quote:

---

If by 'Celtic' we are talking about the Orthodox form of Christianity in the British Isles prior to Augustine then it doesn't bear much resemblance to SOME of the Celtic stuff we see now.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:

quote:

---

If by 'Celtic' we are talking about the Orthodox form of Christianity in the British Isles prior to Augustine then it doesn't bear much resemblance to SOME of the Celtic stuff we see now.

---

I was referring to 'celtic christianity' in the sense of it being Christian - long before 'Orthodoxy' was even a twinkle in the first patriarch's eye

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anyuta:

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:

quote:

---

If by 'Celtic' we are talking about the Orthodox form of Christianity in the British Isles prior to Augustine then it doesn't bear much resemblance to SOME of the Celtic stuff we see now.

---

I was referring to 'celtic christianity' in the sense of it being Christian - long before 'Orthodoxy' was even a twinkle in the first patriarch's eye

---

well, there was no christianity before there was Orthodoxy. so that's kind of a strange thing to say.

but as for the Celts, they were in communion with Byzantium before being forced to be in communion with Rome, I think it what the earlier poster was talking about. However, as I understand it, the Western (non Roman) form of christanity did differ somehwat from that practiced in the East. but that seems to depend on whose research one reads.

---

quote:

---

well, there was no christianity before there was Orthodoxy. so that's kind of a strange thing to say.

but as for the Celts, they were in communion with Byzantium before being forced to be in communion with Rome, I think it what the earlier poster was talking about. However, as I understand it, the Western (non Roman) form of christanity did differ somehwat from that practiced in the East. but that seems to depend on whose research one reads.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian Agnostic:
I find anglican versions of celtic Christianity a little weird, given that various studies
(Historical, archeological, genetic etc.) point to the likelihood that the early germanic settlers (angles,saxons,jutes et al)practiced "ethnic cleansing".

---

Of course if you believe some people even the Irish aren't really Celts IIRC its been argued that a relatively small number of Celtic settlers brought their language and culture to Ireland without significantly displacing the much larger pre-Celtic population. And 'Celt' was always a pretty loose category anyway.

[ 04. February 2010, 18:50: Message edited by: Yerevan ]
 

---

Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anyuta:
but as for the Celts, they were in communion with Byzantium before being forced to be in communion with Rome.

---

quote:

---

It is easy to exaggerate the cohesiveness of the Celtic Christian communities. Scholars have long recognised that the term "Celtic Church" is simply inappropriate to describe Christianity among Celtic-speaking peoples, since this would imply a notion of unity, or a self-identifying entity, that simply did not exist. As Patrick Wormald explained, “One of the common misconceptions is that there was a ‘Roman Church’ to which the ‘Celtic’ was nationally opposed.” Celtic-speaking areas were part of Latin Christendom as a whole, wherein a significant degree of liturgical and structural variation existed, along with a collective veneration of the Bishop of Rome that was no less intense in Celtic areas.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yerevan:
Now the supposedly spiritual, nature-loving Celts are the antithesis of modern, industrial England. Whats changed is how the English perceive themselves.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian Agnostic:
I find anglican versions of celtic Christianity a little weird, given that various studies (Historical, archeological, genetic etc.) point to the likelihood that the early germanic settlers (angles,saxons,jutes et al)practiced "ethnic cleansing".

---

quote:

---

One major point was that Irish bishops were relatively weak, because there were few Irish cities (and those very small).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
Actually there is no real distinction between Celtic and Saxon Christianity. Northumbria the Saxon kingdom stretched all the way to Galloway and the Forth. Scotland's earliest Christian Saints are in Galloway preceding Columba by at least 100 years there are certainly fifth century Christian Relics there. Whithorn has similar but I don't know what to google, in fact Whithorn is the only place in Scotland with earlier Christian remains. Aidan might well have not being going to a solely pagan country when he set off for Lindisfarne but one where Christianity had been practised for some time.

Where did the Christians to Galloway come from? Well almost anywhere, they could have come from Cumbria, Isle of Man or Ireland. This is the part of Scotland where you can see into five Kingdoms, the fifth being heaven.

Jengie

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian Agnostic:
I find anglican versions of celtic Christianity a little weird, given that various studies (Historical, archeological, genetic etc.) point to the likelihood that the early germanic settlers (angles,saxons,jutes et al)practiced "ethnic cleansing".

---

My understanding is that the older theory of a violent displacement is being displaced by a theory of a more gradual mingling of cultures and peaceful co-existence. But I only know what I read about that in third-hand sources.

---

quote:

---

My understanding is that the older theory of a violent displacement is being displaced by a theory of a more gradual mingling of cultures and peaceful co-existence. But I only know what I read about that in third-hand sources. [/qb]

---

Linguistically, OE and ME have very few gaelic words, though I read somewhere that english grammar might have been influenced by gaelic. I read that a few years ago, genetic researchers concluded that the genetic profile of english people in the south of england were almost identical to folks in holland and schleswig-holstein. [/QB][/QUOTE]

Now that is strange. I was under the impression the the genetic profile of the english people in the south of england were almost identical to the southern scots, and that the danes had a more significant genetic influence than the saxons. Furthermore there is at least one publication on the Anglo-Celtic roots of English.

Personally I don't believe the myth of the English.
 

---

Posted by Oferyas (# 14031) on :
 
I once worked with a supposed guru of 'celtic Spirituality' who said to me 'I woke up one morning and realised it was all pseudo-mystical cr*p' but I notice he's written two more books on it since!

St David regarded himself as simply a Catholic priest, and would have thought it bizarre to celebrate Mass in any other language than Latin, while the famous Easter controversy 'settled' at the Synod of Whitby was no more than some Christians hanging on to a dating for Easter decreed by a previous pope instead of embracing a dating for Easter decreed by a current pope! Liturgically we know almost nothing reliable about worship at that period, so attempts to 'revive a celtic style of worship' are pure fantasy.

Having been around the block for a few years now, I wonder if this is just a re-run of the 'franciscan fashion' - there was a period in the 1970's when it was ecclesiastically 'hip' to wander around in open-toed sandals and be gooey about birds and bunnies, while quietly ditching the self-denying Christ-centred simplicity which seems to me to be the heart of real Franciscan spirituality.

Call me an old cynic if you like, but I suspect that quite a lot of our modern 'celtic stuff' would be dismissed as sentimental rubbish or dangerous syncretism if we were to preach it to a congregation of 5th century Christians.
 

---

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Edward Green:
Personally I don't believe the myth of the English.

---

quote:

---

I once worked with a supposed guru of 'celtic Spirituality' who said to me 'I woke up one morning and realised it was all pseudo-mystical cr*p' but I notice he's written two more books on it since!

---

Yes, and it says something about it when 'celtic christianity' hasn't really taken off in Ireland!
 

---

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Thanks ianjmatt. I'm not quite sure whether the OP and other responses are referring to any specific current Christian communities or writings.

We're friends of the Northumbria community, headed by the Baptist minister Rev Roy Searle (a previous President of the Bapist Union in the UK) and have also attended worship at the Aidan and Hilda community, headed by Rev Ray Simpson, an Anglican priest and author who we knew first in Norfolk when he headed a large ecumenical church centre. If folks are thinking about the work and faith expression of these particularly communities, then I'm a bit pushed to understand where the words "sloppy" and "sentimental pap" might come in. Either about the community leaders or ethos.

But maybe you're all thinking about something else?

[ 05. February 2010, 07:56: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
 

---

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :
 
Celtic Christianity was certainly a harsh and austere thing, very unlike its harp-playing, home-weave-wearing modern reinvention. Monastic rules of the 6th century contain helpful advice on spiritual discipline such as standing up to your neck in a freezing lake, or "let your genuflections be till your knees bleed". Their teaching was rigorously Trinitarian and, far from being tree-huggers, there is plenty of literature to suggest that the Celtic Christians saw demons in every wood and lake.

There is, as has been said, plenty of evidence to suggest that the Church in Ireland and Scotland (and later in Northumbria) retained Eastern traditions and missed out on the changes in Western practice from the early fifth century onward. The most famous and obvious was the date of Easter. The style of monasticism, too, is more like the missionary monasticism of Russia 500 years later than the settled communities that Benedict was beginning to found in the West. It was the monks who were the frontiersmen of the Church, as King Oswald knew well when he invited the Iona monks to evangelise the kingdom of Northumbria. It was a rough, basic life, and those who led it must often have been close to freezing, starving, or both. I doubt many of today's "Celtic Christians" would have survived ten minutes.
 

---

Posted by Thurible (# 3206) on :
 
Fr Hunwicke on 'Celtic Christianity'.

Thurible
 

---

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
I guess the real historical controversy surrounds the nature of the church in the UK prior to the Synod of Whitby. My own reading is that the post Reformation protestant view of the distinctives (between Ionan liturgical, monastic and outreach practices and Catholic practices as authorised by Rome), was hardened in support of a classic protestant nonconformist view that Catholic control and order won out against Ionan "wildness" (e.g the wild goose symbol for the Holy Spirit). The kind of story which is music to the ears of wild nonconformists everywhere!

My own reading is that there probably were some interesting distinctives but there was undoubtedly a great deal of overlap. What is true is that a major outcome of Whitby was the moving of the episcopal seat for Northumbria from Lindisfarne to York which looks like a major transfer of control and authority away from the locals. Ah well, as us North-Easterners would observe, nothing new about that. We know we're not to be trusted!
 

---

Posted by Honest Ron Bacardi (# 38) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian Agnostic:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian Agnostic:
I find anglican versions of celtic Christianity a little weird, given that various studies (Historical, archeological, genetic etc.) point to the likelihood that the early germanic settlers (angles,saxons,jutes et al)practiced "ethnic cleansing".

---

My understanding is that the older theory of a violent displacement is being displaced by a theory of a more gradual mingling of cultures and peaceful co-existence. But I only know what I read about that in third-hand sources.

---

Linguistically, OE and ME have very few gaelic words, though I read somewhere that english grammar might have been influenced by gaelic. I read that a few years ago, genetic researchers concluded that the genetic profile of english people in the south of england were almost identical to folks in holland and schleswig-holstein.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anyuta:

but as for the Celts, they were in communion with Byzantium before being forced to be in communion with Rome, I think it what the earlier poster was talking about.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Edward Green:
Linguistically, OE and ME have very few gaelic words

---

quote:

---

I read that a few years ago, genetic researchers concluded that the genetic profile of english people in the south of england were almost identical to folks in holland and schleswig-holstein.

---

quote:

---

Now that is strange. I was under the impression the the genetic profile of the english people in the south of england were almost identical to the southern scots, and that the danes had a more significant genetic influence than the saxons.

---

quote:

---

Furthermore there is at least one publication on the Anglo-Celtic roots of English.

---

quote:

---

My own reading is that the post Reformation protestant view of the distinctives (between Ionan liturgical, monastic and outreach practices and Catholic practices as authorised by Rome), was hardened in support of a classic protestant nonconformist view that Catholic control and order won out against Ionan "wildness" (e.g the wild goose symbol for the Holy Spirit). The kind of story which is music to the ears of wild nonconformists everywhere!

---

quote:

---

---

quote:

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alaric the Goth:
Take Pendle Hill, which was something like 'Y Pen' ('The Head', 'The hill') in Brythonic. It became 'Penhyll' in Old English , so 'Hill-hill', later corrupted to 'Pendle' which then needed a further 'Hill' to make it clear'. So 'Hill-hill-hill'!

Bredon on the Hill is similar, as 'bre-', 'bryn' is another Brythonic word for hill, so 'Hill hill on the hill'!

---

quote:

---

English doesn't borrow from other languages. English follows other languages down dark alleys, knocks them over, and goes through their pockets for loose grammar.

---

)

But maybe once upon a time English just wasn't in the habit of borrowing. Perhaps something happened in the early Middle Ages to turn English into a language that borrows words from other people. Which it certainly does. Latin and Greek at the forefront, but our relatively short contact with India has given us far more words than fifteen centuries living alongside British langauges. I think we have more Chinese words than Welsh. (for example: char/chai/tea, chin-chin, chop [stick], chop suey, chow, feng shui, fu, ginseng, gung ho, kaolin, ketchup, kowtow, kung fu, soya, tycoon, typhoon, yen [="desire" yen=money is from Japanese, though they got it from China])

Some people have a theory that when two languages meet the one that is easier for adults to learn to speak badly is more likely to be used for intercommunication. All languages seem easy enough for babies to learn, but not all languages are as easy for adults.

But what's "easy"? English, like Chinese, is notoriously hard to pronounce for non-speakers. (Much harder than say KiSwahili, or standard Italian, or Malay) But modern English (not Old English) and Chinese both have a very simplified syntax compared with their closed relatives, mainly based on word order rather than inflection. And they lack complicated tenses and grammatical gender and have few rules of agreemment between words so once you know a word you can often use it in all sorts of different contexts. The same is apparently true of Persian and to some extent spoken (but not written) French and Spanish (though Spanish still has grammatical gender, as does French, though barely). All languages that spread well beyond their original home. (On the other hand its not true of Arabic...)


Ah.. a colleague reminds me that there are some animal and plant names as well. "Gull" certainly (the English name used to be "mew"), possibly guillemot, probably penguin (used as a name for what we now call an auk)

The English certainly knew those birds before they came to Britain. I wonder why the words changed?
 

---

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :
 
French barely has grammatical gender?

Have you ever sat through a primary-school French class while the French teacher tries to teach word gender to students whose language barely recognizes the concept? English-speakers positively have to be beaten by the gender stick until they get the concept.

Monsieur! Quelle Horreur!
 

---

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :
 
Thank you for the link to Father Hunwicke. If it could draw on other ancient sources, I can't understand why CW did not follow the Stowe Missal Prayer of Humble Access he cites.

'I am unworthy because I filthily adhere to the mire of dung and all my good deeds are like a rag used by a menstrual woman'.

More seriously, though, I also think that because nobody really knows what Celtic Christianity was like or how different it was, it is very convenient for people to be able to project onto it what they'd like it to be. Nobody can prove you are wrong. If you are Dr Paisley St Patrick was obviously a Free Presbyterian. If he were alive today, he'd be in Martyrs' Memorial every Sunday wearing a dark suit and a tie. To Elizabethan divines, the Celtic Church hardly differed from what they were turning the Church of England into.

The one thing you can say, is that they were ascetic and tough. You can't live on Skellig Michael at all, yet alone on a meagre diet, bare foot and roughly clad, without being. Not can you stand praying all night in the North Sea without being tough.
 

---

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
French barely has grammatical gender?

---

Compared to Latin it doesn't.

And colloquial spoken French has less - a lot of inflections you have to remember to spell right all sound the same. Well, they do to me anyway.

Anyway that's just the sort of thing I mean. Sensible languages like English and Chinese don't have all that frippery. So they are easier to learn to speak badly but acceptably.
 

---

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :
 
ken, I grew up in a French-speaking northern New Brunswick and took French until Grade 10. You're off-base.

Spoken French frequently slurs the last letters of the preceding word if the following one has a vowel. Then those endings really come out. Plus the article, which Latin famously doesn't have, is declined for gender, number and possession plus du = de le which is considered inelegant by itself. Much grammatical "business" in French is moved to the article compared to Latin.

Don't get me started on the Past Perfect in which case gender and numbers is inflected into the entire verb construction.

Just because French pronounces a good deal of its endings as "eh" emphatically doesn't mean that the grammatical differences aren't relevant. Just as English's favourite grammatical ending of "s" in all its varied forms conveys several different meanings.

Having had a dip of Latin too all that's missing is the neuter gender.

Plus French grammatical gender is not based on natural gender, which drives Anglophones nuts.
 

---

Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on :
 
I think most of the easily marketable 'Celtic Christianity' of our day is ahistorical, to say the least.

Once the historical continuity of a movement/organization is broken it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to reconnect the chain. So various dubious 'chains', 'links' and 'histories' are manufactured.

The real history of Celtic Christianity is one of amazing survival in a very rugged environment. Wars, Viking incursions, disputation, heroic endeavour etc.

Don't tell Mel Gibson. We don't want a Celtic Christian 'Braveheart': Life of St...'
 

---

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :
 
Not to mention who or whatever said saint would hurl out the window....


 

---

Posted by Johnny S (# 12581) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):

Don't tell Mel Gibson. We don't want a Celtic Christian 'Braveheart': Life of St...'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Johnny S:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):

Don't tell Mel Gibson. We don't want a Celtic Christian 'Braveheart': Life of St...'

---

Titter ye not.

In New Celts by Roger Ellis & Chris Seaton, the film is quoted - "the holy Spirit Braveheart cry of 'freedom'."

There is some creative stuff in it. Just don't think it has anything to do with 6th century Britain.

---

At anything connected with 'St' Mel, I don't titter, I guffaw.


 

---

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :
 
Celtic Christianity has during modern times always been ahistorical. Just check out Making Myths Chasing Dreams by Ian Bradley.

Jengie
 

---

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
I agree that a great deal of fun can be got out of the history/mythology details. I chuckled over fletcher christian's Irish review. But I'm not really coming from that POV.

What intrigues me about modern expressions (Iona, Northumbria, etc) is the way they cut across lots of Protestant/Catholic/Orthodox stereotypes. The nonconformist Roy Searle, for example, is a strong proponent of the value of daily offices, liturgy and contemplation and a critic of the way they are often very much discounted in the tradition he grew up in. I suppose it helps that he has (or has had) a Catholic nun as a spiritual director (somewhat unusual for an ex President of the Baptist Union). I guess analagous pictures could be painted of John Bell and Ray Simpson, but I know less about them.

Some of this ties in with my general view that the Reformation led to the throwing out of various babies with the undoubted bathwater, some of it a personal unease, (e.g. a recognition of "something missing" re worship and contemplation in my own nonconformist experience). It's not so much the re-presentation of that ancient history that I find interesting, more the re-evaluation of current practices and understandings of what helps the Christian journey. There is a sort of organic ecumenicity to this which seems a lot more creative than just talking about differences.

[ 06. February 2010, 08:17: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
 

---

Posted by QLib (# 43) on :
 
But (neo)Celtic Christianity is not unique in this. People in the later middle ages re-invented the early middle ages. Various bods later re-invented non-specific bits of the middle ages: the Tudors, Walter Scott and the Romantics, for example. Victorian writers re-invented the Tudors and Stuarts. The Church reinvented various pagan festivals; in fact, one could argue that the whole Church constantly re-invents the story of Jesus of Nazareth (and not necessarily in a bad way). And so on.

In a way, this is what 'Culture' is - though I do agree that in general it's better if such ideas can be disconnected from ideas about 'proper' history.
 

---

Posted by QLib (# 43) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
It's not so much the re-presentation of that ancient history that I find interesting, more the re-evaluation of current practices and understandings of what helps the Christian journey. There is a sort of organic ecumenicity to this which seems a lot more creative than just talking about differences.

---

• new ways to touch the lives of all
• renewal of prayer and worship
• Health & healing
• Local church renewal
• Church centres
• ecumenical movement
• People of other faiths and belief
• Implementation of the communities economic witness
• People living in poverty
• those without livelihoods, access to education or training, work place mission
• Young people
• Iona
• Residents group
• Publishing Committee
• Glasgow office
• The Programme committee
• Our commitment to social and political action
• The UN
• Human rights and gender equality
• Racial Justice
• Environment - Climate change
• People without homes
• Renewal of community
• Family groups
• Associates
• Friends of Iona Community
• New Members
• Guest and others touched by the Community
• Basic Christian communities
• Growth and deepening of the life of the Community
• families of those who have died.

• Corrymeela
• Christian Centre for Reflection and Dialogue, Cuba
• Community for Reconciliation, Barnes Close
• Northumbria Community
• Open Door Community Atlanta
• Pilsdon Community
• Taize
• Well Community Willen
• Wellspring Community, Australia

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
Yes something like that.


There own list under basic Christian communities goes as follows:

• Corrymeela
• Christian Centre for Reflection and Dialogue, Cuba
• Community for Reconciliation, Barnes Close
• Northumbria Community
• Open Door Community Atlanta
• Pilsdon Community
• Taize
• Well Community Willen
• Wellspring Community, Australia

Certainly not all Celtic by any means.

Jengie

---

quote:

---

The Iona Community was founded in Glasgow and Iona in 1938 by George MacLeod, minister, visionary and prophetic witness for peace, in the context of the poverty and despair of the Depression. From a dockland parish in Govan, Glasgow, he took unemployed skilled craftsmen and young trainee clergy to Iona to rebuild both the monastic quarters of the mediaeval abbey and the common life by working and living together, sharing skills and effort as well as joys and achievement. That original task became a sign of hopeful rebuilding of community in Scotland and beyond. The experience shaped – and continues to shape – the practice and principles of the Iona Community.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
...
Celtic is a projection of others upon the Iona ...

Jengie

---

As you pointed out in your posts on this thread, George MacLeod was what I would deem a practical visionary. He did an enormous amount to renew the spiritual life and home missionary sense of the Church of Scotland. I don't think his work with the Iona community was anything remotely 'romantic' in the sense of trying to create something which never existed.

The very stones of Iona are part of Scottish history. Saints and Kings are buried there. It doesn't need a bogus 'Celtic' genealogy. It already has a genuine one!

 

---

Posted by Timothy the Obscure (# 292) on :
 
I've known a couple of people who got interested in modern "Celtic Christianity" because they were intrigued by Orthodoxy, but couldn't see themselves fitting into the intensely ethnic culture of the Orthodoxen where they lived. I'm not sure what they're up to now.

There's quite a lot about neo-Celtic Christianity that I like--it's just the history geek in me that objects to the misunderstanding of the past. But then, I'm not one who believes that the apostles got it right in 36 C.E. and we should just be preserving their practices in amber.
 

---

Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on :
 
There are still genuinely Gaelic speaking areas which may preserve some of the links to an older, simpler rural and fishing life. Though I believe drunkenness and boredom sometimes afflict the young. I'm thinking of islands like Barra and Harris and Lewis in particular.

I think there is a deep desire in many of us, especially in the face of a society which gets more and more complex, to 'go back to our roots'. How we do is the interesting bit.
 

---

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :
 
The most numerous example of actual Celtic Christian liturgy is presumably either the liturgy of the (Anglican) Church in Wales or else that of the Welsh Calvinist Methodists (AKA Welsh Presbyterians)

Some good Welsh hymns are in order!
 

---

Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :
 
"Celtic" is just another Christian fad, another lifestyle choice.

It suggests that the church is not so much clutching at straws as desperate for "something" else to get people on board.

Yes I know that authentic celtic spiriuality is far more sacrificial than the "God bless my little cow brigade" could ever imagine but where is that actually different from what the founder of the feast intended?

[Lets down net carefully into the water]
 

---

Posted by Cottontail (# 12234) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
There are still genuinely Gaelic speaking areas which may preserve some of the links to an older, simpler rural and fishing life. Though I believe drunkenness and boredom sometimes afflict the young. I'm thinking of islands like Barra and Harris and Lewis in particular.

I think there is a deep desire in many of us, especially in the face of a society which gets more and more complex, to 'go back to our roots'. How we do is the interesting bit.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
After a visit to skellig michael I was left wondering where the rather soppy sentimental version of 'celtic' christianity came from. .....

However, these ideas seem to have become very sentimental, with some rather odd ideas about creation. Is it a 'celtic' christianity for city dwellers?

---

Less urban then monied. Over here celtic christianity is most often part of the faith patterns of the middle class suburbanite. The inner city poor don't get into it.

Mostly because modern celtic christianity expression seems to be a form of neo-classicism, revering the pull of nature.

Shame all this because reality was more celtic christianity as practiced did not seperate the world around from the practice. That this world around happened to be rural was due to timing.

If the celtic practice teaches us anything for today its that God can exist in the city, if we just learn to practice it here.

E.g. If somebody could create books of prayers for the routine of the urban dweller, I'd buy that.

Something like reciting this whenever you are stopped at a stoplight.

Red above for the Creator of us all

Yellow between for the Son who died for us all

Green below for the Spirit that teaches us all

But...no...instead we get more about how communing with nature is where we can see God.


 

---

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
I quite like the idea of praying at traffic lights, especially when you are in a hurry and they have just turned red.
 

---

Posted by Saul the Apostle (# 13808) on :
 
I went to spend a weekend at a place called Ffald Y Brenin in West Wales (near Fishguard). They have a delightful chapel which is stone built and round with a natural rock formation coming out of the floor inside the chapel itself.

This sort of feels neo-monastic and 'celtic' in a sort of way.

I find myself drawn to 'celtic' christianity although I'm not wholly sure what ''it'' is.

http://www.ffald-y-brenin.org/retreats-indiv.php

Found my time at Ffald Y Brenin interesting. Has anyone else involvement there? Hope this question is not too off tangent?

Saul
 

---

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :
 
The most numerous example of actual Celtic Christian liturgy is presumably either the liturgy of the (Anglican) Church in Wales or else that of the Welsh Calvinist Methodists (AKA Welsh Presbyterians)

Ken, I'm sure you're onto something important there. If there is such a thing as a specifically Celtic mode of Christianity, at least as relevant as ideas about how things were done in the C6 century, would be - is there anything that Welsh non-conformity, the CinW, Irish Catholicism, fissiparious Gaelic Presbyterianism and Breton pardons have in common, that distinguishes them from what is around them?

If there is, then there's something in the idea. If not, there probably isn't.
 

---

Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on :
 
Good post, Cottontail.

Most of the crofters/combined crofter-fisher folk living in the Highlands and Islands would, I think, want a fairly simple religion which fits in with their lifestyle. They would suffer neither the urban deprivation of the Gorbals and Black Hill or the at times overly romanticized view of their way of life some Edinburgh intellectuals have.

My contention is that there is a radical disconnect between the current lifestyle of contemporary Gaelic speakers and an artificial 'Celtic spirituality' some wish to create.
 

---

Posted by QLib (# 43) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
My contention is that there is a radical disconnect between the current lifestyle of contemporary Gaelic speakers and an artificial 'Celtic spirituality' some wish to create.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fuzzipeg:
Sacrificing live chickens certainly enhances some people's prayer life but I wouldn't consider it a valid expression of Christian worship.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by QLib:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
My contention is that there is a radical disconnect between the current lifestyle of contemporary Gaelic speakers and an artificial 'Celtic spirituality' some wish to create.

---

Well, I think you can rest content with your contention because I don't think anyone is even attempting to argue that 'Celtic spirituality' necessarily has anything to do with contemporary speakers of the Gaelic.

As for artificial... well, if you use an idea to enhance your prayer life or your worship, then it becomes 'real'* doesn't it? Is any other kind of spirituality more real or less artificial? Isn't Gregorian chant artificial? Aren't albs and surplices artificial? Furthermore, you know, there was no man travelling on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho who was set on by thieves and rescued by a Good Samaritan - Jesus just made it all up. Bloody lefty new-age wishy-washy librul.

*In an 'imaginary friend' sort of way.

---

Somewhat of an oversimplified reductio ad absurdum going on here I think.

But then you've never been afraid to go out on a limb QLib.

Bless you and please continue being lovably eccentric. You've cheered me up no end this morning. I appreciate your sense of humour, intentional or otherwise.
 

---

Posted by Fuzzipeg (# 10107) on :
 
Qlib.... I think that even on the Ship you might get a consensus that the sacrifice of a 'live'* chicken, though certainly real in one sense, was not valid in Xtian worship but, up until now, the argument about Celtic Christianity has not been that it isn't Christian but that it isn't authentically rooted in ancient Celtic practice.

I'm sorry, I misunderstood you. I didn't realise that you were arguing that albs, Gregorian chant and surplices were rooted in Celtic Christianity. I must disagree with you.
 

---

Posted by QLib (# 43) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fuzzipeg:
Qlib.... I think that even on the Ship you might get a consensus that the sacrifice of a 'live'* chicken, though certainly real in one sense, was not valid in Xtian worship but, up until now, the argument about Celtic Christianity has not been that it isn't Christian but that it isn't authentically rooted in ancient Celtic practice.

I'm sorry, I misunderstood you. I didn't realise that you were arguing that albs, Gregorian chant and surplices were rooted in Celtic Christianity. I must disagree with you.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
I wonder in time will there be a neo-Celtic revival period in art (or maybe there already is)

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0