Articles Page
|
|
Articles Page |
|
Morgan Ravenwood
|
Pagan Clergy: What
Qualifications With
Paganism (and Wicca in particular) being the fastest growing religion today,
it’s no wonder that the need for qualified clergy members of ALL Pagan
denominations is also growing. But this
produces a new dilemma: what sort of qualifications are needed (or should be)
before one can call oneself a clergy person?
This issue has been coming up enough on the Internet of late so as to
merit an in-depth examination. As
examples I have used excerpts from many opinions that came to light on this
issue in an online Pagan Clergy group I belong to. One
poster thinks she has it all figured out: “I
got a ULC ( However,
anyone who knows anything about the ULC knows that, while it serves a purpose
in affording an “official” ordination of sorts to people who wish to be able to
perform legal marriages (and ULC ordination is by no means legal in all 50
states), there are no requirements whatsoever to obtain ordination through
them. This
was my reply to that lady: “You know, I’d be the last
one to diss ULC because I too am “ordained” through them—but let’s face it, it
hardly qualifies one to bear the title of “clergy” since we could even ordain
our cats and dogs if we wanted to. A
piece of paper---from ANY organization---or even a person dressed up in an
impressive robe with a bunch of highfalutin titles---do not a High Priestess
make. But practice, experience and
practical application---that of ministering to others---DO (not to mention the
Goddess and God Themselves!) I don’t
know about you, but I don’t think I’d want someone whose sole claim to the
title of clergy was a two-cent certificate he printed off his home computer
performing MY nuptials!” Believe
it or not, there were some indignant replies from others who saw nothing wrong
with the above scenario since their ULC ordination is their own main
qualification! My answer to them is to
get over themselves---and get real. But
it gets even better. Here’s another idea
propounded by someone with even less demanding standards: “(Name
deleted) indicated that there may be some who feel that they are not worthy to
be clergy. If you have a "call" (this is an all encompassing term to
me meaning…chosen by deity), have a feeling you should be---or "Hey, Moonpuppy is no longer able to be HPs. You are maiden, it is your turn"..(in
other words how you came to the title) to be in clergy you have a
"right" to call yourself clergy and anyone who tells you different
has security issues. I have met VERY few people who willingly take on the title
"Clergy" and not "deserve it" in some manner. I have met
some people whose ability to lead I question, however most of them still care
deeply for the people they lead. Time and your group (if you have one) will
show your true colors. People who just want to be "High and mighty, all
powerful, purple robed poo bah's" do not last long in the grand scheme of
things.” Wow. So then I can just call myself something to
make it so? In that case---ALL HAIL THE
QUEEN! (Or not!) On the other hand, there are many successful
and knowledgeable High Priestesses and Priests who indeed have earned their
titles by word and deed and perform their clergy duties in an exemplary manner
without possessing “official” degree initiations. Some
more suggestions: “I would also add
‘Experience.’ To become comfortable
being a clergy member you need to do it!!!!... Clergy persons need the experience
not only in their trad or magical path but also as ministers to the
community...That is why I encourage my students to do volunteer or community
service during their training....It promotes a realistic picture of just what a
clergyperson does every day...” There would certainly seem to
be some merit in this; most covens I know of do indeed perform community
service—usually with all members participating. Another came from a person
who seems to have some grasp: “One of the things people are
very quick to accuse Pagan clergy of is being uneducated, illiterate
theologically, and having gotten their "ordinations" without serious
study. A course in philosophy, some training in Biblical exigetics and
comparative theology along with gnosis about texts we do not use are to me
basics of claiming to be a clergyperson.” I agree with this, and I’ll even go one
better: training in sociology and psychology can give one great insight into
human behavior, not to mention practical experience in counseling others. Someone
else mentioned that being a clergyperson is no sinecure: “I've found that being clergy
means you get calls in the middle of the night from someone in crisis who needs
someone to talk to. It means giving up
enormous amounts of your personal and family time for clergy work. It means showing up before anyone else to set
up ritual and staying later to clean up.
It means that when someone in your coven/church/circle/grove drops the
ball on a project or gets sick at the last minute, you are responsible for
keeping things going. Being
"clergy" is not a title. Being
clergy is dedicating yourself to service.
When I look at my bracelet, it reminds me that I have sworn an oath to
service and am "bonded" so to speak.” As
heartfelt as it is, this is still more of a job description than a list of the
qualifications that one should possess to BE a clergyperson (though it’s
certainly thought-provoking for “wannabe” High Priestesses and Priests!) Physical and mental stamina, lots of free
time and good organizational skills are all admirable qualities, but they are
by no means the main requirements for clergy work. The best response I’ve seen to date was this, so this will be the last quote: “But the problem arises when people believe their own PR. I have personal experience with people who obtain a ULC or other paper ordination, and with NO OTHER TRAINING than that consider themselves to be clergy and require or expect or demand the percs, if any, and the respect and position in local community, that is held by the trained and experienced clergy of other denominations or of trained and experienced Witches and Pagans whether covened or solitary, traditionally trained or eclectic . With this I have a serious ethical issue. A person can be seen to be a wedding officiant or able to perform another rite of passage for which "legal" ordination or sanction is required, without having the right to call hirself a Priest, or Priestess, a clergywoman or man, an Elder or minister. Such designations require study, training, experience, and humility. And it is seeing unethical Pagan ULC ordained people laying claim to these additional titles and attributes that they do not in fact possess that causes many both in and out of Paganism to disdain all other claims made by Pagani who choose to call themselves clergy without having the right so to do. Let's admit that the ULC ordination serves a useful purpose in making it possible for people to perform marriages and other rites that require some piece of paper not issued by the faith body but by the state. And let's further state that this is ALL such pieces of paper qualify one to do.” While one of the best advantages of Paganism is that it is by nature individualistic, this is also at times one of its biggest drawbacks, as Lady Maeve Rhea mentioned in “Handfasted and Heartjoined” as well as myself in my earlier article, “The Pagan Aversion to Organization.” This is especially so with regard to the clergy issue. In the same message thread that I mentioned, I contributed a post to the effect that since there is no “universal” ordination or standards for Pagan clergy, one could have been a High Priest or Priestess of one tradition for years and then joined a new tradition that would completely disregard this background and make the person start all over as a neophyte (don’t laugh, it happened to me!) In my case, I felt that this was unfair and would be tedious waste of time for me, so I dropped out of the group. But in hindsight, I can almost see their logic: with no universally recognized credentials to view as proof, they had no way of knowing how advanced I was in my studies. The fact that there are no standards in place for clergy designation also opens up a lot of gullible people to potential fraud and victimization by so-called “clergy” members who would use the “clergy” label to their own advantage. The gods know that this has certainly been done enough by certain Christian “clergy” members as well as some unscrupulous Pagans representing themselves as clergy just to victimize teenagers. With this in mind, it seems a shame that there can’t be some sort of basic standards for clergy designation that at least most of the larger traditions would agree to recognize—and follow. True, the Covenant of the Goddess has its own requirements that a person must fulfill before they can achieve clergy designation, but these requirements certainly aren’t recognized by every Pagan tradition and their stringency is discouraging to a lot of covens and solitary seekers alike. If this could be changed, then we would need to work
on what “basic” clergy credentials might consist
of. Perhaps these could follow along some of the
same lines as those of the larger traditions (in all
denominations). It almost seems to be an
Morgan Ravenwood |
