Copy of post made to The Thicket

[kiya]

In an attempt to put it somewhere where it won't get bogged down in the stupid argument about whether being a priest means not having to have an intercessor between self and gods, rather than, y'know, having the obligations of clergy:

Wicca as originally conceived is an initiatory mystery priesthood religion. All dedicants had to have a certain level of focus and interest in pursuit of the goal in the early years, because training was hard to find. Levels of training/priesthood established depth and possibly to a certain extent direction of calling (though Wicca is far from the first religion to have clerical rank). BTW and the other traditionalist Wicca lines are holding closely to this original concept.

Historically speaking, mystery religions have existed on the edges of a mainstream of people sharing roughly the same cultural context. There would be a mainline complex of faiths, and then people who were interested in something more specific, there were the Mysteries. Sometimes the Mysteries were very large, encompassing major festivals or subsets of the population; sometimes they were very small and particular. Going through some of the Mysteries conveyed particular status or titles in everyday life. There was also a great deal of feedback back and forth between the larger community and its Mystery organisations, with bastardised forms of the idioms of Mystery becoming a part of the main culture (which in its way can deepen the effectiveness of Mystery).

As modern paganism grew and developed, it started developing a mainstream culture. (For better and for worse.) That mainstream culture, these days, is dominated by outer court traditionalist Wiccan practices, with some cross-fertilisation from other groups (feminist spirituality is a big one in the US). This has created a pool of shared idiom and cross-fertilising culture among modern pagans.

From that pool of shared idiom has developed what amounts to the mainstream complex of modern pagan religion, much like the ancient mainstream religious practices that supported the mystery cults on the side. It is very largely Wiccan in flavor, due in significant part to the power of the structure that Gardner and his compatriots put together. The symbolism, the structure, and the theology can carry meaning without that meaning being created by the mysteries, which is a great credit to the underlying vision.

So now we have the traditional Wicca on the side of a largely Wiccan-idiom mainstream, partially duplicating the historical position of Mystery cults. The mainstream has a dominant religion, which is eclectic Wicca, and there is cross-fertilisation in a variety of directions. The mainstream-pagan eclecticism has also spawned its own religions with their own priests, many of which refer to themselves as 'Wicca' in at least some form.

There will always be a spectrum of religious devotion in any group of humans. I believe the degree system of traditional Wicca is, in part, an attempt to register this, that even among folks with a calling some will be called to levels of more intensity, greater obligation, etc. When the mainstream is included, you get folks who range from secular religionists to heavily dedicated laity who don't want to take on the responsibilities and obligations of priesthood.

My feeling on the question of "What is Wicca?" is complex. I don't think that the traditionalist end of Wicca has necessarily adapted well to having a mainstream, a laity, of religious witchcraft folks who aren't engaged in their Mysteries, who just want to celebrate the Wheel of the Year and revere the gods. I also don't think that the mainstream eclectic Wiccans are as aware of the possibility that their experiences may not be the same experiences as the traditionalists' as they could be. (They may be, but without experiencing both sets of mysteries, there's no way to tell.)

I think it's important to recognise all these things: the importance of the mystery traditions, both historically and as options for those people who are called to experience those particular mysteries; the importance of a mainstream shared idiom and a community context in which a priesthood can exist; /and/ the broad pool of the laity who are called to the gods in ways that are not priesthood.

I think resolving the debate of legitimacy between BTW-and-similar and the eclectic Wiccans really needs that level of distance and recognition that these things are, at least potentially, really dealing with different things. I think the argument is too far gone for either to claim 'Wicca' exclusively, much though it would make some conversations earlier. I hope that at some point the traditionalist way is recognised as a legitimate calling rather than "elitism" and the mainstream-eclectic as a legitimate practice-set containing other legitimate callings rather than "bastardisation".

Comments

[blackbird013.livejournal.com]

As far as the obligations of clergy goes, one could say that 'historically' the foremost obligation is one of intercession between gods and laiety.

I am just thinking here, but I look at this differently.

I have always thought that the "job" was to bring people closer to their god/goddess/diety/higher self. The job would have a meaning for people more than the diety therefore would be tending the needs of the people. I have often thought that people can be far too egotistical about religion, definition of higher powers, or our position in the universe. I suppose my point here is that it is possible to work for the god in the sense that you devote your life to promoting it, but you will actually work for the people.

Am I misunderstanding what the two of you are saying here?

[kiya]

Historically speaking here --

Well, I'll talk about Egypt, which I know best. The innermost portions of the temples, where the god lived, were not accessible to the public. The seniormost priests were basically the servants in the god's mansion, responsible for providing food, clothing, annointing oils, etc., according to the requirements of the god.

This maintained the relationship between the community and the god by making sure that the needs of the god were addressed, but doesn't involve interaction with the people.

At the same time, the Wab priests, the purity priests, tended to serve three month terms in the local temple and spend the remaining nine months working normal jobs in their communities. One presumes that this led to a general level of awareness of the ways of the temple among the common people, and that this probably carried over into their private shrine rites, but we know that they did have private shrines in their homes, and not every house would have a Wab priest.

Festivals often included the god coming out of its home (the temple) and giving its direct presence to the people and providing direct oracles. At the same time, people had such things as rituals for seeking oracular dreams at holy places, and while there were priests trained in interpretation, the direct contact was between common worshipper and god without priestly intervention.


In more general terms, priestly or ministerial roles are historically things that are generally studied for and which may be full-time jobs. Some of the training will be more intensive in some areas than others -- I seem to recall that at the basic level of rabbinical training a person is qualified to perform weddings and the like, but hasn't accomplished enough skill to be considered able to handle questions of meat and milk.

Generally, people have been able to have their own connections with the divine at a variety of levels; the idea that the priest is the only one who gets to talk to the god, while it exists in antiquity, is not very common. The priests have been the ones tasked to maintaining the health of the boundary condition between the seen and unseen worlds (and in some societies, people who are thought to be on boundaries between dualities are preferentially selected for priestly roles: people who have mysteriously come back from the brink of death, the intersexed, or the transgendered); this is as important a job as bringing in food for the community or making sure that everyone has pottery. Not everyone can make bowls, but everyone needs to use bowls; not everyone can maintain the numinous, but everyone has access to it when it is maintained.


Now, bring this in to the history of Wicca. BTW is similar to a monastic community; the aspects of priesthood that require interaction with other humans are in interaction with other priests within the same community. All are working together in that space between seen and unseen ("space between the worlds" is the term for what's in a circle, isn't it?).

This terminology works all right within that structure. Then the written stuff gets turned loose on the world and we have Wiccans who aren't running within BTW-and-derived structures. Not all have a community, and not all have this sense of maintaining the space between the seen and the unseen. But many of them refer to themselves as 'priests', because 'Wiccan' was originally defined as 'priest' -- within that monastic context.