by C.D. Varn

D.V.: How would you like to introduce yourself?

Kym Lambert ní Dhoireann: Well, I go by Kym Lambert ní Dhoireann and also simply Saigh, which for the record is a nickname not a “Craft name.” I am one of the people who apparently got this whole CR thing started and so far as we can tell am the first to actually publish the term “Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism” back in 1992 to describe my practice. At that time I had already stopped practicing Wicca to try to find a way that more accurately fit the Gaelic cultures and what I believed were the desires of the God/desses I was worshiping and had had no name for it. Recently I helped a bit on both the CR Essay on Witches’ Voice and The CR FAQ.

My focus is on Scottish Reconstructionism which I also sometimes refer to as Pàganachd Albannach. My specific path is Pàganachd Allaidh, which is based on the concept of the Fianna or Outsider war bands. It is Gaelic/Norse syncretic and practiced only by myself and my sigoth at this time, although there are others who have some training in it with us in the past none completed the training very far. It is focused on the warrior or warrior-poet path, as am I. I should note that while warrior path, I do not consider myself yet a warrior.

I am also a night watch guard at a wilderness camp/school and have been working as a reporter for the past couple of years (I do not know how long I will continue with the reporting), as well as a CERT member. To me these activities are part of my CR path, for they are all ways I walk my path. I feel that CR requires some community basis, not so much in creating CR groups but in how we interact as CRs. Along with my sigoth I live with a couple of hounds and a sheepdog and have a rescued horse which I do Natural Horsemanship with…I feel that my work with these animals is a spiritual connection as well…in a Northern NH forest. I am a pathetically bad chicken farmer as well.
D.V.:  Would you like to discuss your training with your tradition?  And what kind of training you think most Celtic Reconstructionists should go through?
Saigh: This is a difficult question, for training is very individual. As this is not a religious order but rather culture building with in a religious frame-work, there is no one course of study or even a few. And I should have avoided the word "completed" all together, as that may imply finished and it can't be finished.

One reason no one got very far is also because the training has changed. When we tried to run a larger, more would-be-tribal sort of group, it was even more varied. We were then mixed Irish and Scottish Gaelic focused and had people trying to work on varied paths. But at that point, even, there was a need for all to attain some degree of knowledge of Celtic culture (including modern), history and lore, to know our own customs and ways and to attain some language skills.

Now that we are just our household, have become focused on the Scottish and would, if we ever do, build a group more based on the concept of an Outsider "war-band" it is a bit more specific. Scottish Gaelic is the language we are working on learning (I admit I am someone who will always be "working on learning" it, I'm terrible with languages). We are now focused on varieties of the warrior path. So, along with the Celtic studies, language and our own customs, there is a need for martial arts of some form, we may learn tracking and wilderness and urban survival skills, mediation skills. On-going fitness training is required. We see things that other Pagans may not see as part of their training. My sigoth is a First Responder, as I intend to be soon, soon to get his EMT-B...this is part of his training in this path. For some of us, myself more than my sigoth for example, there is also training in trance work, Otherworldly interactions, exploring ecstatic ritual. Poetry, writing, art, all these things may be part of the training depending on the interests and strengths of the individual.  

For CRs in general, well, I think that it seriously becomes a matter of what each person needs to fulfill their path. However, I do believe that studying the culture, lore and history is vital. And, again, I do feel that knowing the living culture is absolutely required. And language. Whether one ever become fluent or not it is vital that anyone following a CR path must pursue the study of the language of the culture they are studying, for that is what defines "Celtic" cultures. It is a very small thing we can give back, to help preserve these languages.

And to me, giving back is a very important thing. Training should never be seen as something done just to improve oneself, but rather to find a way to improve the world, to give back to one community or another. Someone on a warrior path should see how they can give back to their local community, for instance, by working as an EMT, firefighter, police officer or similar service. Or become involved in search and rescue, CERT or other usually non-paying volunteer work for the local community. Someone who is pursuing a path of wisdom should find ways to teach, not just within the "Pagan Community" or what have you but also within their local or the global community. Even as one who identifies as being Outside of the society must serve it or be a total outcast. And in this I am not speaking of building "CR communities" and isolating ourselves, but instead about living in the communities we do live in. And this should also mean giving back to those living cultures from which we are deriving our ways...through language and cultural preservation organizations, traditional music and artistic activity or in anyway we find we can.

D.V.:  Most traditional societies would put a high emphasis on community--how do you see the somewhat individualistic people who are willing to go largely against the flow of their own society working back into the larger (non-pagan) community?  And do you feel that in that tension, a lot of the bonds of the pagan community are developed?

Saigh: I'm afraid I don't know quite what you are asking, could you clarify? I may just still be toasty from the shift change.

D.V.:  Let me rephrase.  I wonder how it works trying to get people actively involved in a community whose cultural norms they have forsaken in taking a Celtic path.   I suppose, every Celtic Reconstructionist is bicultural if they live outside of Gaelic or other Celtic language speaking areas.  Do you see this as true?  And if you do, do you see this as competing things?

Saigh: Actually I don't see America itself as having much of a culture. There are a few places culture can be found here, of course. One type are the immigrant cultural areas, where groups of immigrants have tended to gather, but there are a few typically American regional cultural areas which are also colored by the culture of those who were the larger population who came to that area. But most of these are dwindling; the uniqueness of certain areas is being washed out. We've become more and more the melting pot so many before us considered a good thing. But this has left us with a bland world, with no feeling of connectedness or culture. I don't feel bicultural at all; I feel I finally have a culture. I think over all that what those of us involved in religio-cultural Reconstructionist movements are looking for is, in fact, a return to a culture. I know I didn't "forsake" anything, because there was nothing to forsake culturally. I was searching for something and that turned out to be culture as much as spirituality.

Because the community that I then interact with has no culture, I find no conflict in giving the services I feel I must give to live my path to them. But I don't know as I would anyway. It is perhaps simply harder for me to see this as a conflict when I identify as an Outsider anyway. Even if I were in a Gaelic community, even a totally Gaelic Reconstructionist community, I'd still be liminal because that is what I am.

Then too we can always find the commonality of our local communities. Hospitality was a key part of Celtic cultures, of many cultures, and many still try to practice it in some form. And there are reflections of our beliefs and cultures nearly anywhere we look. How different really is a modern wilderness camp to help kids learn to be part of society from the Irish Fianna concept that boys needed time in the wilderness before becoming fit for society? There are things that fit into our world view all around us in our own communities, we just need to open our eyes to them.

D.V.: I see what you are saying, although growing up in the Deep South, I do feel that I, by breaking with the dominant religion of the area, I am "bi-cultural."  I think, however, that you point out that most Americans would not feel that way.

So you definitely see Celtic Reconstruction as a valid attempt to fill avoid created by modernity.  This brings me to one key criticism I have heard leveled against ALL pagan thought, that it is almost a reactionary rejection of modernity.    Do you see this as justified but that paganism has valid reasons for rejecting modernity?  Or do you see reconstruction as sort of syntheism of pre-Christian traditions and modern culture? Or do you see this as something entirely different? 

Saigh: Indeed, I think that the Deep South is one of the places that a culture is still existing, I somewhat remember some uniquely New England culture here, but have seen it fade in my life time. I think that many are, while at the same time many of us are seeking to reconnect with a unique culture. Although with a culture that has heavy Celtic influences, I would think there would be elements to draw from, so rather than making it a bi-cultural activity there is some essence of sub-culture instead. But I don’t know…we have little culture left here, most of the Gaels, as well as the French, who moved to this area were hell bent on melting into the pot.

 I think that CR, like any culturally focused movement, is a response to the tendencies in the modern world to move away from cultural ways. To conform into this bland mish-mash or to see all cultures as open for exploitation. However, in no way does this mean that any CR wants to return to the Iron Age, that's just not what this movement is about. I do see that many of us are critical of many of the ways that modern life exploits the planet and many of its people, but this doesn't mean we want to give up running water. But many of us have explained what we're doing as looking for what the polytheism of our cultures would look like TODAY if it hadn't been swallowed completely by Christianity.

Now, a minority of us, and I am one, are into homesteading and the whole "back-to-the-land" movement, which often confuses people. But there are very few true "Luddites" in this movement. Most would-be homesteaders are more than happy to use technology; we just tend to be a bit fussier about what resources the technology we use up. We would prefer to opt for sustainable technologies, which often are more modern than what most people live with in order to make them more environmentally friendly. We might opt for not having flush toilets if our local area dictates that modern composting toilets are a better alternative. We wouldn't want to heat our homes with an open fire pit, but we might combine a well made Russian Fire Furnace with solar to replace our oil heat. We might skip the fast food to grow our own, but we're going to use the most current, humane and ecological methods we can learn.

 Of course, most CRs are not doing this. I'm really in a minority here, so I can't speak for all. Although most of the CRs I know and hang out with are doing things to make their footprints smaller, many are finding those ways in urban areas. So we're not rejecting the modern world, we're just dealing with it with our eyes wide open and asking a lot of questions. Questions we are answering ourselves.

D.V.: Given the that "Celtic culture" was never really all that monolithic in nature, does the lack of cultural cohensiveness make CR more "difficult" to organize than say Asatru or Kemetic Orthodoxy?

Saigh: Well, no, there was never a “Celtic culture,” there were always many and I don’t see any problem with that. CR uses “Celtic” only to create some sense of unity among those of us trying to get this movement moving in order to create mutual support, but we do not try to create a single “Celtic” tradition. That would be an insult to the many living cultures, after all. As we grow in numbers we’ll see more people identify mostly as their cultures, as well as some creating traditions with in those cultural identities. As there was much rich diversity even within the particular cultures, there is much for people of different leanings to draw from and explore deeply.

I do not see why this should be thought of as a “difficulty.” There is no NEED to organize CRs as a whole and that was never our intent. Anyone looking for that should not be looking into diverse polytheistic religions. I’m not sure where they should be looking.

I also am confused that you are saying that Asatru is more organized due to them having a more “cohesive” culture to draw from. Because I have never seen that as true, there are many, many Northern cultures, with similar relationships to language and mythology that the Celtic ones have. In simple terms, there were Germans, Scandinavians, Icelandars …. and are modern Northern Reconstructionists drawing from different ones. In more complex terms they had small regional differences within those just as the Celtic cultures always did. There are also Norse and Germanic Reconstructionists who do not consider themselves Asatru. I think the reason that it appears more organized is due to them having 20 years on us. They do have many “factions” as it were, but each one tends to be rather large.

I can’t speak for the Kemetics as I know little of their movement. However, from what little contact I’ve had with Kemetics, I believe that there are several groups which do not always agree. Kemetic Orthodoxy is only one of those. So I can not speak for how much “cohesivemess” they have as a whole, but it is true that if they are looking at a particular time period of Egypt that they might have a single thing to draw from.

D.V.:  I suppose the question could be raised about the existing "Celtic" speaking cultures relationship to Catholicism and many people who call themselves "Celtic traditionalists" are Catholics, sometimes of a very strict variety.  How do see CR groups interacting with these individuals?

Saigh: Well, I suppose that in Ireland and the Irish diaspora as well as some of the Scottish diaspora most are Catholic. Among those who are speaking or reviving the language and preserving the songs and arts in their native lands of Scotland, Wales and Cornwall, however, more of them are staunchly Protestant instead. I don’t think most of them call themselves "Celtic traditionalists" either, as very few people who are "traditional" try to claim that there was one Celtic culture, instead preferring the "Gaelic traditionalist," "Welsh traditionalist" or which ever.

I do know Gaelic traditionalists (and by these terms I want to emphasis that I mean those living and raised in the living cultures and are keeping their culture, language and music alive, not any of the American polytheistic groups that have been using it lately) who are Catholic or Protestant, and some who are atheists in the living cultures. For the most part once they realize that CR isn’t a form of Wicca, there is seldom a problem. So I think that we will continue to interact by focusing on the traditions and the language.

And so much of the older traditions remained in the later Christian ones, that we would be idiots to throw things out because they "Christian." The Carmina Gadelica is a very important piece of work for my path, for example. And so many of the cultural traditions, the music, dance and art, are being kept alive by Christians; it would be foolish to ignore their efforts or refuse to work with them.

I think much of the "us vs. them" attitude that has developed in the NeoPagan community comes more from the number of people who have become Pagan to escape a bad past. For those of us who were either not raised Christian or had no real problems with our Christian upbringing other than non-belief, who came to Paganism because of our beliefs rather than hatred of what we came from, there doesn’t seem to be so much need to feel hostility towards Christianity. And, funny, those of us who do not feel hostile towards it do not seem to get as much hostility back. I think in part this is how we put things, if you start talking about "the occult" then they might get cross-eyed, but if we talk about the culture or language then there is common ground.

D.V.: Is there anything you'd like to say in closing?

Saigh: It will always amaze me that this term, this path, has developed any sort of a following at all. When Kathryn NicDhàna, Paul Pigman and I were sitting among their books one night and Kathryn, we think, first uttered the term in the context of such a path, my thought was "This is perfect, it's so unromantic and cumbersome that no one else will want use it!" (this being around '90 or '91 when there were huge fights about the titles "Witch" and "Druid"). I am happy to see there is interest in the path, but I am saddened to see that many seem to be latching onto it for some sort of validity without really taking into consideration what it means. I have run into people who claim to be "CR Wiccans" or "CR Shamans" which, of course, totally negates the whole reason we coined the term in the first place; CR means we are not claiming to be "shamans" nor are we practicing anything that looks like Wicca. It saddens me greatly to see this or to see others who make loud claims that they are CR when their practices are truly eclectic or modernly syncretic.

 While I want people to be open to the path, if it's what they are looking for, it is discouraging to see people who do not wish to immerse themselves in the culture of CR decide that all it means is that they read books that aren't published by Llewellyn. You simply can't be a CR most of the week, but go to your Wiccan coven on Saturdays, be a Ceremonial Magician on Fridays and worship Egyptian Gods on Wednesdays, perhaps checking into Santeria every other Thursday. If you're only interested in worshiping Celtic God/desses occasionally but not in delving into an entire culture, and a particular culture rather than Pan-Celtic, then CR isn't the right path.  

I suppose some might see it as hostile, but then I find the idea of trying to reinvent a term being used by others just so that you can claim a bit of validity is a hostile act. So in ending, I just do hope that people who want to explore CR really do do so, rather than deciding that the term has some sort of "I study" value then use it to define something completely different.