![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Dec. 9th, 2006 10:13 pmAlmost any other times when plans got cancelled after i was already on my way, i'd have been disappointed.
Not this time. This time, it came as a relief. I was feeling a little off before leaving, and not having to forcibly deal with anyone else meant i didn't need to inflict my off-ness on anyone but myself.
I ended up doing some thinking. I've hit a point where i'm patently annoyed with the Celtic Reconstructionist movement. I think the next time i see one ot the interminable 'who is a Celt?' or 'what's the big deal about the language and culture, anyway?" arguments, i'm just going to go off on someone. I'm sick of the arguments- the first is irrelevant, the second the keystone which defines authenticity.
Here's where the big catches start, though: because there are so few CR folk, and a number of cultures which fall under the Celtic umbrella, finding people with similar specific interests is difficult. As a direct result of that coupled with an institutional desire to be sensitive of the living cultures, there isn't any communally accepted liturgy. Even with the caveats that this is evolutionary work, and that as new information is discovered many things will be reworked and that personal or shared gnosis is only used as mortar to piece together enough of a framework to make something functional; things still aren't functional at more than an individual (or in rare cases, a couple) level. I don't know of anything which has developed which is even functional on a small group basis; much less the community as a whole.
Innovating from an Anglo-* (Anglo-American/Canadian/Irish; i suppose even Franco-Breton) perspective is outside the cultural framework of the Godelic or Brythonic-speaking cultures. This leaves a nasty quandry- without enough functionality to provide minimalistic practice, it will be nearly impossible to get acceptance from those within the cultural framework (especially given the influence Christianity has had in Gaelic culture); but without acceptance from those communities, anything which is developed is extra-cultural and derivative at best.
And it still fails to meet my liturgal (or perhaps dogmatic?) needs.
It's almost enough to drive me back to rabbinic Judaism. Except for the whole concept of divinity in Judaism. There's sufficient liturgy, dogma and tradition in Judaism to be comfortable, it just has that unfortunate denial of anything polytheistic, even though polytheism runs to the very confession of Jewish faith- the plurals and collective in the Shema. "Shema, Yisrael, adonai eloheinu, adonai echad." Not 'adon', as in "Adon Olam"- "L_rd of the World", but 'adonai'- the plural form. Likewise, eloheinu- traditionally translated 'our G-d' is plural- the root used is the plural 'eloh', not the singular 'el'. Then, too, there's the problem of 'echad'- it's used as an indicator as in one team, one collection; not yachid- a singularity.
Hassidism and some other mystic forms of Jewish tradition recognize the Shekinah as the feminine aspect of the Divine- although not formally. There is also the Sabbath, personified as a queen- Queen Shabbat, which has a very esoteric nature, and may also comprise part of the Divine collective.
But this is all highly heretical. Almost as much as wanting some sort of accepted structure for practice amongst Celtic Reconstructionists.
Not this time. This time, it came as a relief. I was feeling a little off before leaving, and not having to forcibly deal with anyone else meant i didn't need to inflict my off-ness on anyone but myself.
I ended up doing some thinking. I've hit a point where i'm patently annoyed with the Celtic Reconstructionist movement. I think the next time i see one ot the interminable 'who is a Celt?' or 'what's the big deal about the language and culture, anyway?" arguments, i'm just going to go off on someone. I'm sick of the arguments- the first is irrelevant, the second the keystone which defines authenticity.
Here's where the big catches start, though: because there are so few CR folk, and a number of cultures which fall under the Celtic umbrella, finding people with similar specific interests is difficult. As a direct result of that coupled with an institutional desire to be sensitive of the living cultures, there isn't any communally accepted liturgy. Even with the caveats that this is evolutionary work, and that as new information is discovered many things will be reworked and that personal or shared gnosis is only used as mortar to piece together enough of a framework to make something functional; things still aren't functional at more than an individual (or in rare cases, a couple) level. I don't know of anything which has developed which is even functional on a small group basis; much less the community as a whole.
Innovating from an Anglo-* (Anglo-American/Canadian/Irish; i suppose even Franco-Breton) perspective is outside the cultural framework of the Godelic or Brythonic-speaking cultures. This leaves a nasty quandry- without enough functionality to provide minimalistic practice, it will be nearly impossible to get acceptance from those within the cultural framework (especially given the influence Christianity has had in Gaelic culture); but without acceptance from those communities, anything which is developed is extra-cultural and derivative at best.
And it still fails to meet my liturgal (or perhaps dogmatic?) needs.
It's almost enough to drive me back to rabbinic Judaism. Except for the whole concept of divinity in Judaism. There's sufficient liturgy, dogma and tradition in Judaism to be comfortable, it just has that unfortunate denial of anything polytheistic, even though polytheism runs to the very confession of Jewish faith- the plurals and collective in the Shema. "Shema, Yisrael, adonai eloheinu, adonai echad." Not 'adon', as in "Adon Olam"- "L_rd of the World", but 'adonai'- the plural form. Likewise, eloheinu- traditionally translated 'our G-d' is plural- the root used is the plural 'eloh', not the singular 'el'. Then, too, there's the problem of 'echad'- it's used as an indicator as in one team, one collection; not yachid- a singularity.
Hassidism and some other mystic forms of Jewish tradition recognize the Shekinah as the feminine aspect of the Divine- although not formally. There is also the Sabbath, personified as a queen- Queen Shabbat, which has a very esoteric nature, and may also comprise part of the Divine collective.
But this is all highly heretical. Almost as much as wanting some sort of accepted structure for practice amongst Celtic Reconstructionists.
