[Previous entry: "The CR Split over Brighid's Flamekeepers"] [Next entry: "An Evening with Taranus"]
06/01/2006: "CR: A Celtic Religion, A Celtic Culture, or an American Neo-Pagan Creation?"
music: You - Candleboxmood: Upbeat
Some members of the CR/R group Live Journal are in the process of putting together a FAQ on
Celtic Reconstructionism (CR). Watching the hard work and effort put forth over the last few months has been an interesting past time for me. Since I (and they by their definitions) don't consider myself a practicioner of their CR religion as they call it, I have stayed on the sidelines and watched as they painstakenly put this project together piece by piece. Some of the work is nothing short of excellent.
Surfing through the beta version of the FAQ, I came upon
the question and its subsequent discussion:
Is CR a religion, or a culture?
http://community.livejournal.com/cr_r/169445.html#cutid3
"Both. CR is a polytheistic religion that is a branch of the living Celtic cultures. We see our religion as inseparable from culture."
Upon reading this, I had to chuckle to myself. I remember many debates on Imbas-public, Celtic-P, Celtic L, Celtic Path, and on my own Celtic Nation e groups where many CR practitioners argued with Celtic traditionalists like Llew Thomas, Chris Thompson (Gilbride), and other CT's over this position. The irony was, though, that the CT's were the ones arguing that religion was inseparable from culture when it came to minority cultures and that CR attempts to create (or-recreate) a modern day polytheistic religious practice were not a part of living Celtic culture but a Neo-Pagan American one, nor could people outside the living culture create anything authentically culturally Celtic.
Now we see the "CR elders" moving as close as they can to some of the same positions they once debated against. But has anything really changed? Is the move something that is now born out of living Celtic culture, a recognized branch of living Celtic culture, or is the move only lip service to silence some of the more vocal critics of CR?
There is no evidence that the religion of CR as described within its FAQ is in any way a "branch" of living Celtic culture. The FAQ writers speak truthfully when they say, "Few CRs live in a completely Celtic society, so we cannot claim that everyone who identifies as CR is part of the living Celtic cultures." By its own FAQ's admission, CR is a modern American creation with no historical lineage of ancient connection; one that attempts to base itself as much as it can on pre-Christian Celtic scholarship.
The FAQ then proceeds to enter the area of unfounded conjecture when it says that although most of the people in the living Celtic cultures are Christian, "it is a type of Christianity that is often reasonably harmonious with Celtic Paganism. In this spirit, a large, contemporary Celtic community will probably contain both CRs and Celtic Christians, as well as those of Celtic heritage who follow another religion entirely, or no religion at all."
How many of the CR members composing this FAQ have ever visited the Gaeltacht and "outed" themselves to the Christian Celts to observe the reaction? My conjecture would be none. Since by admission, few,if any, CR's live in these areas to begin with, and no one has really observed this alleged "spirit", the rest of the comment has no basis in fact either.
So, yes, CR, as it is practiced according to its FAQ, is a religion.
No, it is not a culture, particularly a Celtic one. Few CR converse in or write a Celtic language or actively engage with or live where one is spoken. Since CR was named and created in Americans by Americans, it is not a Celtic cultural religion. The religion did not arise out of Celtic culture so it is not a branch of one, either.
CR is a modern pagan religion, created and named in America, devoted to re-creating an authentic Celtic pre-Christian spirituality for today, based on what its members believe pre-Christian Celtic spirituality might look like today had it continued uninterrupted by Christianity. That, my friends, by definition, is a creation. It is a Neo-Pagan religion. There is nothing, in my opinion, wrong with that. What is wrong is calling it something that it isn't.