LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for OLD-IRISH-L Archives


OLD-IRISH-L Archives

OLD-IRISH-L Archives


OLD-IRISH-L@LISTSERV.HEANET.IE


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

OLD-IRISH-L Home

OLD-IRISH-L Home

OLD-IRISH-L  June 2002

OLD-IRISH-L June 2002

Subject:

Re: Druid - Magus

From:

Alexis <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Scholars and students of Old Irish <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 15 Jun 2002 15:10:36 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (101 lines)

> De†: Francine Nicholson <[log in to unmask]>
> Objet†: Re: Druid - Magus
>> From: Alexis <[log in to unmask]>
>> Everything that was regarded as pagan was considered as evil. Pagan is not
>> synonym to pre-Christian, it means related to another religion than
>> Christianity.
> Alexis, if everything pre-Christian had been regarded as evil, then the
> Irish monks would never have recorded a single myth, especially stories like
> Lebor Gaba/la E/renn and others that talked about the Tuatha De/ Danann. But
> they did record those stories--in modified form. And there were differing
> standards as to what needed to be changed and how much it needed to be
> changed. The two colophons you cited represent two extremes of those
> standards.

When I am saying that pagan is not synonym to pre-christian, and that pagan
was considered evil it means also that pre-christian is not necessarily
considered as evil. This is was the Lebor GabŠla was written down (some
parts may have been pre-christian, but it was not considered as pagan - a
terme which is connected only to religious practices), but we don't have any
trace of a pagan cosmogony which would have religious implications. The
Irish monks only take their traditionnal history and withdraw nearly
everything that could not be accepted by their christian contemporary (we
have to keep in mind that something could be considered as acceptable at one
time and not anymore later). The two colophons are not representing two
extremes, they are just talking of two different things (or scribes would
have been a kind of schizophrenic !) : this tale is worth being transmitted
(in Irish), but reader has to keep in mind that it is only a story, not
History (in Latin).

>> <snip>>That's exactly what I am saying, once you have adapted, revised or
>> changed the meaning of something, it is not a survival,
> I never said anything was a survival. I said that things were not always
> discarded as evil. Sometimes they were adapted or re-interpreted. It's not
> black or white, one moment it's pagan and the next it's Christian. Most of
> the time it was a compromise, a grey that was acceptable to the
> clerics/theologians and to the people they were, at least at one stage,
> trying to convert or who were reluctant to just stop doing what they used to
> do. After all, if something was working for generations, people are often
> reluctant to toss it out just because the priests tells them to. Thst's
> found in every era and culture.

As far as I know, the texts we possess are much later that the conversion.
So they had little to do with it. In this way, I am afraid that they were
more black & white than grey.

> And I did not say that wells were uniquely Celtic or that they were not
> Christian; I pointed out that they were *characteristic* of Celtic practice
> in pre-Roman eras and continued into the Roman era.

If a practice is attested in all ancient Europe, then there maybe no point
to define it as "*characteristic* of Celtic practice".

> Ritual use of wells can
> be found all over the world. It was also used by Jews and was carried into
> Christian practice as part of that heritage as well as adapting
> pre-Christian European customs. Water plays a *very* powerful role in
> Christian and Jewish theology. And incidentally, I don't see what it has to
> do with the present discussion to inject that wells aren't specifically
> Celtic. My point was that they were part of practice in Celtic-speaking eras
> before Christianity, and that, in adapted form they continued in use after
> Christianity became dominant. (Whether or not the modern customs are a
> continuation of medieval is another issue.) My point was that no one came
> from Constantinople, to use your example, in the Christian era and
> *introduced* the custom to the Celtic-speaking areas.

But I didn't say that.

>The custom already
> existed and was adapted in the Christian era. Please note the difference
> between what I said and what you attributed to me.

I was just pointing the fact that if there were some celtic practices around
wells, this might not help us to understand what the Christians were doing
when they were doing apparently the same. I add that very often (but not
always I recognize) there is no proofs that these wells were used in
pre-christian times : it is just infered that if they are used in Christian
times it means that they were also used in pre-christian times as religious
(that is to say pagan) devices. A useful reference on the subject (it
concerns Brittany, but some of the conclusions are more general) is DEN»FLE,
Sylvette, (1994), "Croyances aux fontaines en Bretagne", Aix-en-Provence,
…disud, 1994, 208p.

>> You should take a look at the Council of Trente (1546). Any good Dictionary
>> of the Bible gives a fair account of that. The decision of this council was
>> even restated at the council of Vatican I (1870), meaning that it was still
>> in jeopardy.
> Excuse me, Alexis, but you're misinterpreting the purpose of such
> declarations. Sometimes such declarations simply mean they're re-affirming
> something that has come under attack. The Council of Trent re-established
> what was in common practice. Ditto for Vatican I. But that doesn't mean the
> canon wasn't established long before.

Well, common practice is not canonical practice or dogma : a common practice
has nothing universal, whereas the result of a council (oecumenical) is
supposed to be so. That is what councils are for : to decide what practice
or dogma is to be considered as canonical or not. Sometimes, positions were
even changing from one council to another.

Friendly, 
Alexis.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.HEANET.IE

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager