From: downey@enh.nist.gov
Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic
Subject: Re: Celts-Christianity-Catholicism
Date: 13 Oct 92 03:28:12 GMT
Organization: NIST



downey@enh.nist.gov writes:
>Well, if you are referring to the "Celtic Church" before the coming
>of Christianity, I say it definitely existed - What about the
>Druids?  If I have misunderstood and you are talking about
>the "Celtic Church" after the introduction of Christianity, then
>I would say it was a "different" kind - a sort of mingling of
>the old and the new - pagan + Christianity.  This is termed

from newt@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Michael Steven Newton)
  >>The message by Maloney does a good job of summing up the practices
  >>and political webs involved in early Celtic Christianity.  Here's
  >>a few more notes from "The Celtic Revolution" by P.B.Ellis:

  >>"The term 'Celtic Church' is not a strictly accurate one because the early
  >>Christians churches among the Celtic peoples, in most essentials, were
  >>part of the Roman Catholic Church.  Neither was the Celtic CHurch an
  >>identifiable organization with a central leadership.  Nonetheless,
  >>during the early Christian period, for a period of 150 years, the
  >>insular Celts of the British Isles were cut off from strict Roman
  >>influence... the Celts clung to the old computations and freely
  >>mixed many pre-Christian traditions and social concepts into their
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  >>Christianity, thus developing as a distinct entity within the wider
  >>Christian movement.

This supports my "mingling" concept.

  >>... [some deleted ...
  >>Nevertheless, it was not until the 12th 
  >>century that one could say that the majority of Celts accepted
  >>>Roman orthodoxy."

Frank reported 1171, so this corresponds.

from Matthew Huntbach: 
>>>Mr.Marquie describes himself as a "Wiccan", which he seems to
>>>think for some reason has something to do with the
>>>pre-Christian religion of Ireland. Furthermore, he is under the
>>>impression that this religion was ended involuntarily by means

  >>Yes, Wicca has no more to do with Victorian antiquarians than it does
  >>ancient Ireland.  Wiccans don't tend to be very informed about history,
  >>anthropology or comparative religion, because it would highlight the
  >>dubious connections between actual ancient practices and what people
  >>like Gardner claimed were survivals of wiccan practice.  Even the
  >>etymology of the term is erroneous.

Come on guys, do you have to be so harsh?  I don't know much about Wiccans,
but I don't think insults are warranted.  One could argue that
people who believe in Christianity are ignoring science, i.e.
creationism vs. evolution.

>extreme.  I merely pointed out that in terms of Brehon laws,
>women had certain rights that they don't have in present-day
>Ireland.  I don't remember anyone holding up the "Celtic Church"

  >>In some ways this is true, but it's hard to take facets from a
  >>completely different social context and compare them with another
  >>context.  Women (and I'm not even sure if this applied to all women
  >>or only those of the free or ariosticratic classes) had the right
  >>to divorce, since it was just another social contract like any other.
  >>And they had the right to keep their share of property.

I'm doing some research on the Brehon laws with respect to women for
my Women in History class.  I'll let you know what I find out.

  >>But I think it's hard to compare rights and laws one-to-one, because
  >>laws and practices only work, and make sense, in a particular social
  >>context.  You couldn't revive some number of these laws and expect them
  >>to mean the same thing, or work the same way, without trying to
  >>reestablish the entire social context, which is impossible.

  >>-- mn

On the contrary, I think we can learn a lot from the past.  I wasn't
suggesting that we revive an ancient law system, just pointing out some
diffferences.  However, if some of those laws were enacted in present
day Ireland, women would have more freedom in certain respects than under
the current system.  We don't have to necessarily take everything in its own
context.  Many governments have taken what they consider to be
"good" principles from other governments and from past governments and
adjusted them for the current era or political situation.  For example,
some of the principles of the Magna Carta have been adopted without
reverting to the full governmental policy of that time.  Additionally,
democracy is taught as having its roots in ancient Greek society,
however, after studying ancient Greek society, I for one would not
endorse revival of the full culture.  There was a lot of discrimination
in ancient times.  My point is, we can learn from history, adopting
the "good," and discarding the "bad.

Laura

Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic