WHO ARE YOU CALLING A
NEOPHYTE?
I have recently discussed affiliations
both at home and as a member of a religious forum. What has become increasingly apparent is that there seems to be an elitist
thought pervading the discussions. Most seem to think theirs is a closed
sect.
In particular, the thinking is
such that only a true believer is welcome at some or all of their functions. This seems to be true with Wiccae, Mormons, Islaam,
Judaism, and particular Christians cults. Either you are not welcome at some of their ceremonial gatherings or you or not
welcome in their afterlife. Each cult has a novice period in which one has to
achieve a gradient in order to have a say in what the organization does. Smacks
of a caste system!
Suppose one has been studying apart
from the cult in order to understand its origins, teachings, and functions. Over
time, thisindividual has a strong repertoire of the cult and tries to gain entry. Through
self-study, the initiate finds he has more knowledge about the cult than its
clergy. The clergy finds this person a threat to its authority and shunts him
to initiate status, if in fact it will let him into the order at all. Should
he question the cults hierarchy he is pigeonholed into some deviant or other whimsical category outright.
In our modern context the methodology
to gain admittance to a particular cult is to pay in the form of a tithe or through somecult-generated ritualistic teachings. These teachings become animpetus for money-making, and over time the initiate has
to payboth the tithe and for the lessons of the cult. Why? Has not person who is self-taught in the cult already made the grade? Who sets the measure for acceptance
when the neophyte has already done the work or transcended to that level of cult-spirituality equal to the clergy before attempting
entry?
It appears as though the convening
authority of a given insti-tution cannot accept the novel way in which a self-taught person has learned. Gender transcended, Wiccae gives credence to the Crone as the sophist, relegating the High Priest to a
lesser status. Catholics have priests, bishops, cardinals, or the pope, and like the Latter Day Saints, Judaism, and Islaam,
denigrate women as chattel. However, the
self-taught individual, whether or not of like gender, is still a challenge to the rigidity in which the cult has gained acceptance
in the community at large.
There is an interesting treatise
by Hegel on Dialectical Materialism.It fosters the idea that in order for an entity to nurture and grow, itneeds to constantly
change. Otherwise, it stagnates and falls by the wayside. So too, has it become with the established religious cults, Wiccae aside because it is a work in progress. (Wiccae cannot get its head out of its ass long enough to accept the truth of its
origins and refuses to make the necessary changes in order to accepts all its affiliates.)
Ritual holds the key! Not the cult ritual, but the original Pagan rituals on which the aforementioned institutions base their
own ceremonial patterns. Stop and look at each worship service and how it is
carried out. Each has an association with some bygone ceremony that it has taken
for its own, calling the original here-tical or blasphemous to its order. Further, the cults consider their ritual as having been authored by themselves.
As a Pagan, it is amusing to watch
these cults in practice. Consider their modelPagan ritual. It is insult to my beliefs because while the cults have stolen my rituals, they shun me as infidel. In point of fact, the infidels are they themselves who are little more than thieves!
© Green & Rhodes 2002