Rant of the Day: Banned Words = No Clergy??
It was kindly pointed out to me that I don’t rant on the blog like I used to. I must be mellowing with the end of Saturn’s Return or something. Or maybe I want to make friends and not enemies in my new habitat of Ottawa.
However, it can be nice and cathartic to rant now and then and I find it also can start some great discussion and debate. And the odd fire storm.
Also with life getting busier and busier and the prospect of going back to school in Spring looming ahead I think I need to set a few things in place to ensure I don’t neglect my blogging. Thus, once in a while I post a Rant of the Day, which would be myself bitching and moaning about just about anything. Sometimes long rants but most often short rants and maybe a link or two to articles or events etc that are related to the rant.
Combined with my usually inconstant blogging and things like Wordless Wednesday I should be able to keep up the blogging without getting too boring or going too long between posts.
So here’s my first Rant of the Day:
Upon reading an article or two on the future of Paganism and reading discussions between folks on forums and good ol’ Facebook it has come to my attention that a lot of the resistance to the idea of a properly trained, accredited and paid clergy is because people don’t like words like “Clergy” or “Priest” right along with words like “worship” and such.
Why do they not like these words?
Because they were raised Christian and therefore have negative associations with these words.
So, as someone who did not have a crappy Christian upbringing, and also as someone who sees more and more kids being raised Pagan I have a question/rant.
I don’t think it’s fair to have to ban certain words like “priest” or “worship” just because few of us had crappy Christian childhoods. Why should I not be allowed to have such things and use such words because of someone else’s issues? (The kind of issues therapists can help you with)
I mean seriously. We shouldn’t strive towards real clergy because a small portion of us get the heebee-jeebees when they hear the word “Priest”? Shouldn’t we instead strive to have a healthy form of clergy, learning from the mistakes of others, rather than reject the idea outright due to the concerns of people who haven’t gotten over their childhood?
What do you think?
*
Here’s a link to one of the articles that started the discussions that brought about my rant:
Ruminations on Pagan ‘Clergy’
And here is an episode of my podcast where Bren and I debate the use of the word “worship”
Episode Two: Nature, Dogs, Elders … and Lex and the Devil!
Related posts:
9 Responses to Rant of the Day: Banned Words = No Clergy??
- Je Ne Sais Quoi lupa
- Wordless Wednesday: Ask the Stones Admin
- Swimming the Sunlight Alison Leigh Lilly
To Fly By Night
Hoofprints in the Wildwood
I don’t like paid clergy. Professionalizing our clergy will be highly detrimental to our growth as a grassroots movement. Read Roger Finke and Rodney Stark “The Churching of America 1776-1990″ for a very good argument against putting a lot of our limited resources into salaries and profesional qualifications that separate our religious leaders from the laity. However, it is helpful to have formal clergy in some ways – dealing with the outside world, screening out the cultist and New Age dinks, and ensuring our religious leaders do know their arses from their elbows. The Initiatory model, with Inner Court and Outer Court seems like a good way to approach this issue – clergy must be Initiated and preferably active members of covens or groves, because these provide grounding and a group of peers to keep them honest, and these covens can serve as the religious specialists for larger Pagan communities. Judy Harrow’s “Wicca Covens” is a great book for ideas on this.
People can have issues without reacting out of a Chrustian past, although you’re right that it’s often that, or some anti-intellectual kneejerk reaction or some status anxiety or something equally dumb. But there are reasons we don’t want to just be a “church like the other churches” but explore different directions that suit our theology and our movement’s needs better. For one thing, the conventional church model is no longer working – mainstream churches are bleeding away members and its the innovative house church movements that are growing.
Blessed Be
Sam Wagar
Ordained Minister, Wiccan High Priest, History MA
In the pod cast, you mention that Paganism is a protest against the hierarchical structure. And in Brendan’s book “A Pagan’s Testament”, he mentions that Pagan’s prefer not having a bible.
I don’t see how the Pagan movement could have clergy without having those two elements.
Although, there are specific pagan paths, so maybe there could be registered clergy in that manner.
I am just starting down the path myself, and I do find it more difficult to find my way. It would be nice to have a guide as a reference.
Thanks for your input Sam. I appreciate it!
Awakening: It is Bren’s opinion that Paganism is a protest movement. But we must keep in mind he was raised Irish Catholic. I however, have a very different view on the matter as I was raised more or less New Age-y.
I was raised in an atheist/agnostic household. I went to a Church of England school and occaisonally went to the local church (CofE is a wonderfully moderate church anyway).
Christianity is not an issue for me at all.
I really look forward to seeing paid clergy, or at least trained clergy anyway! It would be nice to have someone to go to for counsel, or to have somebody trained to officiate at my wedding and have it legally recognised.
This does not have to come with dogma! I don’t think paganism as a whole is a system where dogma is feasable.
As for the term worship; it really irks me when people refuse to use that term. I know I’m not the typical pagan, and my path is a lot different to many pagan paths out there, but I WORSHIP my gods. I do not ‘work with’ them or ‘use’ them. I honor them because they are divine.
Also,
Many of these contested words are older, or their roots are older, than Christianity.
I have no desire to see new words invented. It makes us sound silly and makes no sense to non-Pagans. I cringe every time I hear “Desoil” and “Fluffy Bunny” and “UPG” … makes me feel like I am playing D&D and not practising religion
I know that for me, being trained in the dealing with the people end of things, that clergy training, has benefits for our religions that we have not fully explored yet. (I will call it clergy training because that is what the training is under. If someone wants to call it pagan leadership, be my guest. I am not sure there will ever be a term that will be acceptable to all anyways.) On the other hand, we do need to acknowledge that the original Wicca model anyways made everyone priest and priestess, which makes no one special. I think that paganism has not done a good job with outlining the difference from personal mysticism and spiritual counsel, and as much as people do not want to admit it, books and the internet has done more to attract people to this path than anything else. I was just reading an article that the author was suggesting that covens were dead, or on their way out. That is sad.
Still, working with others has benefits for spiritual growth, and I think some folks are still not at that place of being open to those ideas.
My humble opinion….I think 3rd degree of traditions needs to have some kind of dealing with people component, especially if they are going to run their own groups. I know ADF has made clergy training a part of their model. Not sure if OBOD has anything, and anyone who has their own path will not have that training. But, there is training out there. Cherry Hill Seminary, and Ocean Seminary are two that i know of, one coming out of Judy Harrow et al. work, and the other that is more of a multi-faith school. If dealing with others is a part of your deal or path, getting the training and skills is required, because that to me is just as much a show of commitment to your path as any other thing we do.
My Paganism and my Witchcraft/Shamanism are kind of two different entities.
I have no calling to be clergy, a priestess or a leader-type in my Paganism. I am quite happy to do my home stuff on my own and then attend a public ritual as just…… another Pagan a handful of times a year. I am happy to allow someone called to be clergy to take that role and I will happily support them.
My Witchcraft and Shamanisms are all tied up together and are service oriented. But not as a leader of any sort really. Perhaps as a kind of “facilitator” between spirits (gods, ancestors whatever) and others. Also as a healer to a certain extent. But again my path in that case is geared more towards animals and the landscape than people. I’m not always a big fan of people lol Maybe some day when I am grey haired and know my shit I’ll teach or something *shrug*
Speaking as one who resisted the call to priesthood for many years, I am very glad that when it did finally begin happening to me, I was long gone from the Christian ways. My years of study and readings and contemplation on the subjects, and encounters and watching the news of current events, have led me to the conclusion that if I ever re-converted my only recourse would be to fight to destroy the world, and take Yahweh’s playthings away from the psychotic, sadistic bastard.
I also have some aversion to anything coming from the beastie on the red davenport, after my first encounter with its belief that it is itself THE arbiter of what is proper in Paganism. Its disclaimers of such give the lie.
Talking about ancient pre-Christian Pagans and then going on about “every Pagan his/her own Pope,” or “every Pagan his/her own island” are both extremely foolish. Chaos only benefits the vermin who prey on those with knee-jerk aversions to dealing with reality. Anarchy builds nothing, destroys everything, leaving such chaos as benefits thugs, bullies, power-brokers, the corrupt, and arms salesmen.
Those who are virulently opposed to any form of organization among their own people are great allies to those vermin, knowingly or not.
Pagan, neopagan, and understanding of Paleopagan clergy, are all important to me. Any group which has some equivalent to an “outer court” already has a laity as opposed to the “clergy” of the inner court membership. Whether the inner court sees the outer as a pool of almost-dedicants, as ‘batteries’ to be sucked dry, or just as followers, they are still “the laity” within that Trad.
“Every Pagan his/her own Priest/ess.” is not historical to those earlier Pagans. It is a concept which is only practical in small, nearly or totally hidden groups which do not seek expansion, merely continued succession.
While the head of every household once may have carried out the religious rituals pertaining to the household, that was a limited subset of the rites and practices of their religion, and they relied on the priests and priestesses of the local temples for those other, more specialized rites and services.
Just because some child (of any age) has read a few books, and been to a festival or so, does not make them the sole source of knowledge and authority they give themselves airs to, regarding what knowledge, experience, power, and compassion may be in the hands of the elders they disdain so emphatically. Such childish resistance to influences outside of their own whims is a big reason why they do not find a teacher. Well, not a real teacher, anyway.
Not every person receives a Calling. Some have other destinies directed by their karmic state. That does not mean that they will never require the aid or advice of a person who has received such a call to serve the Gods and their co-religionists. Those who have neither, presume too much when they claim to know what those trained specialists, called “clergy,” have gone through, have encountered and survived, have studied, have wept over, have given up to answer the Call.
Yes, our modern movement has a great many people who falsely claim priesthood and clergy status. Even with the coming of a little organization, such fakes will be easier to expose and cast out of the halls of “power” such tend to claim for themselves.
Well !
I did not expect that my response would become a sort-of mini-rant in agreement with Juniper.
The thing that bugs me the most is when people push their issues with Christianity on Paganism as a whole. Many people can not work with or choose not to work with because it is reminiscent of their Christian upbringing, but that’s for another conversation.
On to the clergy thing, I whole-heartedly agree with Juniper and Ananta Androscoggin. Clergy is a very important thing regardless of what we decide to call them. I think it is a good idea for our faith to have a group of trained leaders as opposed to every wo/man for themselves. The reason I think this is important is because without teachers there is no growth of our religion as a whole. Without teachers and leaders, the same mistakes will happen over and over again, without learning from someone who has been around the bush before.
Ananta is also correct with a little organization we can avoid the growth of cults, false priests, other negatives regarding less than stellar groups.
For people my age (I am 23) there are few Starhawks and Bucklands, maybe with a little organization we can have many more accomplishments in the future.
Plus honestly, I am sick of the “my tradition is so much better than yours” bs. We all come from similar paths I am sure we can find some commonalities to agree upon in regard to organization. Look at all the other religions and their sects (see Judaism if you don’t want to look at Christianity). They have seminaries in which their leaders are trained but those leaders lead very different groups within their religions.
PS. Sorry I am so late in responding its been crazy in my next of the woods. Also so you all have some context this reply comes from a 23 year old practising witch of 12 years (almost 13) who is hoping to one day become one of the dreaded clergy as well as a teacher of science for high school.