![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
causticusThis is sort of a follow-up from a more extensive entry I wrote awhile back. This is also inspired by a re-reading of an old Ecosophia thread from about a couple of years ago regarding the feasibility of forming a new "Druidic" religious organization that lacks the dysfunctional, woke, and clusterfracky characteristics that defined ADF to the core. I saw some very insightful comments, among many others that expressed a lot of confusion on how a Druidic religious organization might differ from that of an initiatory order. I don't blame them for this confusion, as nearly all Druidic orders (with the exception of RDNA and its offshoots) have belonged to the latter category.
Here is the organizational wish-list JMG posted in the first comment:
Well, this sounds a lot like the basis of a Fraternal "Grand Lodge" type of organization; something like Freemasonry. Basically, an organization that requires only a vague belief in a Divine Power(s), with nothing specific beyond that. The inclusion of both "Christian Druids" and "Druids" who venerate non-Celtic pantheons means that a shared liturgy, shared set of holy days and festivals, or shared mythos involving specific divine names is off the table right out of the gate. So then how is this a religion exactly? It seems like we're circling back to the disjointed mess that was/is ADF. And this raises the obvious question that many commenters raised: What exactly makes this organization specifically Druidic? Many ADF members who had nothing Celtic about their own beliefs and practices certainly felt the "Druid" identity* of ADF was rather confusing and nonsensical. If this organization is to use the Druid Revival as a common theme and mythic backdrop WITHOUT an explicitly Celtic pagan spirituality being shared among all members, then this will be a non-religion and essentially a duplication of what AODA/OBOD has already been doing. Then what's the point exactly?
And then we come upon what I found to be one of the most on-point comments:
Yes, it does seem like there were two different conversations going on. I think what's really wanted here is a "polypantheonic" religious organization. Basically an Ecosophia version of ADF. And once again we are faced with questioning the logic of having "Druid" be in the name/identity of the organization. If "Druid" here means "Druid Revival" (which is a specific tradition) then this really whittles down the appeal the organization might have to what's otherwise a general polytheist (and open-minded Christian) member base. The Ecosophia community is already tiny and geographically-scattered enough; those among this group who are specifically attracted to the DR tradition is an even tinier slice of an already-tiny group.
I think this is all interesting food for thought. In another follow-up I might elaborate on what a viable "alt spirituality" organization moving forward might look like. In the most general sense, it will be more like a think-tank or a guild rather than a church.
---
*ADF's Druid branding was a holdover from its founder Isaac Bonewits branching off ADF from RDNA (Reformed Druids of North America), of which he was a member. RDNA started off as a joke organization and its "Druidry" was basically an "anything goes" ethos, with a vague nod to environmentalism. By that, RDNA is a social club, not a religion. And so it seems that beyond its obscure RDNA origins, it seems that there was nothing all that "Druid" about ADF. This became an endless source of confusion and disorientation among the membership. In reality, ADF functioned (barely) as a Pan-Neopagan Church.
Here is the organizational wish-list JMG posted in the first comment:
- I'd like something with plenty of room for solitary practice. Not everyone is well suited to group activities, and some of us would rather eat live tarantulas than go through round after round of group meetings.
- I'd like something that makes room for Christian Druids. I'm not one, but I know quite a few of them, and I've never understood the attitude that insists that you can take any deity for your patron but Jesus. At the same time, appropriate protections need to be put in place to keep anyone from forcing their god on anyone else.
- I'd like something that doesn't pretend to be ancient. The Druid Revival has been around for 300 years; that's ample heritage to claim.
- I'd like something set up to minimize internal politics. The more energy needed for internal group management, the less will be available to worship the gods. If there have to be elections, let them be at long intervals. If elections can be avoided, even better. A lot of nonprofits have a board of directors that appoints its own new members, and ordinary members can vote with their feet if they don't like the existing policies; that might be a model worth considering.
Well, this sounds a lot like the basis of a Fraternal "Grand Lodge" type of organization; something like Freemasonry. Basically, an organization that requires only a vague belief in a Divine Power(s), with nothing specific beyond that. The inclusion of both "Christian Druids" and "Druids" who venerate non-Celtic pantheons means that a shared liturgy, shared set of holy days and festivals, or shared mythos involving specific divine names is off the table right out of the gate. So then how is this a religion exactly? It seems like we're circling back to the disjointed mess that was/is ADF. And this raises the obvious question that many commenters raised: What exactly makes this organization specifically Druidic? Many ADF members who had nothing Celtic about their own beliefs and practices certainly felt the "Druid" identity* of ADF was rather confusing and nonsensical. If this organization is to use the Druid Revival as a common theme and mythic backdrop WITHOUT an explicitly Celtic pagan spirituality being shared among all members, then this will be a non-religion and essentially a duplication of what AODA/OBOD has already been doing. Then what's the point exactly?
And then we come upon what I found to be one of the most on-point comments:
Perhaps this is just my perception, but I feel like we are discussing two different potential organizations. One being a "druid" religious organization and the other being a polytheist religious organization.
Personally, I don't consider myself a druid or really anything in religious terms but I am a polytheist of the plain old uncategorized variety.
I am not much drawn to organized religion but I feel like I would be interested in a polytheist religion that was actually concerned with how to relate to deities. When you throw druid into the mix though I feel like you immediately start down some well worn paths, for example needing to protect the environment. I am all for taking care of the environment, but I don't necessarily see that as something related to relating to the divine, or at least no more so than any other activity can be linked to the divine.
I think charity is another of these issues. What's wrong with helping those less fortunate? Not a thing but, again, I don't necessarily see that as directly related to relating to the divine.
I think having a polytheistic religious organization that was serious, rather than the aforementioned larp party, could be a great thing but I think that, especially given the current climate, it would need to keep a hard focus on being a religion in order to avoid the slippery slope into a politics, social agendas and the like.
Yes, it does seem like there were two different conversations going on. I think what's really wanted here is a "polypantheonic" religious organization. Basically an Ecosophia version of ADF. And once again we are faced with questioning the logic of having "Druid" be in the name/identity of the organization. If "Druid" here means "Druid Revival" (which is a specific tradition) then this really whittles down the appeal the organization might have to what's otherwise a general polytheist (and open-minded Christian) member base. The Ecosophia community is already tiny and geographically-scattered enough; those among this group who are specifically attracted to the DR tradition is an even tinier slice of an already-tiny group.
I think this is all interesting food for thought. In another follow-up I might elaborate on what a viable "alt spirituality" organization moving forward might look like. In the most general sense, it will be more like a think-tank or a guild rather than a church.
---
*ADF's Druid branding was a holdover from its founder Isaac Bonewits branching off ADF from RDNA (Reformed Druids of North America), of which he was a member. RDNA started off as a joke organization and its "Druidry" was basically an "anything goes" ethos, with a vague nod to environmentalism. By that, RDNA is a social club, not a religion. And so it seems that beyond its obscure RDNA origins, it seems that there was nothing all that "Druid" about ADF. This became an endless source of confusion and disorientation among the membership. In reality, ADF functioned (barely) as a Pan-Neopagan Church.
(no subject)
Date: 2022-07-11 06:27 pm (UTC)I really enjoyed reading this post, and I've been following the topic of the "new Druid church" debate since it first emerged a couple of years ago with vested interest. I think you rightly point out that two separate conversations were going on, and that for further clarity they should be two separate, but related projects. I'm interested in what a "panpolytheonic" religious organization (that's not ADF) would look like. I believe in an earlier post you mentioned the possibility of an Americanized Cultus Deorum, and that might be a good analogy to work with. Although, I speculate that this might be the working foundation for Eastern and Midwestern states, while in the Pacific Northwest and Hawaiian Islands it would be an Americanized Shinto. You also mentioned on a comment on I think Violet Cabara's blog a year or two ago about seeing a polytheist analog of High Church Tory Anglicanism; as a polytheist-friendly High Church Tory Anglican myself that's also something I'd be interested in seeing. There's also the recognition that there's another form of spirituality emerging in North America that might as well be called the Green Path based on herbalism, astrology, music, alchemy, etc. (https://ecosophia.dreamwidth.org/187900.html?thread=31485436#cmt31485436). I see both the Green Path and a "panpolytheonic" Assembly of the Gods as possibly the defining features of the new religious landscape (one where hopefully polytheists and Christians can at least respect each other in fraternity. I need to get going, but hopefully this discussion can continue later. Peace and blessings to you.
Sincerely,
SanctuaryofRoseandChalice
(no subject)
Date: 2022-07-12 01:42 am (UTC)I do think some sort of "Cultus Deorum Americanorum" might be an interesting way to give names to local demigods and spirits of specific places here in the US. Your idea of the West coast and Hawaii adopting an Americanized Shinto for that purpose is quite fascinating; from what I've read Kami can be invoked practically anywhere with good results. I'll have to do some asking around and divinations on invoking Roman deity names for place-specific contexts. Since we already taxonomize all the plants and animals using Latin nomenclature, it only seems logical to do the same for spiritual entities!
On a polytheist "High Church Tory Anglicanism" I was probably horsing around a bit when I made that comment, but I think it's a cool concept to contemplate for a religious organization here. That sort of aesthetic would probably do a good job keeping demonolators, cosplayers, and wokesters at bay. I actually wish I knew more about High Church Tory Anglicanism beyond the superficial knowledge I have of it; please feel free to share any insights you want about your experiences with that church. Having "Divines" as religious specialists has a nice ring to it, not gonna lie.
The Green Path sounds fascinating and there is definitely a lot of overlap with the Ecosophian Druidic ethos and methods. The Green Path could end up being a prominent feature of whatever new church might form from these ideas!
Thanks again for dropping this very insightful response, and peace and blessings to you!
(no subject)
Date: 2022-07-12 03:03 am (UTC)To be honest I only consider myself High Church Tory Anglican, I would love to one day participate in such a parish. My home parish hovers between high church and broad church, and unfortunately borders on being Woke (fortunately my rector seems to have toned down the wokeness a bit after I introduced her to JMG's The King In Orange). I agree that having that aesthetic would probably drive out the entryists.
On the matter of the "panpolytheonic" religious organization which would you argue to be the "core pantheons" to work with, and what would be the maximum number of accepted pantheons before it becomes too inclusive to function well? Would there need to be a separate liturgy for each pantheon?
Peace and blessings.
Sincerely,
SanctuaryofRoseandChalice
(no subject)
Date: 2022-07-12 03:41 pm (UTC)On the matter of our hyopthetical polypantheonic organization, I don't have the exact answer and I'm certainly not qualified to make that determination in any sort of firm or final manner. However one of JMG's responses in that thread I linked in the OP seems to shed some light on how to address this problem:
I do think something along these lines might work. It seems like Greek, Roman, Romanized Celtic deities, the Hebraic Angels, parts of the Egyptian pantheon, and some other historic cults can be syncretized into one cohesive "Central Tradition"...with perhaps different spaces/altars side aside for Northern (Germanic) and Hindu traditions. But yeah, I suppose the general idea is not to go overboard and spread the system too thin by trying to accommodate every other barely-followed pantheon under the sun (a la ADF), though those who prefer those can most certainly venerate those on their own time.
(no subject)
Date: 2022-07-12 06:48 pm (UTC)I wasn't regularly following the Dreamwidth journal when that thread was posted, so I'll have to read it to catch up, but a few thoughts based just on what you have here:
1) On the breadth of Revival Druidry: when I first read JMG's descriptions of Revival Druidry, it did not sound appealing to me at all. At the time, I was deep in the grips of reconstructionism as my guiding religious light. After taking up magical practice, though, I ended up getting nudged to find a complete system to work through instead of trying to kitbash my own, and the Druid Magic Handbook seemed flexible enough to handle where I was religiously while still giving me a complete path that would require discipline and will to finish. Over the past year (almost exactly!) working with the rituals and doing the meditations while still keeping up a primarily Germanic prayer practice, I have come more and more to appreciate what a fine balance Revival Druidry as presented by JMG strikes between "believe what you want about the Gods" with "here's a solid spiritual and philosophic core and set of ritual practices that you should mostly stick with". Now, to be fair, I've only done solitary practice, so I don't know how well it would actually work in practice for me to try to celebrate the summer solstice with a handful of other Revival Druids. Considering the whole point of an organization would be to have some kind of shared experience with others, this could be a problem.
2) On the Guild as a model: your last comment intrigues me greatly, as I've been reading more about guilds of late. The Ealdrice Theod (Theodish group in Virginia) actually changed their model of local religious groups from "Kindreds" to "Haliggilds" (Holy Guilds). Their founder has a pretty interesting essay on the history of the concept in Anglo-Saxon times here: https://ealdrice.org/guild/ . JMG also has had a lot to say about guilds in at least his fiction, and I've started to track down some historical books on the concept. For the current topic, one of the things that seems promising about a guild is that you can have broader bylaws for the overall guild, and then local guilds can be more specialized. Have a large group that worships Germanic Gods in your city and others who worship the Roman Gods? You could either have two different locals or one more open one. The default "apprentice, journeyman, master" structure also allows for fairly flexible governance - masters mostly get to do what they want with their groups, bigger questions get decided by a meeting of masters, and every level has certain rights and duties associated with it. Perhaps advancing in levels requires demonstrating some level of ritual, scholarly, or artistic competence. These are all just vague ideas so far, but a very interesting line of thought!
(no subject)
Date: 2022-07-12 10:55 pm (UTC)2) Ohh, now that's quite interesting! Yeah, I never quite got the usage of "kindred" for religious gatherings consisting of unrelated persons. Seems very logical and appropriate for the Ealdrice Theod to revive the original usage of Guild for that purpose. Having said that, the Guild structure I had in many was for the proposed Fellowship as a whole (which includes different religious approaches), but I think "sub-guilds" within this overarching structure would be very doable. But yeah I agree the "apprentice, journeyman, master" structure is very conducive for sorting the membership according to criteria like skill/competence, commitment, and tenure. Achieving the "Master" grade could mean the ability for that person to start their own working groups or sub-guilds. As you say, this is all very interesting food for thought! I'm sure I'll jot down more ideas as I go and I eagerly await your (and anyone else reading!) input as well.
(no subject)
Date: 2022-07-13 01:19 am (UTC)On 2) Yeah, getting group organizations to work properly is tough, especially when there isn't an explicit form of accountability like a board of directors with a specific goal. One thought that came to me as I read your response, though, is that it might also be helpful to look at other religious approaches that work well for fairly small groups. The example that comes to mind is the "home church" movement I've heard a few rumblings about. I don't really know anything about it, so maybe it's not a helpful model at all, but I reckon we're still firmly in the "come up with as many ideas as possible" stage of things, rather than "narrow down on what works and try to make it happen".
(no subject)
Date: 2022-07-13 06:18 pm (UTC)