The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum

I've been reading The CR FAQ over the past week during my exploration of different paths, and I'm wondering if any people familiar with and/or practicing Celtic Reconstructionism out there can point out, I guess, the pros and cons of being CR (what's good about it, what's bad, problems that arise, things like that).

I'm still learning more about CR and other paths, but I'm just curious as to other people's experiences with or being CR.

I'm aware that CR requires a lot of work and that it's based more on archaeological facts and UPG than other branches of Paganism, I'm just curious about other peoples' personal experiences with it.

Sorry if this post seems invasive or rude in anyway, I'm just trying to learn as much as I can.

Also, CR paths have given me the impression that they're very out doorsy. Not that that's a problem, but it seems very biased and not in tune with how most people live nowadays. Pictures of sacred places are always out in the boonies some where. Someone mentioned to me earlier this week, in another forum, that when she/he moved to London, she/he immediately began checking out the local river god action and not, say, the Main Street god action, or the Banking god action. They live in the city, but their brains are still on the family farm.

I live in a forest preserve surrounded by towns, and I spend a bit of time in them, and I personally want  rituals and a liturgical calendar that reflects and sanctifies a more urban lifestyle. The CR calendars I've seen are pretty much the same: quarter days, a couple solstices or equinoxes. These dates don't coincide with any events in my life, whether it be a wild grape harvest, the first frost, getting my library card renewed, so they don't mean anything to me.

It's just my thing. Some people love it. What it boils down to is if the path you're looking at meets your needs.

I suspect this was me. You took one thing I said out of context and decided you knew everything about me? I'm a Londoner (born and bred), and I adore the spirits of this city. I follow an urban neo-druid path. I honour river spirits on arrival in a new place, not because of anything to do with farms (there are few farmers in this country), but because that's what the Celts appear to have done when they moved area. You're the one who wants to do what the ancient Celts did... I was getting to know city spirits long before I was doing most anything else spiritual. My sacred places are hearth- and home- and city-based.

I apologize for causing you offense. Thank you for informing me that you're a native Londoner; your perspective on how to adapt a pagan religion that originated when the world was mostly rural to modern life is welcome.

The honoring of the river spirits, an ancient Celtic practice though it may be, is only applicable to areas with rivers. I spent a day in Arizona,  and the only water there was in toilets. Yes, I want to practice the ancient ways of my British ancestors, but there are limits. I find myself making my own adaptations.

Of course - but most cities have rivers. That's where cities are often built - near rivers. I was confused by your assertion that I was being all 'country' by honouring the water that is the lifeblood of my city. In my view of my own practice, that - plus honouring the city spirits - *is* modern urban Celtic practice. I'm the last person you could describe as being stuck on the farm. I can't stand the countryside.

But I appreciate the apology.

I've been reading The CR FAQ over the past week during my exploration of different paths, and I'm wondering if any people familiar with and/or practicing Celtic Reconstructionism out there can point out, I guess, the pros and cons of being CR (what's good about it, what's bad, problems that arise, things like that).

I'm still learning more about CR and other paths, but I'm just curious as to other people's experiences with or being CR.

I'm aware that CR requires a lot of work and that it's based more on archaeological facts and UPG than other branches of Paganism, I'm just curious about other peoples' personal experiences with it.

Sorry if this post seems invasive or rude in anyway, I'm just trying to learn as much as I can.

I've always described myself as Celtic recon-influenced, but I'm increasingly moving towards embracing CR as my religion, although I doubt I'll ever fit entirely well into any of the CR groups out there (of which there aren't many, anyway). Some of the groups have values that I don't consider particularly Celtic/Irish, and which are more about the way those groups have evolved and their shared ideas. That said, I am beginning to feel that only a recon approach will ever make me really happy in my religious practice, although it will have to be my own flavour of recon, and it will have to allow for a 'dual tradition' approach - which seems to be frowned upon by many CRs, who don't seem to think that switching worldviews is possible/sensible.

I think *my* main problem with CR is that most practitioners are in the US or Canada, and are therefore doing diaspora reconstructionism, but there isn't much acknowledgement of that. I grew up spending summers in Ireland, and I live in Britain. My view of Celtic gods and surviving Celtic practices is going to be very different from that of an American. (Not better. Just different.) For example, I'm strongly aware of the Catholic culture that pervades every aspect of life in modern Gaelic culture, and that affects my practice. I don't usually take Mary out of my prayers based on the Carmina Gadelica, for example, since I see her as a strong Gaelic presence. I also don't have any problem honouring Gaelic saints, and there's an influence of Celtic Christianity on my practice that I don't intend to deny. I get particularly angry at certain CR practitioners who are deeply anti-Christianity and, for example, wear black on St Patrick's Day, but claim to honour modern Gaelic culture. It's alien to me.

But I'm only talking about the cons... There are good reasons why I think I'm headed towards a more reconstructionist approach. It feels more authentic, or at least more honest, to me, than some other neopagan approaches - that's a personal response, since CR is a revival religion like every other neo-pagan revival*, but that's just how I feel - I like that recons are keen to be honest about what is research-based and what is UPG-based, for example. I think CR is more in tune with modern Gaelic culture than eclectic Celtic Paganism is, and that's important to me. And (again this is a personal thing), my gods seem to prefer it when I'm working within a more reconstructionist framework. In the end, that's what's probably going to win me over to this approach. But that's solely a personal thing.

Have you read any of the books written by CRs? In some ways they'll give you a much better idea of what CR is about that simply 'reading all the things', at least initially. They vary in their approaches, as CR groups do, but they're fascinating for an overview. I recommend 'Celtic Flame' by Aedh Rua, 'A Circle of Stones' by Erynn Rowan Laurie (dated but still interesting), 'The Apple Branch' by Alexei Kondratiev (same problem - quite dated, and ideas have changed, but it's still good) and 'Where The Hawthorn Grows' by Morgan Daimler (a more recent approach).

*I've encountered some CRs who refuse to be associated with neopaganism. That's fine, but it feels to me that it's a little dishonest. It's like Protestants claiming they have nothing to do with Catholics and never did...

 Given the attitude toward UPG (among reasons unrelated to CR) I opted to leave the label behind and go my own way.

The UPG attitude, is that something like "lore good, UPG bad"?

The UPG attitude, is that something like "lore good, UPG bad"?

 
Yes, but also a theme of acceptable UPG only coming from very specific people in the community, and if you don't agree with them you're wrong. While I haven't had any UPG that was particularly divergent, as far as I know, I still found it a bit hostile.

I think *my* main problem with CR is that most practitioners are in the US or Canada, and are therefore doing diaspora reconstructionism, but there isn't much acknowledgement of that.

 It feels more authentic, or at least more honest, to me, than some other neopagan approaches - that's a personal response, since CR is a revival religion like every other neo-pagan revival*, but that's just how I feel - I like that recons are keen to be honest about what is research-based and what is UPG-based, for example.

The reconstructionist view on religion, whether it's pagan or Christian, was started in America, so that's probably why the population is still higher here. I can understand your attraction to CR's honesty. A lot of religions have been founded in America, like Eckankar, which claims their teachings were kept secret for a million years until humanity was ready for  their revelation blah, blah, blah, and it's just a rip off of Sikhism and shabda yoga.

Pagan reconstructionism is one of the very few religions in this country that is truthful about its origins, and I can't stand for anything less.

Yes, but also a theme of acceptable UPG only coming from very specific people in the community, and if you don't agree with them you're wrong. While I haven't had any UPG that was particularly divergent, as far as I know, I still found it a bit hostile.

 
Yes... 'hostile' is a good word for it. UPG can become equivalent to modern lore, in some communities, and the result can be a lot of "you're doing it wrong". Which isn't to say that that's always the case.

I think you make a good point, Juni, that personality can make a difference as to whether you're comfortable with the way some of these groups work. There are definitely a lot of extremely knowledgeable people in them, and that's impressive and helpful.