Unity - Working Together

Admin
Admin's picture
Posts: 1327
Joined: 2007-07-07

Druidic Dawn invites its various Celtic and Druid Associations, Groups and Orders members to a discussion which could lead to some form of unity between the various pathways which are current today.

This discussion is not limited to its community membership, but open to the wider internet Celtic and Druid community, who are encouraged to participate.

This exploration can either be held transparently in this public forum or alternatively within the community members accessible Serious Discussion forum. All who may wish to participate in the proposed discussion are governed by the terms and conditions of using this neutral virtual space.

Ideally speaking representative spokespersons are encouraged to participate who are in a position to speak for an Association, Group or Order, if they exisit. Alternatively we invite heads or leaders of Celtic and Druid Associations, Groups or Orders to participate.

Looking forward to a constructive debate!

 

 

--

Renard

Guardian of the Druidic Dawn



Fae
Fae's picture
Posts: 171
Joined: 2007-11-12
You are not alone!

I too know that we must do something to stop the destruction of what is sacred to us all. We can only continue to share the message of the winds with others and hope that they soon listen.

Take care my friend. 

 

--

Druidic Dawn Knowledge Base Moderator
All things are filled with knowledge
http://celticsageholistictherapy.com



attila
attila's picture
Posts: 154
Joined: 2007-11-25
I am glad I am not the only one seeing it

Hi fae, I am glad I am not the only one seeing it. We are in great times of change, the seeds we sow now will grow in our children’s hearts and world. Something inside says we cannot afford the comfort of not taking part, we are the kinds of people who get messages begging us to take notice of how the world is being destroyed. If we have a message in our hearts, then it is for us to give that to those who are too busy to listen to the winds.

Perhaps its our job lols



Fae
Fae's picture
Posts: 171
Joined: 2007-11-12
Harmony throughout the whole land.

Attila I agree with what you are saying, there are many issues that one voice for a large group of peoples carries more impact than thousands of little voices. I think the time is ripe for some sort of coalition of druid groups. There is much dismay worldwide of the destruction of sacred sites, as well as environmental issues that need us to speak up not singularly but as a group.

Singularly, one can assist the environment to the best of one’s abilities in your little piece of the world, but one voice against an industry who is deliberately destroying the land is a waste of time and energy.

These are a couple of the issues that I can think of that require the attention of all of us in a cooperative and well thought out manner.

 

 

--

Druidic Dawn Knowledge Base Moderator
All things are filled with knowledge
http://celticsageholistictherapy.com



attila
attila's picture
Posts: 154
Joined: 2007-11-25
We are on the negative side...

I actually think perhaps Harmony is a better word than Unity

Well said!

We are on the negative side seeing all of this on an internal basis, as if a druid council would take away our individual opinions etc etc. we should think of it in the opposite context ~ as a way to represent ourselves better to the outside world. After all internally there needs little change apart from working together, but how can you do even that effectively? On both levels you need a circle which joins all other circles ~ just like ancient society did.



Astrocelt
Posts: 753
Joined: 2007-09-15
Some thoughts....

Some thoughts……

One would imagine this might come about if there is a general desire from the various leadership of Druid related groups, and the communities which support them. Even those who might wish to create “peace throughout the land”, or even explore such possibilities of creating unity and indeed harmony, which drives from the former or latter.

After all, we can express our individual thoughts and views, when druidry is either consider an individual path or even a way of life.  There is no need I think to have such grand titles or even to be led by an appointed super duper “Arch-Druid”. Nor is it about forming a single body or creating a new worldwide Druid organisation of any kind.  

Alternatively views expressed here from the leaders of a Druid Order and a Druid Education establishment suggest they are interested in “unity-working together.” Both might be different pathways which suit different types of people within its membership. Indeed it’s likely to be the case within other membership to known Druid and Celtic Associations, which sits well within specific parameters of its membership ideologies. Albeit, a philosophy, a religion, a reconstruction, and so forth.  Such diversity should be celebrated and respected, yet it should not prevent people coming together or even working together for the benefit of their druidry or even druidry as a whole.

On the other hand one would have thought if there is to be a structure per se; the form it would take surely would arise from an amicable and respective discussion undertaken by such Druid leadership present; instead of the concept of the G8 perhaps a D2 or more might develop is just a suggestion.

At the end of the day, it might be viewed as the leaders of ADOA, ADF and OBOD, are coming together for the celebration of Lughnasdh, complete with a discussion panel, in California. The question is what is preventing it happening on a larger scale? Is it, druid membership ideologies; or the will of its leadership itself, or even prejudices which may be held preventing such possibilities occurring in the future?

Peace ~ astrocelt



Shakti
Posts: 50
Joined: 2008-11-22
Working together

Thanks for sharing your views, all. I pretty much agree with a lot of what has been said, so won´t add to it.

If ever this discussion lifts off from being "just" an intellectual conversation, I have the place where a Unity Conference could take place:

We are an OBOD Grove, the Lothlorien -Nemeton Grove, and we live smack in the middle of a forest 150 kms south of Barcelona, Spain, in a 108 acres property mostly made of woodland. We have the lodgings for a group to meet. So we´ll offer that, in the case this discussion, at some point, goes beyond "just ideas". This is my Grove´s way of contributing to this conversation. *grin*

Peace Under the Trees,

Shakti (Vivian).

http://www.earthsanctuary.net

http://earthsanctuary.wordpress.com

PS.- Adam and I are part of the same Grove, and are working in the same Project (ecopsychology and Earth-based Spirituality).

 



wyverne
wyverne's picture
Posts: 31
Joined: 2007-10-23
organic organisation

g'day,

druidry suits me because it is an organic organisation, like a forest. to me, the idea then is to discover to what extent we should be driving the organisation, supplying our own intentions and actively shaping our druidries around our them, and to what extent we should be simply observing and celebrating whatever is emerging as a result of natural growth.

some people like carefully controlled topiary, and some like wild, free exuberance in their forest/park/garden. druidry can incorporate both these extremes and everything in between, and all variants as well.

there will inevitably be the occasional discordant element, a disease threat, a battle between two trees for light and nutrients, and strategies for conflict resolution will arise naturally, through organic means, magical means, ritual and yes, active personal intervention and structured politics.

we'd need to be protected against peer-level judgment, eg, (mis)identification of some groups as 'weeds' or some trains of thought as 'disease' by groups or individuals who think they know druidic right from wrong. in short, we have to believe in the process and that it is happening on more than just the earthly dimension, and that we are unified within it in many more ways than just those that we can control.

the mere fact that we can all say yes to the title 'druid' unites us.

that said,

I actually think perhaps Harmony is a better word than Unity. Unity gives the sense of One. Harmony is many different elements blending and interacting together to create one beautiful sound. Like the Oran Mor/Great Song of the universe. 

i must add that this is one of the best of the many very wise things that have been said on this thread.Smile

blessing of this antipodean storm and its aftermath

wyverne /|\

 

--

dig we must



attila
attila's picture
Posts: 154
Joined: 2007-11-25
If a body is to be represented beyond itself

Hi fae,

Sounds ok, I would go with something like that though would prefer to not have councils, though I doubt if that would happen, it is more likely that we would have some kind of round table scenario, similar to what you say.

Btm, hi

Absolutely eco systems work as you say, when I said ‘domination of the strong over the weak’ I meant that predators have domination though that is balance by the ability of their pray to evade.

Imagine if a herd of buffalo decided to band together and charge at the lions [I remember a u-tube video where this actually happened], they would no longer be a threat. Hence what I meant by communion was not the comparative relationships, but a joining together of minds on given issues.

We can also go further by teaching beyond Druidry, at present we are mainly preaching to the choir - so to say [I know there is no preaching as such]. If a body is to be represented beyond itself, it needs a mechanism for this. For example if someone from govt or local govt ask how we feel on a given issue e.g. about something that may effect a sacred site, who would they ask? And would they get many differing answers even if most of us would agree generally.

Equally as an example of druidic expression; when I go to weylands smithy there is a small placard with a little basic info on what we don’t know about it more than what we do. We could petition for more info to be given, just a simple thing like ‘it’s a doorway into the celtic otherworld’ would be nice. I noticed tourists get a feeling of sacredness when they approached it, so perhaps a better description would help them understand why that is so.

This is an almost inconsequential thing compared with some issues, but it highlights that even for a simple thing you need one voice. A council would argue that there are many interpretations so why take one from one order etc, yet with one voice and a larger body behind that voice, we could be heard.

I absolutely agree on ritual and practices, philosophy etc. again this is where ‘If a body is to be represented beyond itself’ it has to be expressed in a more universal manner non-specific to each case. In short, what rituals etc that people do are not relevant to the overall effect of us all, however we do all believe in the awen and in liminality, then most importantly in respect for the earth.

We can be Buddhist-druids or christian-druids or whatever, it’s the same source by different names and belief systems. Each kind and each individual are a circle within a circle, we are winds in the weather, but there is an overall effect to that weather, which can be arrived at via debate and by voting. None of which would affect each individual only the effect of the weather ~ of our expression in the world.

The celtic dreamtime which extends to pan European then all the world, is a sublte undercurrent, which will be expressed weather or not we have any kind of centralisation. As I see it, here I am choosing to move with the wind as much as and including being my own wind.

“I think if we all spend more time being human beings and less time being druids then we would be closer to the Truth in all matters. In that is right speech and right action“.

I see your point though I don’t see the distinction between being a human being and a druid, I am a druid type human being, it is not something I can divide up.

I don’t think there is right speech and action ~ if there was and we all found it, that would be a mono-anthropomorphism where all people are the same. Fate made us different ‘genius is the result of the entire product of man, difference is the essential ingredient in that equation’. insert anything where the ‘genius’ notion is.

 

our universal expression is key!

 



Between the Mists
Posts: 23
Joined: 2007-10-30
There are many druid

There are many druid 'animals' with no general communion. The likely
outcome in nature would be dispersion, territorialism and domination of
the stronger over the weaker.

I think its quite fitting too...but for the very opposite reasons. That's not actually how an ecosystem functions. They are in fact systems of communion and not competition. Survival of the fittest does not mean, and never has meant survival of the strongest and dominion of the strong over the weak. Those who survive are literally those who fit into the general community and are able to function according to the overarching dynamics of the system as a whole. But they are seldom if ever centralized or hierarchical (though there is hierarchy between levels such as the way cells make up an organism--on the level of a single ecosystem however they tend to be relational). This is why I say we need stronger relationships between different druid groups, stronger dialogues. I don't see a particular lack of it, but as you say, why not go further? That much I agree with.

So what are the dynamics of druidism as a whole? I think one of the strongest features of the druid tradition, and what draws many people to it, is the very fact that there is no centralization, no universally recognized leaders, no prevailing trends in teaching. Something much more basic and subtle connects us as druids. I, for example, would probably have very little in common with most of the druid community. I'm not really a Pagan, aren't interested in the same kinds of rituals that are generally part of druidry, am non-theistic or pantheistic depending on the day, and identify fairly strongly with Buddhism. Yet, I can find connection with other druids and there is something we have in common that allows us to generally recognize one another as "related." I suspect that something is a shared dreamtime of Celtic culture, past or present--much more so even than the shared love of nature. As I pointed out, I have that in common with the Sierra Club too, but they aren't all druids. Everything beyond the cultural dreamtime I think--interpretations of stories, relationships to places, and specific practices--are an open question. If we want unity then I think whatever unity we will and can find will be found there and not in some elected bureaucracy that can speak to governments and the media on our behalf. I don't really feel that I personally need to speak to anyone as a druid. It's enough for me to speak to them as a human being.

A few years ago I posted a reflection around about the druid tradition, where it is and where it's going. I'm sure it can still be found on the OBOD board somewhere. A friend of mine wrote back talking about the Invisible Druid Order started by an aquaintence of his. The idea of the invisible druid (or at least how I understand it) is that your practice is not a public affair and that the service you do for the world is not "as a druid" but as a human being and that no one ever really knows what you're practicing. This doesn't necessarily preclude dialogue or being open. It's not something that's kept secret per se, it just isn't something flaunted and worn on the sleeve. You don't go around calling yourself Hawkstar Riversong and wearing costumes to the supermarket that make you look like you just got off the SCA bus. That's all very satisfying the ego but it is actually just another obstacle on the path. This kind of centralization I also see as an obstacle. We don't need someone to be our spokesperson. We each have a voice. If you're not using it then really that's your own problem. Start talking. Mary Oliver has a great poem to this affect, talking about the use of meditating on a hill and ends by saying "Be ignited, or be gone." We can all be ignited. It doesn't matter one bit if all the voices of druids are united as a single voice. If the matter at hand is the destruction of the Tara-Skryne valley then let all those who oppose that destruction be heard as a collective voice. We don't need someone to say "the druids oppose this." We can all of us say we, as human beings, all oppose this. It isn't just a religious, cultural, or ecological issue. It is a human issue. In fact, I would go beyond that and say it is an earth issue. All issues are earth issues and we can speak up on them all, support what we know is right to support and oppose what we know is right to oppose. We can come together, not just druids, but all of us (that's real multiculturalism there) and work together for these causes that we are passionate about. No elected twat necessary.

I think if we all spend more time being human beings and less time being druids then we would be closer to the Truth in all matters. In that is right speech and right action.

p.s.  I do however support the Celtic nations (much like Fae pointed out about the unity of the First People tribes in Canada) having a political voice.  That is a cultural matter however, and not a spiritual matter.  Most druids are not part of the social Celtic cultures even if we share in the Celtic dreamtime.  We have our own social groups. 



Fae
Fae's picture
Posts: 171
Joined: 2007-11-12
A page from the Six Nations

Greetings; personally I like the way the Six Nations operates here in Canada. Each of the six nations is composed of a number of different tribes (this is mostly governed by the region they live in) each tribe consists of between 10 – 20 different tribes with 200 – 300 tribe members, as a single voice they have no impact. So what they have done is elect an elder from each of those tribes, these elders sit on a council of the Six Nations. The Six Nations elect a council of elders (6), these are the people who would take the issues of the collective to 1) the public; 2) media 3) government. Now each tribe still maintains their own identity as well as their own traditions. But the collective issues are heard, just imagine a tribe of 200 with no voice or a council of 1000’s being heard and negotiated with. Sounds like a good idea to me. These elders do not get their place in the council due to age, but due to their ability to take the message from the grassroots out into the world. They are elected for a period of 3 years, if they are doing a great job they will be re-elected if not out they go. They do not receive recompense, although, their travel expenses are paid by the tribes.

--

Druidic Dawn Knowledge Base Moderator
All things are filled with knowledge
http://celticsageholistictherapy.com



attila
attila's picture
Posts: 154
Joined: 2007-11-25
your analogy to the situation being like an ecosystem is perfect

Eadhdeora

The philosophy for me is thus; you enter a circle of people and ask a question, what do you get back? …a whole host of replies! Yet of those many will be in concord some in opposition and others somewhere between. If the circles wish to be heard they ‘must’ speak with one voice or be a cacophony. hence debates and voting on all issues along with some kind of centralisation is needed.

I for one want to be effective in the world, I want my strong beliefs of universal respect for nature and humanity to be heard in a deafened world. At the moment we can only do this via our meditations etc, which is limiting in terms of time.

I see our point about the council, it’s a bit like a round table kinda thing. It is a good way to go about it, a council member for each circle ~ indeed a circle of circles.

Even with the best of intentions my problem with that would be where council members may start playing power games, each with their own agenda. Not to mention that the councils as a whole could and probably would end up acting on ‘behalf’ of the people! [can end up being self interested etc].

What is wrong with direct democracy ~ why do we need a select group to represent us rather than we represent ourselves? [via a voice/spokesperson]

If we don’t have groups we don’t need to make anyone do anything! You just set up online voting systems at your sites, then the members can all vote on a given issue and the votes all be counted together as one.

Equally I don’t think we have to go by celtic tradition, we are a merged peoples and the Germanic tradition is equally valid as are all others. Mores the point we should simply use the best model for us irrespective of traditions. I am sure that the ancient systems worked well for them, but we have to make one that works well for us as concerns our position in the world. We are a small body of people up against a very big body ~ one that is destroying our planet and our sacred sites etc.

Regional groups are a good thing but isn’t that pretty much how it works now? I see no reason why that would need to change as it works on a localised level.

_______________________

Btm, hi

The leadership could do many things both internal and external, a little centralisation wouldn’t hurt for the various schools and for collecting philosophical works, poetry etc, then putting it all in one place so that people can come and find out what modern druids are all about. Externally an arch-druid could put forwards our protests and petitions on given issues [e.g. tara], and would serve to mediate with authorities and other non druid groups and religious bodies.

Put it this way; I feel there will come a need for it even ‘if’ there is not one now!

You are right that I think all of us don’t want Druidry to become a religion, hence it is better to not have power groups but simply a speaker of our collective voice with no power of their own.

As dialogue is happening, what is wrong with taking that a step further?

My feeling are that Druidry is only just finding its spirituality, and mainly through liminality ~ something which is vital to understanding how druids of the past joined religion and teaching judging and politics together, and how it may do it in the future [even if in a different way].

Some druids are teachers and other aspects of the system, and we all need to play our role in educating in the workplace on all levels. This I feel can be done without even mentioning the term ‘druid’ [that our issues are not labelled off]. For my part I go to many non druidic forums and debate issues, I have made many friends and contacts, many of them Christians and Buddhists and they all listen! At work I speak about real issues from a druidic perspective again without coming across as religious.

I greatly believe in the circle of knowledge, that we can input wisdom and it will carry through the ethers to many an ear. This is why it is important to me to do what many have tried before and get a school of schools together. Such things I cannot do, nor can any specific group as has been seen in the past, so I feel the need for some manner [to be debated] of centralisation whilst keeping all the existing schools intact.

I think your analogy to the situation being like an ecosystem is perfect! There are many druid 'animals' with no general communion. The likely outcome in nature would be dispersion, territorialism and domination of the stronger over the weaker.

Thank you for you for your most interesting replies!

 



Between the Mists
Posts: 23
Joined: 2007-10-30
I’m slightly confused and

I’m slightly confused and boggled with aspects of this conversation.  I hear a lot of people saying they want representation and to be united under some leadership (whether it’s a full council or an individual, or a handful of individuals), and that these leaders will be there to make decisions and speak on behalf of all druids.  It raises a lot of questions:

Who would this leadership represent us to?

Again, speak on behalf of us to whom and about what?

Make decisions about what exactly?

What it seems to boil down to appears to be an attempt to emulate the organized religions in structure, possibly as a means of gaining legitimacy in the eyes of others (possibly to those others that we will be represented to…other religions, the media, the aliens from the planet Fargamaguxpsi IV?)

This would be, I think, in the very opposite of the modern currents which sees religion becoming increasingly irrelevant and decentralized, and the more vaguely defined and individual “spirituality” on the rise.  A decentralized tradition seems quite fitting to me for an ecological spirituality.

To be clear, I think dialogue is good and I think community is necessary.  But dialogue is happening.  It’s happening right here, its happening on the scores of other druidic and Celtic message boards, and its happening locally in areas with a stronger concentration of druidically-inclined people.  So what is not being said?  And if there is something significant not being discussed, why not?  Granted, a lot of the dialogue tends to get stuck or derail into discussions about how we define druidry anyway.  Community—real community—happens offline and locally.  There doesn’t need to be centralized leadership for any of that to happen.

Druidry is one of those religions which doesn’t have much of an exoteric form to it.  Some people do the whole robes and staff thing, and most people get together (or get away from others) to mark the festivals in some way, but that’s about as far as it seems to go.  I think the “definition” of druidry is so often stated to be a personal thing because it mostly seems to involve the individual practices of people.  I’ve always noticed that druidry and paganism in general seems to have an odd relationship with contemplative practice.  It’s not true of everyone by any means, but there seems to be more interest in rituals and community building than meditation or other forms of practice.  There’s certainly no basic druidic practice that everyone does in the way that, for example, Buddhism is so closely connected with meditation.  So there’s druidry without much sense of guidance in terms of “esoteric” or contemplative practice but also fairly lacking in an agreed upon exoteric form.  It seems no wonder that people are craving something.

Perhaps that is what people are trying to fill with this idea of uniting druids under some common leadership or principles.  What we really want is an understanding of how we each fit in with the wider system and community.  I think that’s a question for each person to discover on their own though and that the answer is much deeper and more complex than doling out our common traits and values.  It doesn’t really mean much to me that we all have some reverence for nature.  I have that in common with the Sierra Club too.

What I do think though is that relationships between the diverse groups could be stronger.  That’s about honoring the relationships though and not about some contrived attempt to unite them all under a common banner.  I look at the situation like an ecosystem.  We have a variety of organisms and energy/information flows through all of them within the common system which we inhabit.  Could those relationships be strengthened?  Yes.  Does everyone have to talk to and get along with everyone?  No.  I think that’s asking too much and is unrealistic.  There’s a lot of individuals in druidry and lot of groups and everyone has different ideas about what it all is—not all of them are compatible and some are downright contradictory.  It’s a big, beautiful, messy, complex system.

p.s. Sorry if my own post seems slilghtly confused and boggled.  I'm thinking through a headache here, so my mind is all over the place.



Eadha Deora
Eadha Deora's picture
Posts: 193
Joined: 2007-10-02
council and regional groups

Personally, I very strongly do NOT like the idea of one single individual as the head Arch Druid of all druids. It is different to have leaders of orders, groves and groups, but far more complicated when it gets to one individual representing ALL. Downright impossible actually. Although at many levels it is a good idea, I feel it has far more pitfalls than are necessary to expose ourselves too.

Instead, drawing from the patterns set forward in ancient Brehon and Welsh law,  I don't see why we couldn't just elect a council, with one person set up as the spokesperson for the council. The council would be made up of a single or handful of representatives from each group willing to participate, just like the Irish and very probably the Welsh chose certain members of each family group or unit to represent them and made decisions on behalf of the whole at the tribal councils. Indeed, this was how leaders were elected, through representatives. It is not a very far leap to imagine that the Druids of yore operated within a very similar manner.

So I still come back to it that there be a council or even as Fae said, a federation. But I am  unsure about creating unity amongst all druids. Is this even possible? I mean, we can't FORCE people into one group en masse. Imagine trying to unite ALL the different varieties of Native American traditions?!?! There is certainly LOADS of room for dialogue and inter-traditional and inter-regional interaction. These are very healthy and very necessary. 

But at the same time, the Celtic tradition, even within a pagan Celtic setting, is still very diverse and when you think about it, boils down to two things: region and approach. 

Druidry will be drawn on and inspired by one some or all of the ancient and surviving cultures and traditions of the 'Celtic' peoples ... be they Welsh, Scottish, Breton, Cornish, Irish, or Manx ... or even ancient Celts from Germany or Italy and all the other places the Celts got to ... New Zealand, North America, Australia, etc! These regions, both traditional and modern, create natural boundaries WITHIN Druidry, just like the regional differencecs and variations within Native American traditions or within Aborigines in Australia or those in Africa or whereever. Therefore,  I think these boundaries should be used as one way of creating BRIDGES.

For example:  It is far more doable to try and get groups WITHIN regions to work together, meet up, intermingle. So those who are druids within Wales have on one level more in common amongst themselves than those in other parts of the world ... locality for instance. Regions could then extend to countries which then could extend to internationally. And of course you'll have international communities like OBOD that are spread out everywhere. Regional unity is very important though because there are far more practical day-to-day things that groups could do, working together.  This is also far more accesible for the druids who are not on the internet or who can't travel very easily. Then through their regions, they could be connected to druids across the globe. 

Druidry also has boundaries created by personal or group approach. Some of us are reconstructionalists, others of us are eco-druid-warriors, some are shamanistic, or we could be Christian druids, Buddhist druids, Hindu druids, Elven druids, or a myriad of OTHER non-definable approaches. Therefore, a general inclusiveness would have to be engendered in all the various groups. Unfortunately, I know of various druids individually and colleectively who are so dogmatic that being inclusive is not in their vocabulary. 

Therefore, although it is a beautiful dream to strive for, instead of working towards unity, or as i still prefer to say, harmony amongst all druids, instead we'd be better off getting as many people and groups and individuals inspired and involved as possible. The others who don't want to be involved ... that is their choice, and most likely their loss. Otherwise, that's their decision. But that shouldn't hold us back. 

Anyway so to summarize my thoughts at the very end, I presently like the idea of having regional unity and from those regions and then of course from the big international groups, electing individuals to a world-wide council, with one or two or three individuals chosen as spokespersons. And if people really DID have to for their own comfort have an 'arch-druid', then I suggest it be for a period of one year or two years,  like a term of office, to give a quick cycle of ideas, leadership ability and standards. This also promotes unity because then groups and individuals are less likely to break off when they have the opportunity to put forward THEIR thoughts and individuals for election the year next. 

blessings of peace

--

'Just once let what is in your care grow wild enough to see the world through its own eyes.'

http://www.feralpoetry.com

 



attila
attila's picture
Posts: 154
Joined: 2007-11-25
I think the leaders will

I think the leaders will take notice if we post on the corresponding forums, I shall keep plugging away at the forums I go to for sure. There is great potential but the problems need to be ironed out before anything is done proper.

 



CalonDdraig
CalonDdraig's picture
Posts: 250
Joined: 2007-10-30
I think this is just going

I think this is just going to be a hypothetical excerscise at this time... as you mentioned, it seems our Druidic leaders are happy to sit on their behinds and not talk to each other or us, as is their wont. I must mention my admiration for C.S Ceallaigh S. MacCath-Moran and Con Connor for actually taking part in this discussion... 

Just an idea, but perhaps if everyone who is contributing to this thread emailed Philip Car-Gomm, Emma Restall-Orr, etc, it might inspire their thought and contribution to this debate? For I think this is a very pertinent topic of discussion, now more than ever!

~CalonDdraig 



Adam
Adam's picture
Posts: 54
Joined: 2008-11-22
Is this just going to be a

Is this just going to be a hypothetical excercise or is something actually going to happen with this? Where are our illustrious Druid leaders in our time of need? Where are our Carr-Gomms, Restall-Orrs and other double-barrelled Druids?

Are there any examples of inter-Druid cooperation going on already? Druid Network? Druidic Dawn? COBDO (should I really be mentioning that one?)? Others??? How do they work (or not work)?



Adam
Adam's picture
Posts: 54
Joined: 2008-11-22
I cannot imagine that

I cannot imagine that different Druid groups create a common heirarchy between them. Many of them find it hard enough being organised within them. What I can imagine is that a team be assembled, elected from the different groups, that have no executive powers of decision making but merely act as a face and voice outwardly for the purposes of making a "united front" towards public and political spheres.

I can see that working, as long as they follow a "script" agreed upon by the different groups. But that wouldn't make them an Arch-Druid by any stretch of the imagination. But it could become a driving wedge in Druidry's public image as long as the "face" or "voice" was carefully selected.

Another thing is if the Druid groups get together for a practical purpose, like protecting sacred sites or ecological habitats, then a "crack team" might be elected specifically for that purpose. Or perhaps a research or archive team for the purposes of sharing ideas. But neither of those would constitute "arch-druid" either.

I was reading Jean Markale's king of the Celts recently and his description of King Arthur and Celtic monarchy in general was interesting. King Arthur, in this case, is not seen as a ruler of Britain but more of a "bodyguard" for various British tribes against "outside invaders." Like Vercingetorix and Boudicca, King Arthur only aquired great power during times of invasion. The Celtic leader would rally the different tribes behind them against a common enemy. When there was no common enemy a King or High King had limited power (a certain King with his feet on a virgins lap during times of peace comes to mind).

Perhaps, in the same style, the various groups could elect a "king" or "arch-Druid" and a team for them to work with. But then what "enemy" have we got that we need to unite "against"? Other religions? Our own non-Druidic/Celtic societies? Misunderstanding about us? Global warming?

A full blown "arch-druid" and accompanying "priesthood" I don't think will work. But a "driving wedge", a tool of public image, for the various Druid groups might be a starting point.



attila
attila's picture
Posts: 154
Joined: 2007-11-25
direct democracy

I would go for direct democracy, both to vote who the arch-druid would be thence also on each and every issue. Hence effectively they would simply be a voice for the people with no power themselves bar their own vote which we all would have.

Everyone from all involved orders could vote on such things.

There would be no need for agreement nor disagreement, each issue would be taken in turn and voted on. In the main it would not make any difference if we had an arch-druid or not, but to be effective in the world we need one voice on certain issues like sacred sites ~ and I think we all agree on preserving those!

Personally I would like all the tourist crap taken out of the main circle at Glastonbury, and for Stonehenge and all sacred sites to be part of british [or irish etc] heritage and preserved as such.

I don’t think other religious issues/beliefs should be affected. This would need to be fundamental before we even begin. One word; freedom! …and the ability to express it ~ which needs the voices of the many to be heard as one! This is what an effective democracy should be, e.g. where we vote for blair and not war, our vote would be one for blair and another for war.

 



CalonDdraig
CalonDdraig's picture
Posts: 250
Joined: 2007-10-30
I'm not entirely sure how

I'm not entirely sure how effective one arch druid would be... One person speaking on behalf of all is always going to be a possible power house of things that people don't want... you can find real-world examples of this in politics; I might have voted for Tony Blair, but did I vote to go to war? Not necesarily. Case in point. Also, how is this individual chosen? By the heads of orders or be the membership of orders? This could get very complex and very convoluted!

Various individuals are currently claiming to be speaking for all Druids, I can say they certainly are not... this strikes me as arogance. True democracy is a very hard thing to find, but it certainly isn't found in one person... surely?

However, perhaps representitives of many could combine? Not sure if they'd ever agree, but it's got to be better than one person on his own? 

I'm interested to hear other people's views here - and these views are not necesarily my own, I am playng devils advocate on the issue of one person representing all, although personally I'm against it... 

 Thanks to all for making this such a fantastic discussion... I'm heartened by everyone's approaches and although not in agreement, we are sharing certain ideals and hopefully this topic can help us outwardly express them together.

Blessings,

~CalonDdraig 



attila
attila's picture
Posts: 154
Joined: 2007-11-25
Together we stand...

Going by the debate we had over at obod [about dis-pater], I quite like the idea of an arch-druid priesthood, gathered together as one although with differing beliefs. An arch-druid would be a single leader nearest to the centre/source, and would serve to unite in voice though not in particular practice.

For example, when issues arise where e.g. sacred sites are at risk, then a single leader and overall priesthood would serve to amass and unite us all under one banner.

A vague splattering of voices means nothing to authorities, a combined, unified effort with a spokesperson would have far more powerful effect in a democracy.

From what I can tell the ancients used some form of democracy [don’t ask me to site sources though lols], and one would think that even with multiple deity worship, they also found a unity. This is why the romans considered them a threat moreso than the tribes.

If they can do it we can! There is no need for dogma as we all still have our own beliefs.

It doesn’t matter so much about the ancients, it matters about us now, any number of other religions could take centre stage and start making us comply ~ even if that religion is atheism! As I see it the future is problematic to say the least, there may come a time when we need strength [if we don’t already] but wont have it.

Together we stand, divided we fall ~ as they say.

 



Adam
Adam's picture
Posts: 54
Joined: 2008-11-22
I don't see Druid groups

I don't see Druid groups sharing principles, except to the extent that we all use the word "druid" and somehow identify with it. I think that is the one and only principle that could work.

But then how could we then "work together" and organise ourselves. Sharing information is a good one, and I think could work well. There is a Yahoo group I'm on called Druid Wisdom Exchange. Funnily enough they've got a rule of NO POLITICS, although they have created a separate Yahoo Group for just that purpose.

Still, this group is an example of individual Druids "working together," not of Druid Orders.

How it could be organised I imagine could be a bit like a confederation type deal; a collection of autonomous groups, each organising themselves internally (such as defining Druidry or heirarchical or administrative structures) as they want but with a shared agreement between them to facilitate some inter-Druid Order relationships.

I know of one inter-Druid organisation but to name it might provoke something that would distract this thread from its original intention and make it devolve. However, what examples of inter-Druid organisations or agreements are there, what is their intention and what is the nature of their member groups?



Mythagobaz
Mythagobaz's picture
Posts: 81
Joined: 2008-09-06
I think that is very

I think that is very sensible approach. Generally fraternal druids avoid religion or politics because of the division it can cause.

 

I would be all for sharing information on sacred sites, history and philosophy as well

 

 

--

"May the good deeds of Druids be as numerous as the leaves on the Oak and as pure as the berries on the Mistletoe"



Ottawa Seed Group
Posts: 19
Joined: 2007-09-30
>I therefore would resist

>I therefore would resist any campaign to bring us all together in one
great pagan religion, or even one great druid one, for such a >campaign
would exclude many, and would anyway be doomed to fail.

 

I think "druidry" is far too ill-defined to seek "unity", other than in the unity of goodwill we should extend to all peoples. For some, druidry isn't a religion, but a philosophy, for others it isn't a pagan religion, but a form of their Chrstianity, and for some others it is a non-theistic pursuit. To achieve something approaching unity, other than in the broadest terms (we are all brothers and sisters) would require some sort of articulation of what druidry is, and whenever that question is possed, I usually only see statements about individualism...it is a personal path, it is an inner jouney, the individual decides what it means to them, etc....all fine and good,  but it doesn't seem to be an  "outward" looking "spirituality" (if it is even that), but often a navel-gazing pass time.

 

I think it would be possible to come up with some universally shared values...variations on the Golden Rule, don't pollute, etc....that we could all agree on, but would it be druidry, or just generally accepted ideals of all humanity? 

 

What makes druidry unique?



Mythagobaz
Mythagobaz's picture
Posts: 81
Joined: 2008-09-06
Shared values

I think this has raised some really good and interesting comments. I think the best we would arrive at are some shared or common values particularly relating to Druids role in the community

 

"May the good deeds of Druids be as numerous as the leaves on the Oak and as pure as the berries on the Mistletoe"

--

"May the good deeds of Druids be as numerous as the leaves on the Oak and as pure as the berries on the Mistletoe"



phagos
phagos's picture
Posts: 19
Joined: 2007-09-23
United in respect

< Perhaps not an idea for global Druidic unity, but one little idea I had was to have "twinned groves".>

 

Yes a good idea which does happen from time to time in my expereince, albeit informally.

 In case my previous comments were misconstrued, my personal point is that goodwill and respect between the pagan movements will allow us to unite over certain issues as necessary but the differences between us, even between druid orders, even within an order between the groves, is actually a great strength and should not be seen as a problem. These differences are the result of the local members, the location and local deities, and the traditions and aims of that particular grove etc.

 I therefore would resist any campaign to bring us all together in one great pagan religion, or even one great druid one, for such a campaign would exclude many, and would anyway be doomed to fail. A campaign to end the sometimes quite horrible treatment of pagans to each other - on message boards and other forms, which is not only painful to watch but also does such great damage to our reputation and credibility, would get my full support.

In peace

Shaun. 

 

--

As we become light, the light becomes conscious.



CalonDdraig
CalonDdraig's picture
Posts: 250
Joined: 2007-10-30
Perhaps not an idea for

Perhaps not an idea for global Druidic unity, but one little idea I had was to have "twinned groves". Check out this post: http://www.druidicdawn.org/node/1713 - seperate post as I didn't want to detract from this thread, but thought it would be pertinant to mention!

Blessings all,

~CalonDdraig 



Astrocelt
Posts: 753
Joined: 2007-09-15
Why?

Maybe the question should be rephrased...

Why shouldn't there be some form of unity and working together?

How many of us often pledges "Peace throughout the land." 

 

 



Astrocelt
Posts: 753
Joined: 2007-09-15
Why

May be the question should be Why shouldn't there be some form of unity and working together?

Rather than just why?

 



Admin
Admin's picture
Posts: 1327
Joined: 2007-07-07
The position of Druidic Dawn

The position of Druidic Dawn in this thread is quite simple it’s a neutral space and its non political, which is in service to its membership and indeed the larger Celtic and Druid internet community which may visit. It too is a space for what has been indicated,  as a place for ‘inter-druidic dialogue’.

Both the public and members knowledge base, expresses the like mindedness of the inter-Druidic and Celtic community, in the way the resources have been freely shared, with consent for the benefit of all visitors to this site and its community. There are members’ forums as indicated relating to 'Working Together'.  This is available for those wishing to explore such benefits  with its various linked in associations, groups and orders present in the community. Additionally there are other forums which allowing for inter dialogue across Druidic and Celtic groups which encourages learning and the sharing of knowledge. In both cases they are there if they wish to be used by its community.

Yet the subject is not Druidic Dawn, but whether there is a desire of some sort of “Unity or Working Together” for the benefit of what Druidry is or might become. How this evolves or ripples in dependant on the various types of druids or druidry. For instance can it work with Celtic Reconstructionists or visa versa, in turn can they both work with Fraternal Druids or likewise.

One would like to congratulate Avalon Druid Order; Irelands Druid School; and individual members of OBOD for their opinions, inclusive of the solitaire individuals, who have shared their thoughts, to date transparently. 

--

Renard

Guardian of the Druidic Dawn



phagos
phagos's picture
Posts: 19
Joined: 2007-09-23
Unity - why ?

Hi all

 As usual (IMO) even trying to get into this area of debate is sooo difficult. My personal feeling is that we are still saddled with the western, christian notion of unification, doctrinal agreement, common creed etc.

 As a child I was raised as an irish catholic, at eighteen I resigned.

 I love the pagan world and particularly druidry (OBOD druid) and I celebrate the differences between us all, and also the way we come together in ritual in our local grove, united by the purpose of celebrating the turning wheel of the seasons.

At the same time I feel the deeper spiritual element is very much an individual thing, I feel my souls journey is unique, unique to me, and I rebel against any attempt to compromise my inner path.

 So in summary I believe the best way to find unity in the pagan world is through individual campaigns and issues, and through group rituals and even camps etc. The most important thing for me is respect. Respect for my path, respect for everyone elses, respect for this earth, and all life.

Unity within our differences and relinquishing the need to be 'right' except to oneself, oh what a world we would then have.

Shaun.

 

 

--

As we become light, the light becomes conscious.