|
Post by Heron on Oct 3, 2010 18:59:30 GMT -1
This seems to be occupying a lot of comment space. I wonder why I am feeling so indifferent to it?
From TDN's point of view it means more than just a vague status thing, money given to charities is not subject to tax, so TDN can claim of third as much again of all subs and other contributions back from the Inland Revenue on behalf of the contributors. They say that this was not their main reason, but even on just 350 members that's a tidy bit more income for them. So for them there are various pay-offs. But for the rest of us (trying to bask in reflected glory?) I can't see that it will make any difference at all. It doesn't give 'legal status' to Druidry in general, and only gives limited 'legal status' to TDN in respect of financing their operations.
For individual TDN members it would be possible to tell them that you'll claim the tax back yourself and thereby get a small financial benefit. Otherwise why would it be of any significance at all to anyone outside TDN?
|
|
|
Post by arth_frown on Oct 3, 2010 19:11:49 GMT -1
Personally I find the definition of druidry so open that just about anyone pagan could probably fit within it. And that's the other side of the debate going around in my head. They did consult the other big druid organisations on this. With all this free advertising there has been a lot of people applying for membership to TDN TDN press release druidnetwork.org/files/core/CC%20and%20Conference%20press%20release.pdf
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Oct 3, 2010 20:26:29 GMT -1
financially it might mean up to 25% more cash, which isnt really all that much when you look at the number of members they have. i think we should just wait and see where this leads if anywhere. i cant help shake the feeling its a lot of fuss about nothing. i did note on the press release it says a talk on the Brythonic tradition at the conference
|
|
|
Post by Craig on Oct 4, 2010 16:10:01 GMT -1
Well the Daily Mail have waded in with a completely predictable comment piece by Melanie Phillips. Apparently there were so many comments against her point of view that the Comments section is now "temporarily unavailable".
|
|
|
Post by dreamguardian on Oct 4, 2010 16:52:51 GMT -1
Some time ago, I would of been genuinely really pleased. But like heron, I don't really care now, TBH.
It does piss me off that they claim to be the anceint pagan religion of Britain when they're clearly anything but! Although thats pissed me off for ages anyway ;D
It'll either come to nothing or may actually be a good thing in the long term
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Oct 18, 2010 18:41:42 GMT -1
For those of you who don't know me, I work for a well known Heating Appliance manufacturer and as such,, am not allowed any holidays between the end of November until the end of January for operational reasons, i.e. because of the increased workload in the heating season. Therefore, midwinter solstice is usually out of the question for me as a full day observance. With the recent CC ruling, I decided this year to apply for the 21st as a holiday with a view that there was nothing to loose and to test if the ruling had been picked up by my employers. This meant also advising my manager about my spirituality, a coming out process, so to speak so as to demonstrate why this date was important. Anyway, they are quite strict in enforcing this rule, which is entirely understandable, and he contacted the company's HR dept. Anyway, a hour and a half later I had a return phone call and I expected to be informed, politely, that my request had been declined. Imagine my surprise therefore, to be told that my request had been granted. Now it is possible that the company I work for may be very understanding in considering religious holidays, but I was suitably impressed that they realized the significance of the 21st of December in Paganism and it left me wondering if the recent ruling may have had a an influence in their decision. RR
|
|
|
Post by potia on Oct 18, 2010 20:14:57 GMT -1
There's been information on standard pagan holidays in things like ACAS guidelines on Faith and Belief Equality for some time now. The Charity Commission decision will have raised the profile of the Druid end of things a bit further but it's the legal guidelines that will really have made a difference. Delighted that you have got 21st Dec off in any case
|
|
|
Post by arth_frown on Oct 19, 2010 6:44:39 GMT -1
Great news RR.
|
|
|
Post by dreamguardian on Oct 20, 2010 15:13:50 GMT -1
Delighted that you have got 21st Dec off in any case Me too, mate
|
|
|
Post by Francis on Oct 20, 2010 17:45:00 GMT -1
This meant also advising my manager about my spirituality, a coming out process, so to speak so as to demonstrate why this date was important. Fair play for coming out at work RR. Certainly not a trivial step for you.
|
|
|
Post by stefan on Nov 8, 2010 21:35:02 GMT -1
I'm a little confused? I thought Brython were seeking to evolve totally independently of the Neo Druid movement? Has there been some shift since I've been away?
Cant you see for whom this status serves? Its probably bad form to spell it out.
Surely in the 21st Century we've learnt enough about religion to know its quite an evil controlling device. Whats wrong with cutting the apron strings and being allowed to think for ourselves? What could a distorted modern definition have to do with Druidry? The very idea is absurd. I thought all this had been chewed over many months ago?
Do you really think Druidry is any more enlightend than any other religion? If Druidry were the main religious power in the country today it would be the most vile thing imaginable. Their leaders are not self aware enough not to abuse the power. How they would sharpen their knives in the contest to become Arch Druid.
|
|
|
Post by Francis on Nov 8, 2010 23:27:22 GMT -1
I'm a little confused? I thought Brython were seeking to evolve totally independently of the Neo Druid movement? Has there been some shift since I've been away? Cant you see for whom this status serves? Its probably bad form to spell it out. Whilst having no need to justify ourselves to your good self or indeed anybody else I think I can clarify. As Arth said the Charities Commission ruling is irrelevant to this. The ACAS guidelines on Faith and Belief have contained information on the typical Pagan Feast days for a while now. We do not approach this under a neo-Druid umbrella as you disingenuously suggest. We are ultimately a group whose approach is a form of Earth Based Spirituality, which we root in what imagery and tradition we can recover of our pre-christian ancestors. Inevitably the pattern (although not necessarily the specific dates) of the standard 'pagan' wheel of the year has, for the most part, relevance to us. The cycles of seasons, agriculture and the sun, whether misappropriated by some groups to a meaningless fluff of going through the motions, can't be abandoned or ignored by us for the sake of apparent distance between ourselves and some others. We ARE a Pagan group - that's by definition and inescapable, whatever the gap we may vainly claim between ourselves and other neo-pagan groups. The ACAS guidelines exist to the benefit of ourselves and all notionally pagan groups - note not Druid groups but Pagan groups. RedRaven described the importance of 21 Dec with respect to Pagans not Druids. The only person talking about Druids here, in this context, is You Stefan!
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Nov 9, 2010 15:44:18 GMT -1
I'm a little confused? I thought Brython were seeking to evolve totally independently of the Neo Druid movement? Has there been some shift since I've been away? No, no change. we are sily discussing something that is going on at the moment. you will notice no mention of us aligning with druidry at all. Surely in the 21st Century we've learnt enough about religion to know its quite an evil controlling device. Whats wrong with cutting the apron strings and being allowed to think for ourselves? What could a distorted modern definition have to do with Druidry? The very idea is absurd. I thought all this had been chewed over many months ago? incorrect. People are evil and controlling. besides, didnt you yourself say we needed more religousness as that is what was missing? Do you really think Druidry is any more enlightend than any other religion? If Druidry were the main religious power in the country today it would be the most vile thing imaginable. Their leaders are not self aware enough not to abuse the power. How they would sharpen their knives in the contest to become Arch Druid. could you point out where anyone has suggested it is more enlightened? im not sure if you are trying to provoke but i dont quite see what you are getting riled up about. we have been getting on with things - see www.dunbrython.org.uk for an example. Lee
|
|
|
Post by dreamguardian on Nov 9, 2010 16:28:50 GMT -1
I'm a little confused? I thought Brython were seeking to evolve totally independently of the Neo Druid movement? We have. We're are evolving as Lee has already pointed out. It is a gradual process with silent periods as well as manic bursts of development. We are thinking for ourselves. And in fairness, so are the membership & caretakers of TDN, thats the reason why it's a mish-mash & many are trying to find some sort of order & structure. The ancient paganisms of Britain were probably far more controlling than any of the mainstream religions of today! No, not at all. Not too sure of you are trying to say in your whole post. Can you clarify please?
|
|
|
Post by stefan on Nov 9, 2010 23:20:42 GMT -1
I was going to delete this because none of it is adequate, but clumsy as it is, it steers a rough direction to my thoughts on the subject...
Arh forgive me, perhaps a bull in the china shop posting. I see I have over-reacted with some level of intense feeling associated to this recent event. Intense feeling, alarm and a strong sense of suspicion.
So why does Druidry becoming more empowered, more accepted, more recognized become such a cause for concern? Its so difficult to say what I really think without sounding like a complete bitch offloading personal opinions about individual people.
That I know is bad form and really only damaging to myself and how I would be perceived by others. It may not be regarded as honorable or quite the done thing. Part of me also thinks what the hell, speak your mind, it happens to be something you feel very passionate about and indeed I would mean every word of it with the conviction and belief that it needs to be said. Not by a deranged ranting hot head, but because its important. Perhaps a bit like smashing up stalls in the temple. No I don't think I'm JC, its just an appropriate allusion.
However I think no one here is ignorant of the current Druid culture so perhaps I have said all I need to without making it personal and no I'm not just pointing the finger at one person.
I think I was misunderstood about religiousness. I think what I meant was a greater focus on theology and practice, certainly not organizations, or structures, or power bases. I've given all that crap up and have done so with no envy cast to wards others. Please believe me there is no bitterness. It was my personal learning curve from Flag Fen. I gave away whatever so called Druid power I may have had and its the best thing I have ever done. Its allowed me to see things more objectively.
So on a calmer footing with any signs of cats claws retracted. I personally think religions across the board, in the long term, after the honeymoon period is over, are extremely bad news. What Flag Fen taught me is that no one should be elevated into a position of power associated to matters of the spirit. No one is deserving of that office, its something we can manage quite well enough for ourselves.
My strong belief is that in Druidry it is the priests who are worshipped.
Therefore, why does Druidry want to become more empowered? Why is it so important for its voice to be heard?
|
|
|
Post by potia on Nov 10, 2010 8:41:28 GMT -1
So on a calmer footing with any signs of cats claws retracted. I personally think religions across the board, in the long term, after the honeymoon period is over, are extremely bad news. What Flag Fen taught me is that no one should be elevated into a position of power associated to matters of the spirit. No one is deserving of that office, its something we can manage quite well enough for ourselves. While I can see your point here I think you are also in danger of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Yes when anyone becomes more enamoured of their position of power in their community than how they serve that community you can get problems. But most people at some stage in their lives will need others to help and guide them through difficult or exilarating times and experiences. Those people who are turned to again and again to fill such roles in any faith have power and responsibility. It is how they use the power and responsibility given to them by their community that is the important thing. At times I have been turned to by others for help and I hope I have been able to do a good job. Equally there are times I turn to others. There is nothing wrong with putting power into another's hands if you can trust them with it. There is nothing wrong with accepting power put into your hands if you can trust yourself not to misuse it but as with all walks of life there are those that will abuse and misuse such things. Is it better for there to be some form of organisation to judge someone's worthiness and possibly to help train them or better that any charismatic individual can step forward and say "come follow me"? I don't really know at the moment but I tend towards the former as the better option. For me it is better still to choose aid from those I know and from the abilities they have already demonstrated but I accept that for others that may not always be possible.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Nov 10, 2010 9:46:57 GMT -1
While I can see your point here I think you are also in danger of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Yes when anyone becomes more enamoured of their position of power in their community than how they serve that community you can get problems. But most people at some stage in their lives will need others to help and guide them through difficult or exilarating times and experiences. Those people who are turned to again and again to fill such roles in any faith have power and responsibility. It is how they use the power and responsibility given to them by their community that is the important thing. At times I have been turned to by others for help and I hope I have been able to do a good job. Equally there are times I turn to others. There is nothing wrong with putting power into another's hands if you can trust them with it. There is nothing wrong with accepting power put into your hands if you can trust yourself not to misuse it but as with all walks of life there are those that will abuse and misuse such things. Is it better for there to be some form of organisation to judge someone's worthiness and possibly to help train them or better that any charismatic individual can step forward and say "come follow me"? I don't really know at the moment but I tend towards the former as the better option. For me it is better still to choose aid from those I know and from the abilities they have already demonstrated but I accept that for others that may not always be possible. But is it better that it be an organisation, or that it be simply rooted in a culture of skeptical enquiry. We have seen a few folk enter Caer Feddwyd over the years I've been here, to announce their allegiance to some particular model only to disappear very quickly when that that model is gone over in that spirit of skeptical enquiry. The only sure fire way to exclude charlatans and chancers. Spiritual support and guidance need be no different to any other form of support and guidance. Individuals are known within a community to have an area of expertise, so when help is needed in that area, the members of that community can approach the person within that field of expertise. I'm not sure it needs an organisation to designate authority... the organisation invariably becomes self serving rather than community serving, a community within a community. Admittedley, what you then need to nail is the framework for developing that area of expertise, but in spiritual enquiry we all have our own areas of interest and exploration, and as long as those are transparent I see no need for an organisation. I already know people here well enough to decide whether to approach say you or Frances or RR, Dg etc regarding a particular question or (more likely) to throw it open to the group.
|
|
|
Post by arth_frown on Nov 10, 2010 18:57:08 GMT -1
Fortunly of unfortunatly, Stefan. These rulings affect us all wheather that's positive or negitive is why it is being discussed.
I suppose that's because they want the recognition and equal rights?
|
|
|
Post by stefan on Nov 10, 2010 21:44:07 GMT -1
Call me an old cynic, but I've been deceived (quite literally) into kneeling at peoples feet, so I'm not entirely convinced the root agenda is about equality.
Nor am I convinced that we need leaders or groups to tell us how to think and make us feel secure.
I agree at times things need to be facilitated. Its also interesting how a culture can make people accountable. If putting oneself forward as a leader with privilege was deemed to be culturally unacceptable within a community, (a taboo or geis) then perhaps it could be self policing and still become a very functional, healthy collaboration. People with various skills would still be acknowledged and respected but there would be an expectation of the culture that they act with a sense of humility and the ego kept in check.
My overriding experience of spirituality is that all to often its a beautiful thing when solitary but quite negative for one reason or another when people come together. Its natural for a certain type of person to want power if they sense there is power to be had and its so easy in spirituality to become an amature expert and use charisma to beguile. Strangely, so many people seem to want to be told what to do. To let others provide them with a false enlightenment.
Maybe its time for new ideas to structure an old faith?
|
|