or outright speculate about what Pagans believed. | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/29/2006 6:36:31 AM | CountIbli, the pagan religions were not wiped out in Europe. They survived in vast areas of Europe, it's just there seems to be this mental block in which there is nothing really east of Germany. Huge tracks of land had peoples who practiced well into the 19-20thC.
:-) | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/29/2006 6:44:06 AM | Lady-Fair, what do you mean by varying cultural formats?
There are variations within each "culture". For example, "Celtic" can mean Irish, Welsh, Scottish, Manx, Gaulish, Cornish, etc. Each, though having very strong similarities (as being all Celtic Speakers) do have local variations as well.
I have a friend who is a Romano-Celt, who follows the practices of Celts during the time of the Roman expansion under Julius Caesar.
On a mailing list I run for Baltic Recons there are a number of people who are not Balts by parentage, but feel a closeness to Baltic culture. For quite a few Recons that I know, it isn't blood that determines your "membership", but your devotion/interest.
So you could be from southern Spain but feel an affinity for Finnish pre-christian practices/beliefs. | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/29/2006 7:06:57 AM | That's exactly what I meant actually.
I was curious because I noted that on a website it said Recons do their best to get factual knowledge first.
I wondered if you had to be of that bloodline in order to go with a particular "brand"
And if it was bloodlines, how would it be determined for those who have more than one bloodline.
You answered that question quite nicely for me actually :P | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/29/2006 11:33:27 AM | Concerning Neo and Reform Pagans.
I found this...We can gather some differences between Pagan (orthodox) and Neo-Pagan (reform) Druidism studying this...
"Reformed Druidism has its beginning at Carleton College in the spring of 1963 as a protest to the college's requirement that all students attend a certain number of religious services or meetings. One of the ways of fulfilling the requirement was by attending services of oneUs own religion. The Reformed Druids of North America proposed to test the degree of freedom permitted under this clause.
Druidism was ideal for this attack. It had a perfect combination of exotic ritual plus some relevance to the so-called Judeo-Christian tradition. If religious credit were granted, the religious requirement could be exposed as totally ineffective. If, on the other hand, credit were denied, the college could be charged with bigotry. The initial attitude of the college was, "If we ignore them, they'll go away". But the RDNA not only refused to go away, it grew, acquiring an advisor, and becoming a registered college organization.
In June, 1964, the religious requirement was repealed. Even though the Druids rejoiced at this triumph, they recognized that their job was not over. For many members the movement had come to represent a valuable part of their spiritual lives. So there was the importance of continuing the RDNA as a protest against all coerced religion."
http://orgs.carleton.edu/druids/
Illustration of a Reform Druid walking in the snow, deep in thought, at Carleton College.
http://orgs.carleton.edu/druids/images/winterchris.jpg
Here is a well defined example of a Neo-Pagan Reformed Druid sect reacting to the religious pressure of the times. As we can see some particular Neo-Pagan (Reform) religious faiths, sects, have been actively formed by reaction to current political and religious environments, which is quite interesting to study. | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/29/2006 12:10:19 PM |
"Reformed Druidism has its beginning at Carleton College in the spring of 1963 as a protest to the college's requirement that all students attend a certain number of religious services or meetings. One of the ways of fulfilling the requirement was by attending services of oneUs own religion. The Reformed Druids of North America proposed to test the degree of freedom permitted under this clause.
Did Reformed Druidism begin as a test of the escape clause in the religious studies rule or did the Reformed Druids of North America already exist prior to this particular test?
Here is a well defined example of a Neo-Pagan Reformed Druid sect reacting to the religious pressure of the times.
If they didn't exist prior to 1963 and were formed merely as a test of the school's religious studies requirement, then how do they represent a sect reacting to religious pressure? It sounds much more like a handful of people manufacturing a faith in order to challenge the school to respect the individual's freedom of religion. If the school accepted what those students did then what religious pressure is being discussed?
Would it not be more accurate to say that Reformed Druidism was manufactured in 1963 by a group of students attempting to engender religious persecution who subsequently failed to engender that persecution... or am I missing something here; if so, what am I missing? | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/29/2006 12:17:32 PM |
^^Good questions. We would have to examine their articles of organization. If they included Irish Brehon Law principles, that were tangible in the literal sense, then they could well have tapped into a very long Druid religious tradition.
Lets examine which Druid Irish Brehon laws a Neo-Pagan Druid Reformist sect may tie into.
There is a very complex Irish Catholic and Irish Druid interweaving of Druid Brehon Law in current and recent past Ireland.
A Pro Catholic view:
Source of Catholic/Druid Brehon Law:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02753a.htm
More on Druid Brehon Law principles still existing in Irish law. As you can see it was not "extinguished" as the Catholics wished.
A Pro Druid view:
Brehon Law
Despite the Roman and subsequently Anglo-Norman and English descriptions of the Celts as a bunch of lawless barbarians the Celts owned one of the oldest and perhaps most humane collection of laws in Europe. These laws are commonly known as the Brehon Law, a name derived from the Gaelic breitheamh, meaning judge or probably more accurate arbitrator. The real, but rarely used, name of this law system is Feineachas, which is usually translated as Laws of the Freemen.
Great Fair at Tara
It is believed that the basic principles of the Brehon Law go back as far as 2000 BCE.
http://www.vincentpeters.nl/triskelle/history/brehonlaw.php?index=060.030.020
Neo-Paganism, the case of the Reform Druids and Brehon Law principles.
Brehon Druid Law and Neo-Pagan Druids in 1960's Ireland or USA
Because the Brehon Law had regulated every aspect of life over a period of more than three millennia there was a thin line between formal laws and informal conventions. The phrase Irish ways, Irish laws illustrates the fusion between Brehon Law and Irish culture. Therefore it's hard, if not impossible, to establish a date on which the Brehon Law was abolished completely. In fact, we think that some aspects of this ancient law are still in place in modern day Ireland. The hunger strike, used as political lever throughout Irish history but mainly known due to the prison protests in the 1970's and 80's, for example appear in the Brehon Law as a method to convince a debtor to redeem his debts, the famous Irish hospitality might well originate from the statutory regulation to provide housing and meals to travellers and the feeling of solidarity with the colours of the hurling team from one's county reflects the vital importance of the tuath, for the time being translated as tribe or clan.
http://www.vincentpeters.nl/triskelle/history/brehonlaw.php?index=060.030.020
We need to examine and judge the Carleton College neo-Druid articles of organization as they filed or amended them for us to judge them and determine their status as either Neo-Druid (Neo-Pagan) or Druid (Pagan) by our concerned judgement. Do they qualify as Orthodox Druids? What are their mating practices like? Do they fornicate? What are their marriage ceremonies like?
Do they drink only on sacred occassions (Orthodox Druid)? Or do they go to pubs for a pint of Guinness (Reform Druid)?
Lets compare Neo-Druids (reform) to Druids (orthodox) with regards to Sunday drinking at the pub.
Brehon Law today
Some principles of the Brehon Law still remain in Ireland. We have already mentioned the hunger strike as mean of putting pressure on. But also the highly-praised hospitality of the Irish originates from ancient times when only young children, madman and old people were released from the obligation to provide housing and meals to travellers.
Even the sentence It is the Law, which you can read in every pub or along the road, make sense to us now. The whole purpose of the law is to organise and guide civil relations. They are not intended to make life miserable, they are intended to make the community more pleasing. In other words: "Laws were made for people and the law can never scorn" (from the song Free the People).
http://www.vincentpeters.nl/triskelle/history/brehonlaw.php?index=060.030.020
Sounds like the majority today are Neo-Druids in Ireland, despite the Catholic church power structure, the people are still Druids as in believeing and practicing Brehon Law legal language in their weekly lives.
| |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/29/2006 1:33:50 PM | and? you have yet to state anything that would indicate that there can be no such thing as a neo-pagan.
All you have done is indicate that this reform druid group has injected some ancient practice into their modern practice. The difference between these people and a lot of other neo-pagan groups in north america is that they are university students who likely understand the lack of knowledge we have and therefore make fewer assumptions, while the common everyday fluffy bunny wiccan reads a couple of pages on the internet and considers themself educated. | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/29/2006 1:57:39 PM |
Neo-Pagans have tried to rekindle those Pagan religions, but little is known of what they were really like. I think they try to do that in a very respectful manner, but they neccessarily have to make educated guesses or outright speculate about what Pagans believed.
Be that as it may, it still leaves many modern day pagan reconstructionists in a much better position in understanding the faith of the ancients than it leaves the modern Christian. As far as European paganisms go, we still have living languages, living cultures, and many elements of elder customs, beliefs and laws that are still pervasive in modern society, along with an abundance of evidence of language, beliefs, and customs that remain in book-form.
In contrast, Christianity has barely a paragraph or two of what Chrisit himself might have said, and the testament of a mere four apostles, none of which is given or received in the original language and which is often completely out of the socio-cultural context that the belief evolved and flourished in.
So, at worst we are have the potnetial to undestand much more about our beleifs and their origins and practices than a fairly sizeable chunk of the world's religious peoples.
Whats more, at least from a Germanic pov, is that as the beliefs of our peoples and our disposition as a people walked hand-in-hand in the elder forms of paganisms, we have a natural insight and need not concern ourselves with all of the details that may or may not have been lost. Enough remains to glean the cultural patterns of the old culture/religion and understand the spirit of the folk, thus leaving the details in the same hands that they were left in prior to the advent of christianity... ours. | |
|
| Differences/Similarity between Pagan and Neo-Pagan
Posted: 12/29/2006 2:13:41 PM | The RDNA, which was founded at Carleton, was created not as an expression of pagan belief, but as an attempt to get away from going to religious services on Sundays - as was required at the time. The only way to get out of those services was if the individual belonged to another religious group (i.e. Judiasm, Buddhism, etc).
These young men were not pagan, they were lazy university students who declared that the sacred drink was whiskey and preferred to sleep in on Sunday mornings.
Later on the RDNA morphed into a proper religious group, but back in the early days it was a way to take the mickey out of the Carleton administrators.
Isaac Bonewits was a member of RDNA when he was in uni, and with his membership in the RDNA this was a springboard towards to the creation of ADF. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
