h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Why do so many pagans fear calling what they do 'a religion'? I have spent years now discussing paganism in general, and brythonic druidry in particular, with people on fora and blogs, as well as face to face. I have listened to those considered wise, read the interminable tomes of published authors, and watched ordinary and celebrity pagans lead workshops and rituals.

In all this there seems to be a real aversion to calling druidry a religion. I've been told it is a spiritual philosophy, a spiritual path, a natural philosophy, a journey and a way. In fact anything but a religion.

The leaders of druid groves and orders call themselves priests, priestesses and druids (which is just another word for 'priest when all is said and done). However, when you point out that a 'priest' is, according to the Oxford English Dictionary (OED):
1. an ordained minister of the Catholic, Orthodox, or Anglican Church, authorized to perform certain ceremonies, or
2. a person who performs ceremonies in a non-Christian religion.
they recoil in horror. The word 'religion' gets them again.

So let's look at this terrifying word shall we. Again according to the OED:

Religion
• noun
1. the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods,
2. a particular system of faith and worship, or
3. a pursuit or interest followed with devotion.

Hmm... this is odd, because that sounds pretty much what most druids of my acquaintance believe in and do, and when you add the second definition of 'priest' that seems fine too.

Perhaps it is the term 'worship' they don't like? I've certainly heard a lot of druids saying they work with their gods, the revere them, but not worship them. Out comes the OED again:

Worship
• noun
1 the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity,
2 religious rites and ceremonies, or
3 great admiration or devotion.
• verb (worshipped, worshipping)
1 show reverence and adoration for (a deity), or
2 feel great admiration or devotion for.
Derivatives: worshipper noun.
Origin: Old English, worthiness, acknowledgement of worth.

Can you see anything wrong with 'worship', because I can't?

I suspect that the main problem is not where these druids are now, but where they came from. Like myself many came from families that were ostensibly Christian. In my case strong Roman Catholics. It is from this unbending Christian dogma that most of these pagans got their understanding of the word 'religion'. Religion in this case has a set doctrine and a holy hierarchy that allows no personal interpretation nor even really a personal relationship to the godhead.

Many people have rebelled against this upbringing and its restrictions, and a fair number of those rebels, those who still felt there was a spiritual component to their make-up, drifted or fled into paganism. The problem here is that much of modern paganism grew out of the anarchic spiritual and hippy movements of the sixties and seventies.

This was paralleled by a change in Britain from the post war extended-family and community-orientated social structure (reinforced by common religious and social values) to one where personal freedom was the single most important factor. As a result spiritualities and authors that have promised that everyone can have a personal prelature, an intimate and unfettered relationship with the godhead, have flourished.

Unfortunately most of these promises were false or built on sand. Disappointment is a constant companion to pagan spiritual exploration. People are beginning to understand that you can't get everything out of a book or by attending a couple of workshops. The present leadership of the druid community seem as lost as those that look to them.

One path forwards would seem to be to re-examine the pre-Christian British native religions and see if these can be restored in away that meets the needs of life in the 21st century C.E. This is the path I am pursuing at this time, along with many other good people. We are not afraid of the words 'religion', nor 'doctrine', nor 'worship'. We believe that our relationship to our gods can be individual but that it can also be strenghtened in understanding and depth by working as a like-minded community.

Quite a step for an old feral polytheist like me, but when you consider the alternative, possibly a better one.

What a fascinating observation!

>>One path forwards would seem to be to re-examine the pre-Christian British native religions and see if these can be restored in away that meets the needs of life in the 21st century C.E. This is the path I am pursuing at this time,<<

This seems an admirable goal but is it possible? The Auld Ones didn't leave any written record and the eyewitnesses who did were foreigners, incomprehending as well as biased.

Maybe the best you can hope for is to not so much restore as recreate. If you accept that the spirits are real then they will guide you.

Heathenry is a religion.

Though it usually doesn't have - or need - priests.

--

Jez

Many Christians of the smaller Protestant denominations are similarly dismissive of "religion". What they have, they say, is a "relationship".



"Religion is a snare and a racket!"

The relationship with your gods is a plus, but not something achieved by everyone.

Heathenry is a religion in the old sense... it is a way of living, a method of dealing with the world(s) and your place in them.

--

Family, friends, honour, mindfulness of the wights and gods of the land... and walking the talk.

Learning, especially from history, and understanding the roots you come from, the things that made you.

--

Jez

Hi Tumsup,

The fact that the pre-Roman Britons left no written record is not the end of the trail, merely a starting point.

We have numerous Roman inscriptions and evidence of their usual synthesis of their own religious beliefs with that of the peoples they assimilated.

A good example are the springs of Minerva - Sulis, now known as the baths from which Bath gets its name. Sulis was a local water deity of sufficient importance that the Romans felt they needed to honour and assimilate her too. Their choice of Graeco-Roman goddess gives us clues as to what the local Britons thought of Sulis and the role she played in their lives. This was repeated up and down the Britain of the early Roman occupation period.

And where the early Romans led the Roman Church later followed, turning local deities into devils and saints with a pragmatic equanimity that is little short of stunning. Bridey became Bridget, the midwife of Christ, nd this is just one of many 'accomodations' that are now being recognised by scholars in this area.

We also have plenty of evidence of the many beliefs and folkways of the peoples of Britain over the next ten centuries. These are the layers of an onion to be slowly and carefully peeled back and examined for their founding influences.

A simple touchstone of how powerful and enduring such folkways can be can be found in any public fountain in Britain. Even those in brand spanking new shopping complexes are full of coins. Now thought to bring good luck or the propitiate some unknown force and receive the thrower's desire in return - this is actually the continuation of the ancient British custom of honouring the deities and spirits of springs and pools through the sacrifice of things of value. Once it was swords and golden torcs, now it is coins.

However to recreate is insufficient. There are plenty of reconstructionists out there, many of whom seek the holy grail of the 'celtic golden age'. They add little to the mix other than muddying the waters with their unfounded romanticism.

What we need is to understand what went before, how people related to the gods and spirits of these isles and their ancestors. Armed with that one can then try to create, not recreate, a native British spiritual path that can serve the people of this century.

Such an effort, academic as it is, must be married to experiential 'field work' by reliable practitioners.

This is what the Brython Project is about.

Thanks Math, I had no idea that there was so much to work with.

The part about the coins was interesting. There is something compelling about deep wells. In Central America there are water filled limestone sink holes in which archeologists find centuries of treasures offered, including the skeletons of young people, richly dressed.

The Romans were polytheists who just accepted that the local deities were real. It's never been clear to me if they just gave roman names to the gods they found because they couldn't pronounce the local name or if they were making an association with a similar deity of their own. For instance, the principal Greek gods have Roman counterparts, Zeus/Jupiter etc.
If the Romans simply adopted the Greek gods, why not use the Greek names? Or, could it be that we call them 'Greek' gods because the Greek were very literate compared to others at the time and that is the record we have. Maybe the same set of gods existed all around the Mediterranean from deep in prehistory and we just have the local names of what emerged as the two main civilizations.

Hi Tumsup,

I think the words 'political', 'pragmatic' and 'eclectic' would be the best to describe the Romans approach to religion generally.

They admired the Greeks greatly, at least an idealized version of Greek's intellectual achievements. When Rome was 'growing up' it borrowed heavily from the Greek, at least until it conquered the Greek and Macedonian states.

It was common when assimilating a new people to examine their gods and look for parallels in their own (stolen) pantheon. This eased the conquered people's transition to citizenship. Look Guys we worship the same Gods so we are all brothers under the skin yes?

Interestingly the one nation they couldn't assimilate like this were the Hebrews. Their form of exclusive monotheism, and the zealots it produced, caused the Romans no end of irritation until, like the Egyptian and Assyrian empires before them, they had to give the Hebrews a damned good kicking.

It amuses me that eventually that same political pragmatism would lead to the adoption the Greek (not Jewish) cult of Christianity as a social control model and replace the tried and tested assimilation one. From acceptance to intolerance in one brief stride - thanks Constantine.

Thanks Math,

If you get a chance, there's a really good book called Constantine's Sword by James Carroll.

He makes the point that when Constantine gave the order 'convert or die' to the Empire, he made a special exception for the Jews. He knew they would rather die than convert and he couldn't kill them because the Second Coming couldn't happen until the Jews were converted.

The practical result was that the Church kept the Jews alive and protected them but perversely as pets to be abused.