/asatru/ - Asatru / Heathenry / Paganism

It should be whatever you most culturally identify yourself as. Many of the Anglo-Saxons were of Celtic blood but still practiced the AS culture because they were essentially Germanic. Decide for yourself what names draw you the most, Wotan or Lugh. Saxon or Gaulli. Hermann or Boudicca.

>>4622
>I've done some research and have found the coat of arms of my predecessors in Ireland and Poland

Wow, really?

If you know that you have noble blood in two nations, then you most likely have enough information to compute the traditional order of precedence based on male-preference primogeniture or ultimogeniture (which were used in both the British Isles and Poland). I would suggest that you follow that backward to determine the faith of your house.

>My ethnicity (as far as I can tell short of giving my DNA to the gubment through 23andMe):

Hmm, this is starting to fall apart. No one with a grant of arms, and therefore documented noble blood, has questions about ancestry. This is all shit you would know.

If you don't have noble blood then you have no arms. That's no big deal, of course; most people have no arms.

>I've always felt strongly drawn to my Irish heritage more than anything else.

There's a reason for Celtic reconstruction. Unless your ancestors were Saxons and floated across the Irish sea. And, genetically, that happened so often in both directions that we can't tell them apart anyway.

>When I awoke I couldn't remember which word I had spoken, but I knew it was either "Irish" or "Norse".

I can't help you unless I know the sounds you spoke. I don't care about your translation of the sounds.

>>4633
I'm going to start backtracking through the family lines today. I'll see if I can come up with anything good.

Clarify on the Celtic Reconstructionism bit. What did you mean with that statement?

It's best to avoid thinking of the gods as categorically exclusive pantheons who have no common essence or demand to be worshipped in a specific way which must be back-calculated based on your sub-European ancestry, because that's not how our ancestors saw them.

Without monotheism, different religious traditions were, and are, seen much like different languages—distinct, and certainly worthy of one degree or another of individual respect, but fundamentally translatable.

Odin was viewed by Romans as equivalent to Hermes/Mercury due to his having brought writing to mankind. But he also has affinity with Zeus as Allfather, and perhaps even with Dionysus or Osiris (or a Hellenic Christ) since he recounts in Hávamál how he sacrificed himself by hanging on the world-tree.

These correspondences make it possible to understand the cosmic beings underlying these names; they don't render differing interpretations 'false' or 'idolatrous'; that's the stuff of counter-religion, i.e. Judaism, Christianity in most cases, and Islam.

Now, those of us who belong to European diaspora today—and even, to one extent or another, those on the Mother Continent—who wish to get back to a healthy religious mindset do not have the luxury (or the limitation) of having a single coherent tradition passed down to us from our ancestors which can be compared/translated in relation to other traditions. We're in a new situation.

Given that, and given the fact that a good number of us are just like you in having a mixed European ancestry, OP, we ought to be willing to learn from any traditions which strike us as particularly pious and take from them what works, particularly those non-monotheistic ones which have survived in India.

If you read Platonic and Orphic wisdom and supplement it with study of present-day Hinduism and Buddhism, you'll be in a much better position to build on what we have from the ancient Celts and Germans than if you assume your ancestors to be categorically limiting you to specific forms—forms which have not been honored with the respect they deserve for over a thousand years.

Again, religion is like language, and if we find ourselves speaking a pan-Northern or even pan-European mélange, so be it.

http://www.graaaaaagh.com/2015/03/european-religion-ritual-and.html

>>4644
This.

It's more about the philosophy and world outlook at this point. I have mostly Polish ancestry but I prefer the outlook and worldview and community of norse paganism which is why I am drawn to it.

My ancestors had slightly different gods, and different names for them, but that doesn't matter. I choose my faith based on my outlook and ideals.

>>4644
>>4648

Interesting points.

I think that Asatru has remained rather untouched (the Folkish sect is still alive and well) but even Celtic Reconstructionism has been co-opted by SocJus.

"CR firmly and absolutely rejects racism, sexism, homophobia and other forms of discrimination which divide people into warring camps." A quote from a very significant site on the practice.

Lots of thinking to do.

>>4684
The whole argument about racism troubles me because I think as far as the religion is concerned it is a non-issue.

We venerate our ancestors, and our kin. People of the same race likely have more common ancestors, therefore we band together. That is supported by the faith. However, nowhere does it say one way or the other to go after others for no other reason than that they're not your kin. That's a personal issue.

For my part, I don't mind other races. I don't band together with them as readily as with my own race and culture, but I will if they prove to be worth it. I do think many people here are too quick to assume entire races all behave the same way.

Sure, most of them do seem to–for example, most Africans I've met have been very loud, obnoxious, unintelligent, and gang-ish, but there are exceptions and I believe in giving them a chance.

>>4692
But that's not what the Folkish bit is about. It's about worshipping the gods of YOUR people, not someone else's. Do I think that a black person can/should worship the Norse gods? Hell no. It's pretending for them. They have no ties to the gods, they essentially just worship because its cool. That's not racist. Is it exclusionary? Yep. Does it attract racists? Sometimes. Is it a bad line of thinking? Not at all.

>>4696
the thing about these genetics threads is that usually it is someone who is part irish part french part german or something. the reason that is not a problem is because all these ethnicities share a central indo-european religious root, and the religions follow the same values. this is why i always say to pure europeans to worship the gods of the culture they live in or identify as. however, a black man, an arab, a chinese man or some other non european race would simply be following a religion with which their ethnicity has no common values. so, it is ok for an assimilated irishman to worship germanic gods, but not an african to worship celtic gods.

>>4706
I think it's possible for an American to work out what he "mostly" is and follow an appropriate religion, but the whole deal does interest me. We poors of Yurop are able to say "I'm English", "I'm Greek", etc but Americans don't have this luxury. Just kind of a sad thing, but I don't think it precludes Americans from working out "what they are" and going with it. Also, as you say - an integrated Irishman could worship the Anglo-Saxon gods. Could an integrated American of an uncertain mix of European ethnicities, but probably quite largely German and English, not do the same? Injections of DNA from neighbouring, culturally and genetically similar nations, are not a bad thing for a nation.

>and have found the coat of arms of my predecessors in Ireland and Poland
Why do Americans think that finding "coat of arms" on some shitty fake genealogy website means actually having a Coat of Arms?

>>4731
I have no idea but once I was at work with this other white guy and two mexicans. They were on some ancestry site and even the mexicans found a coat of arms for their family and thought it was the coolest thing ever.

I think it's just something were people think literally everything is on the internet.

>>4738

Most people do not have arms.