Graeme Bailey wrote:
> Why should the nature and existence of virtues change with time?
> On the other hand there seems to be mountains of evidence
> that this Christian message was is and will be accepted by all
> types and cultures and races all around the world...
> and was accepted very early by the Gaels
> ie it has shown itself satisfying and true as a 'universal' religion
Except, of course, for the Muslims, Hindu, Taoists and Buddhists, and a
number of the "new" religions pooing out of nowhere all over the western
world. Even more, what christian message do you mean? Catholic?
Orthodox? Protestant? Jehova's Witnesses?
> Is this true? Do people kill as part of true Christian doctrine,
> or in spite of it?
Depends upon what variant of christianity you follow. The crusaders
killed as part of the true christian doctrine at their time. So did the
members of the Inquisition.
> What is new about killing, death, and factionalism?
> What of paganism, is there war and murder in these systems,
> and is it justified?
As much or not as those in christianity. There's no reason to assume
that one is superior to the other.
> My understanding is that the actual beliefs of the Celtic pagans
> were 'secret' therefore probably shameful,
They were definitly neither secret nor shameful, at least if we can
reconstruct anything at least partly correct of pagan Celtic religion -
which we actually can. They were not put in writing, but this doesn't
make them inferior or shameful.
> and that at an early time,before most of the written evidence, there was a
> distinct history of Christianity as a force opposing the Celtic idolatry...
> We have written evidence of this ...
> Now it might be interesting to see and try to deduce what pagan
> Gaels believed, but for the love of God let's not start *doing*
> the paganism again...
And why not, actually? If it is adopted for the modern situation, what's
wrong in praying to Lugh or the Dagda or the Morrigan or Boand? As long
as modern pagans don't sacrifice humans? If they are happy with it, why
should this be wrong?
> What of the documentary evidence that the Roman pagans wrote:
> that the Christians were shaming them by doing good works, looking after
> widows, feeding the poor, and burying the dead etc...
This would interest me, too. I've never heard of anything like this. In
what sources is this in?
> What of the pagan kings? What of the destroying pagans who
> wrote nothing, built nothing, and just went on rampaging campaigns of
> wholesale murder?
Like which? I know of not a single pagan group that did what you
describe here. Perhaps they lived their lives in different ways than we
do, maybe they trusted in oral tradition instead of in written
tradition, perhaps they built their houses from wood not stone, perhaps
they even lived in tents - so what? What makes stone buildings and
written tradition superior and less murderous than those others? You
should free yourself from that rather dubious picture of the savage
barbarians outside the area of influence of the light of civilisation -
> The Inquisition, the genocide in Central America, the Crusades...
> these are not Christian events, ie there is nothing in Christianity
> that could justify these crimes...
So why do you think that the atrocities commited by pagans were
requirements of their religious systems? That they did not commit such
atrocities in spite of their religions, like you claim to be true for
the christian faith? I really don't see the logic behind your argument!
RAY - Mag.phil. Raimund KARL
Universität Wien, Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte
A-1190 Wien, Franz Klein Gasse 1
E-Mail: <[log in to unmask]>
Visit the Celtic-L Resources Page at
Privat: A-1120 Wien, Hasenhutgasse 7-11/9/4
Tel/AB/Fax: (+43 1) 8103629 oder mobil: (+43 676) 3048830