/preest"hood/, n.1. the condition or office of a priest.2. priests collectively.[bef. 900; ME presthed(e), presthod(e), OE preosthad. See PRIEST, -HOOD]
* * *Office of a spiritual leader expert in the ceremonies of worship and the performance of religious rituals.Though chieftains, kings, and heads of households have sometimes performed priestly functions, in most civilizations the priesthood is a specialized office. The priest's duties are concerned less with magic than with the right performance of ritual acts required by the divine powers. Many African societies, for example, differentiated between shamans and the priests responsible for the worship of tribal ancestors. Sacrifice is often one of the most important duties of the priesthood. Not every highly developed religion possesses a priesthood, the most notable exception being Islam. The idea of the "priesthood of all believers" was also a cardinal doctrine of the Reformation, and the Protestant belief that priests are not needed as intermediaries between church members and the Holy Spirit is seen most clearly in sects such as the Society of Friends.
* * *▪ religionIntroductionthe office of a priest, a ritual expert learned in a special knowledge of the technique of worship and accepted as a religious and spiritual leader.Throughout the long and varied history of religion, the priesthood has been the official institution that has mediated and maintained a state of equilibrium between the sacred and the profane aspects of human society and that has exercised a stabilizing influence on social structures and on cultic organizations. The term priest is derived etymologically from the Greek word presbyteros (“elder”), of which it is a contraction, and it is equated with the Latin word sacerdos (the Roman officiant at the sacrifices and sacred rites (ritual)).Nature and significanceThe primary role of the priest is that of the ritual expert, the one who has a special and sometimes secret knowledge of the techniques of worship, including incantations, prayers, sacrificial (sacrifice) acts, songs, and other acts that are believed to bridge the separation between the divine or sacred and the profane realms. The priest gains such knowledge through the institution known as the priesthood, which may be composed of various groups or guilds devoted to all or only a few aspects of the priestly craft. Because the priest gains his special knowledge from a school for priests, he is differentiated from other religious and cultic leaders, such as the magician, shaman (shamanism) (healer and visionary), diviner (divination), or prophet (prophecy), who obtain their positions by means of individual efforts (e.g., learning from a master magician or diviner; individual ecstatic experiences that are publicly recognized). As a member of the institution that regulates the relationship between the divine or sacred and the profane realms through the various rituals of a particular religion, the priest is the accepted religious and spiritual leader in his society.At various times in the history of a culture or society the priestly institution may be attacked by other institutions or groups that vie for the religious leadership (and thus sometimes the social, political, and economic leadership) of a people. Such anticlericalism is a phenomenon not only of modern society (as noted in the Russian Revolution of 1917, the Mexican Civil War that began in 1857, and other less dramatic movements) but also in the ancient world, such as in Egypt in the 14th century BC, when the priesthood of the god Amon and the priesthood of the god Aton changed positions. Anticlericalism may be fostered by battles for religious leadership between two or more opposing priestly groups, or by prophets and others who are concerned with religious experiences in their personal rather than in their institutional forms. Among Protestants (Protestantism) the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers (i.e., all believers have direct access to God) militates generally against strong anticlerical tendencies within their own ranks. In Islam (Islām) there is, technically, no priesthood, though there are local spiritual and community leaders, such as the imam, the mullah, the mufti, the qadi, and others.The priest and his officeThe function of the priest as the mediator and maintainer of the equilibrium between the sacred and the profane in human society, and as the stabilizer of the social structures and the cultic organizations, determines the various criteria for holding the priestly office. In preliterate society the functions are accomplished by ritual experts who are trained in the special knowledge and techniques of magico-religious disciplines in which sacred power is believed to be inherent. They also are trained in disciplines that enable them to gain a supernormal psychic knowledge and in the techniques of mystical (mysticism) experience. As agents of the sacred power, they are believed to have the ability to control and manipulate through ritual natural processes and events and to engage in a sacramental relationship between man and the sacred order on which the community and its members depend for their sustenance, survival, and well-being.Because religious institutions and beliefs are intimately connected with other social institutions, those who are set apart to establish efficacious relations with the transcendental powers that are believed to control the universe, as well as human affairs and destinies, occupy a key position at the dynamic centre in the social structure (social class). Thus, in certain types of societies the office and functions of the priest may be limited to those having a particular ancestry, those belonging to certain tribes (such as the Levites in Judaism), families (such as the Eumolpids of the Eleusinian mystery religion of Greece), or castes (such as the Brahmans in Hinduism), and those initiated into certain professional orders (such as the cure doctors among the Maya).Besides such sociocultural criteria, there are also certain personal requirements in various cultures for those who would become members of a priesthood. celibacy (as in Roman Catholicism and the Arcakas of the Digambara sect in Jainism), asceticism (as in various Buddhist groups), and religious experiences (as among some holiness Protestant sects) are among the personal requirements for those who aspire to or are chosen to assume the priestly office.The religious functions of priests are quite varied. In his specific role as the officiant of the rites that unite the sacred and the profane realms, the priest as a pontifex (from the Latin word that means maker of a bridge) celebrates or administers at the rituals of initiation into the cult or church, presides over ritual reenactments of creative, redemptive, or salvatory (salvation-working) events, and offers sacrifices to the gods or to one God. He also functions as a perpetuator of the sacred traditions, practices, and beliefs and as a teacher, healer, counselor, and diviner (see photograph—>).In all their respective offices, functions, and capacities, those who have exercised and manipulated sacred power have attained a uniquely prestigious position as the spiritual and social leaders par excellence. When perplexing and emotional situations that appear to be beyond human control, knowledge, skill, or techniques have arisen in a community, the people have a recourse in the priest, who has the special knowledge of the relationship between the divine or sacred and the profane realms. The priest is often called upon at critical junctures (rite of passage) in the lives of individuals (such as birth, puberty, marriage, and death) and in the life of a community (such as seasonal changes or at times of flood, drought, and famine).Priesthood in the religions of the worldNonliterate culturesThe office of priesthood in nonliterate society ranges from the medicine man, who magically manipulates the sacred power as a quasi-impersonal force, to the shaman, who, as an agent of divine or spiritual beings, may be at once a medicine man, a visionary, an occult diviner, and a genuine sacerdotal cult leader. Not infrequently, chiefs or headmen of a clan or village may become sacred men or ritual experts displaying supernatural insight and knowledge as the agents of spiritual beings. As such, they may eventually become prophets or sacral kings occupying a unique status in the community. This status may be acquired by accepted claims of descent from a mythical divine ancestor or god on whom the fertility of the crops and the welfare of the community in general are thought to depend. Occult power and insight may be derived from spirits with which the prophet or diviner is related in a trance or ecstasy, or else in dreams, visions, or auguries and oracles that make known the divine will. To occupy such a position, a strenuous course of training is frequently required involving some knowledge of therapeutics (healing), leechcraft (use of leeches in healing), trephining (operating on the skull), herbs, poisons, and perhaps sleight of hand and similar techniques, together with the development of psychical and occult qualities. While charlatanry (pretensions to medical knowledge) is often practiced, the office also demands an understanding of the technical equipment calculated to bring about the results that are sought, and the proper type of temperament, conditions of mind, and state of emotion.Unlike the shaman and the medicine man, both of whom exercise their respective functions while relying largely on their own initiative and psychic and occult powers of divination, healing, and direct access to the spirit world at their command, the priest supplicates and conciliates supernatural forces superior to himself, guards the sacred tradition in his care, and acts as the master of sacrifice. The shaman or magician officiates in his own name and by his own methods and techniques; the priest serves the altar, in the temple or shrine, as the representative of the community in his relations with the gods and the sacred order by virtue of the status and its functions that have been conferred upon him at his ordination, bestowing its sacredness and attendant taboos.The ancient Middle EastIn the Nile (Egyptian religion) valley the occupant of the throne (church and state) (the pharaoh) was regarded as a god incarnate, the sacred king (sacred kingship). Because he was believed to be the epitome of all that was divine, he alone was the intermediary between mankind and the gods whom he summed up in his complex personality. Before Menes, founder of the 1st dynasty (c. 3100–2890 BC), centralized the rule of Upper and Lower Egypt, the high priest and king “Scorpion” was traditionally considered to be the incarnation of Horus (the sky god). Under the powerful influence of the priesthood of Heliopolis, the sacred kingship was given a solar significance; the pharaohs were represented as the sons of the sun god Re, who was identified with the god Atum. When Memphis became the imperial city, Re-Atum was brought into relation with its god Ptah (the creator) and subsequently with Osiris, a fertility god who also was regarded as a god of the dead. Osiris was equated with the life-giving waters of the Nile and believed to be the first civilizing king, reigning in the person of the pharaoh as his posthumous son Horus. Therefore in Egypt the divine origin and status of the monarchy was so firmly established that it became the stabilizing force of the civilization in the Nile valley.In theory, the king of Egypt was the high priest of every god, and in all important ceremonies he alone was depicted in the temple scenes as the officiant. For practical purposes, however, he delegated his functions to the particular professional local priesthoods. In due course the priests, courtiers, and officials shared in his divine powers and privileges. Even though they only acted on behalf of the divine ruler, his representatives shared in some measure his personality and potency. As the priest par excellence, the pharaoh remained unique, and it was from him that the priesthood and nobility exercised their sacerdotal functions when the solar theology of Heliopolis was established in the 5th dynasty (c. 2494–c. 2345 BC). After the 5th dynasty the pharaoh was accredited exclusively with having built all the temples, and on their walls he was portrayed officiating as the mediator between mankind and the gods in all important rites. In fact, nevertheless, his place was taken by one of the retinue of priests attached to the royal household or to the local temples. Only very occasionally did he perform his sacerdotal duties in person. Every temple had its high priest who, in addition to his sacred offices, might also be a high judicial official, thereby combining sacred and profane roles, varying with the actions performed.From the number of titles assigned to priestly officials in the Old Kingdom (c. 2686–c. 2160 BC), it appears that one priest must have served simultaneously a multiplicity of cults in the shrine to which he was attached and received a share of the offerings and emoluments. In wealthy great temples in the New Kingdom (c. 1567–c. 1085 BC) there was an elaborate organization, and a large staff engaged in administrative, civil, and educational duties, as well as in their sacerdotal and mortuary functions. There were also a number of priestesses associated with the mother-goddess Hathor (wife of the sun god Re), who were mainly concerned with playing the sacred sistra and other musical instruments. From the 18th to the 21st dynasties (1567–1085 BC), however, under the Theban priesthood of Amon-Re, the priestly hierarchy was able to create an absolute “state within a state.”In Mesopotamia (Mesopotamian religion), where kingship occupied a less prominent position than it did in the Nile valley, powerful priesthoods and highly organized temples were firmly established in and after the 4th millennium BC. The temples were centres of sacred learning of the content and methods of incantation, prognostication, exorcism, and political and economic administration, and their attendent priests were divided into classes with special sacerdotal and secular functions. The valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers contained a series of city-states loosely bound together under the rule of a governor (patesi or ensi) and of a high priest (sangu mah). Their main functions were to integrate the temple communities of the city, their revenues and boundaries, and the unigallu, or head of the priesthood, was responsible for the performance of the seasonal rites, with the assistance of those who sang the liturgies and directed the temple music and those who uttered the lamentations, invoked the oracles, and interpreted the astrological signs and omens. The duties of other members of the priesthood included making incantations and pronouncing spells and exorcisms. The seers, or baru, foretold the future by means of soothsaying (divination), interpreting dreams and visions, and communicating revelations.An important function of the priesthood in the ancient Middle East was that of exorcism. All down the ages good and evil have been viewed as two contending forces in perpetual conflict, and in the dual task of the riddance of evil and the induction of good the exorcist, the shaman, and the seer have exercised complementary functions hardly distinguishable in the higher cultural levels in Babylonia and Assyria. When the function of the driving out of demons from human beings and buildings by incantations and ritual expulsions was separated from the interpretation of omens and astrological portents, the office of the exorcists was in ever increasing demand. According to cuneiform texts from about the 3rd millennium BC, exorcists held a position of supreme importance, assisting at the consecration of temples, at funerals, and at seasonal ceremonies. In the temple schools, exorcists, diviners, and astrologers, together with physicians, scribes, and judges, fostered the study of astronomy, medicine, and jurisprudence. In their sacerdotal functions and capacities they were regarded as the agents and exponents of the gods, having a monopoly on sacred knowledge, controlling for good or evil the destinies of the community and its members. Therefore, their power was enormous, and they maintained the relation between religion and culture by their all-embracing hierarchy that determined the present welfare and future destinies of both human beings and the social order.Similar beliefs and practices occurred in northern Syria in the middle of the 2nd millennium BC, before the Israelite settlement in Canaan (Syrian and Palestinian religion). Here, again, the priesthood was responsible for the dramatic rituals on which the social structure and the well-being of mankind were believed to depend, especially in the climax of the autumnal festival that culminated in the enthronement of the year god. The priestly movement was centred in the temple of Ugarit, and the religious texts discovered there (Ras Shamra) were essentially liturgical documents devised to make the sacred drama enacted there efficacious. Baal, the weather god, was regarded as “the lord of the furrows of the field,” responsible for the rain and the production of the fruits of the earth. A series of temples was erected in his honour in Syria and Palestine. The temple at Ras Shamra was a considerable structure with a lattice, the opening of which was supposed to produce the autumnal rains, and its liturgical ritual was celebrated by the priests and priestesses in their official capacities as those who personified the gods and goddesses responsible for providential bounty and beneficence.With the advent of Persian (Iranian religion) sovereignty in Mesopotamia, a new approach to cosmology and mythology was introduced. In the religion founded by Zoroaster (Zoroastrianism) (c. 7th century BC), the ultimate ground of the universe was reduced to a single supreme deity, Ahura Mazdā, the All-wise Lord. astrology became widely practiced by the Iranian Magi (magus) (priests of the Zoroastrian religion) who were highly skilled in the knowledge of astral lore and the signs of the zodiac. In the three centuries after the Persian occupation of Mesopotamia (6th century BC), the Babylonian priests under Iranian influence made remarkable strides in astronomical (astronomy) learning that ultimately dethroned astrology from its exalted position in sacred tradition. Beyond the Euphrates valley, however, it survived until after the Muslim rule, when the astrologer and the astronomer became indistinguishable.Ancient Greece and RomeThe ancient Greeks (Greek religion) were devoid of hierarchical institutions composed of men and women through whom the gods were approached, though priests and priestesses could be found in many places engaging in specific sacerdotal functions and ritual acts. Some of them attained considerable social and civic prestige and importance and were attached to particular temples or shrines such as the oracle at Delphi, which was consulted on private and state matters. Their duties, however, were generally those of members of a household engaged in everyday affairs, rather than of a caste or sacerdotal order set apart and consecrated for the performance of sacrificial and other rites, functions, and practices. Though not regarded as mediators between the gods and men, they did act in such ritualistic capacities in certain civic and administrative areas. There was no specific distinction, however, between them and lay members of society. On the contrary, such officials as magistrates might be priests and vice versa. Some exercised considerable influence if they were regarded as outstandingly efficient, wise, or distinguished in their respective civic or religious capacities.Similarly, in ancient Rome (Roman religion) when the agricultural religion of Numa (Numa Pompilius) (the legendary second king) was transformed into an institutional state cult in the republic, it was organized as a hierarchy with the rex sacrorum (“king of the sacred (sacred kingship) things”) inheriting the office and attributes of the former priest-king. The rex sacrorum had to be a patrician and was chosen for life, subordinate only to the pontifex maximus, who was the head of the college of pontifices (“advisors on the sacred law”) and flamines (flamen) (“priests devoted to a particular god”), 3 of whom were assigned to the gods Jupiter, Mars, and Quirinus, the remaining 12 to other deities. The flamen Dialis, dedicated to the supreme sky god, Jupiter, occupied a unique position socially, politically, and sacerdotally and was subject to strict taboos and regulations because of his sacred office. The flaminica, the wife of the flamen Dialis, participated in his sacredness and official status, and so vital was her association with him and his office that if she died he ceased to perform his functions.Attached to the temple of the goddess Vesta on the Forum in Rome were the six Vestal Virgins dedicated from childhood to the service of the sacred fire in the atrium Vestae (hearth temple) and to the care of the storehouse (penus). Originally they were selected from patrician families by the pontifex maximus, but later plebians were eligible for election. During their 30 years of service to the goddess, beginning in childhood, chastity had to be strictly observed on pain of death by starvation, but after the completion of the period of service the virgins were free to marry. The duties assigned to them at very ancient festivals, such as the Lupercalia (a fertility festival) on February 15, and at other occasions indicate their unique position and significance in the state cult going back, in all probability, to their origins in the family tradition, associated with the pontifices as the officiating priests. Augurs (divinatory personages) had a powerful influence on state religious beliefs and practices, especially in divination (augury) to ascertain the will of the gods and the blessing of the crops. They also interpreted signs in the sky as good or bad for the guidance of the magistrates. At the end of the republic (in the 1st century BC) this practice led to abuses that were ridiculed by the politician and orator Cicero. Among other groups of Roman priests were the Salii on the Palatine Hill (the 12 Leapers of the god Mars), and the Luperci, whose sacerdotal functions were confined to the Lupercalia. The fetiales (fetial) were Roman officials employed in making treatises or declarations of war, whose work gradually fell into disuse at the beginning of the empire (late 1st century BC) when the state cult was in decline and losing its vitality.Ancient JudaismWhen Christianity became the legal religion of the Roman Empire after AD 313, it had already inherited from its Jewish background a concept of an organized priesthood. The Jewish priesthood had been centralized in the Temple at Jerusalem (Jerusalem, Temple of) (destroyed by the Romans in AD 70) since the 10th century BC. The Hebrew designations for those who exercised oracular, divinatory, and ecstatic functions in ancient sanctuaries that were prominent cultic centres prior to the building of the temple, such as Mamre, Hebron, Bethel, Shechem, and Gilgal, were kohen ( cohen), levi, naviʾ, and roʾe, corresponding to priest, Levite, prophet, and seer, respectively. Kohen is the equivalent of the Arabic word kāhin (“diviner”), and in Hebrew it has the meaning of “priest,” denoting the occupant of the office concerned with obtaining oracles by the aid of the ephod (an apronlike garment) containing the Urim and Thummim (sacred lots) and by inspiration, as well as with officiating at a sanctuary. After the 7th century BC, when worship was concentrated in Jerusalem, the capital, the priesthood was restricted to the Levitical house of Aaron (brother of Moses, the 13th-century-BC lawgiver) after having been previously drawn from other lines of descent, such as those of David, Nathan, Micah, and Abinadab (royal, prophetic (prophecy), and priestly families).Whether in fact the Levites ever were members of a sacerdotal tribe is open to debate, but in any case they represented a special fraternity set apart to be guardians of the sanctuary and to engage in oracular and prophetic function, over against the rival priestly kohanim in their respective independent confraternities. It was not until after the exile of the Jews to Babylon (Babylonian Exile) in 586 BC, when the Priestly code was drawn up, that the distinction between priests and Levites became absolute. The priesthood was confined exclusively to those claiming succession from Aaron, in spite of the Zadokites claiming priestly descent from Eleazar as an “everlasting covenant” (Num. 18:2–7, 25:13; I Chron. 24:37). The Zadokites may have represented the survival of an ancient Jebusite (Canaanite) royal priesthood, giving them special duties and privileges in the Temple worship above those of the Levites. Later, when the priesthood became reserved for the descendants of the family of Aaron alone, the title was restricted to members of the non-Aaronic families of the tribe acting as the servants of the Temple.The oracle given by the priests as the inspired word of the Law, called the Torah, which was referred back to Moses in postexilic Judaism, acquired a new significance, involving a rigid observance of its ritual and legal commands that permeated every aspect of life, worship, and conduct. The cessation of the daily sacrifice and other Levitical priestly ministrations in the Temple after the fall of Jerusalem (AD 70) gave a new emphasis to and interpretation of the Torah in the synagogue and in domestic rituals. The prerogatives of the high priest, and those of the priesthood in general, with its exclusive lineage, were maintained after the revolt of the Jews under the leadership of the Maccabees against the Hellenistic Syrians in the 2nd century BC, and the priestly blessing (dukhan) in the synagogue remained the exclusive right of the kohanim claiming descent from Aaron. They also have had the right to be the first called upon to read the Torah in the synagogue, followed by a Levite. Their privileges, however, have been questioned by some rabbinical authorities (nonpriestly Torah scholars and religious leaders). The Sadducees (Sadducee) (deriving their name from the Zadokites) were the high priests in Jerusalem during and after the time of the Hasmoneans, the descendants of the Maccabees (135–104 BC). They exercised considerable influence in the Jewish sanhedrin (supreme rabbinic court) as the conservative class of the religious aristocracy, favoured accommodations to Greek culture, and maintained the importance of the letter of the Written Law over against the oral tradition of the rival Pharisees (Pharisee). The high priesthood, however, was declining in status under the increasing control of the Roman authorities.At this critical juncture in Judaism, Christianity, with its own particular conception of priesthood and sacrificial redemption, began in Palestine and rapidly spread throughout the surrounding regions in the Greco-Roman world. In the New Testament the imminent destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem and its worship is predicted, and the culmination of its high priesthood in the person of Christ (Jesus Christ), after the order of Melchizedek (the priest-king of Jerusalem revered by Abraham in the Old Testament), is proclaimed. The Jewish Aaronic priesthood and its ritual are represented in the Letter to the Hebrews as imperfect shadows, in a Platonic sense, of the archetypal order of the eternal sacrifice of Christ. Only Christ, who was described as “beyond the veil” (referring to the veil that separated the “ Holy of Holies” section from the other areas of the Temple), was believed to be able to save those who came to God through him, since he had removed the barrier of sin that separated man and God for those in a state of grace. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Hebrews, Letter to the) stated that Christ, in his reconciling offering as both priest and victim on the cross, accomplished the removal of the barrier in the heavenly tabernacle. This was interpreted in terms of the Hebrew Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), a ceremony in which the Jewish high priest made expiation annually for himself, the priesthood, and the whole congregation of Israel. The view of Christ as king, high priest, mediator, and victim influenced the establishment and gradual development of the Christian priesthood in the church, which shares in and makes accessible to its baptized members the all-sufficient priesthood of Christ.Originally the terms presbyteros (“ elder”) and episkopos (“overseer”), current in the New Testament and the early church, were probably identical. From the 2nd century on, however, the sacerdotal hierarchy developed along the lines of the Hebrew priesthood, the title episcopus (episcopacy), or bishop, becoming reserved for those who presided over the presbyterate, then called sacerdotes because they shared in the episcopal sacerdotium (“priesthood”), which included the offering of the eucharistic sacrifice of bread and wine. But the conferring of holy orders (ordination of presbyters) and administering the sacrament of confirmation, together with administration of the diocese (jurisdictional area), were confined to the episcopate. In due course the threefold ministry of bishops, priests, and deacons (administrative and liturgical assistants in a parish) became organized on a diocesan basis. This remained the norm in the Western church until the Reformation in the 16th century, when it was repudiated by the continental Reformers (e.g., Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli). In Roman Catholicism, Anglicanism, Swedish Lutheranism, and Eastern Orthodoxy, apostolic succession and jurisdiction has been maintained, especially in the Roman Catholic papacy and in Eastern Orthodox patriarchates.In European Christianity in the Middle Ages (c. 6th to 14th centuries), the deeply laid tradition inherited from the theocracies and priesthoods in the ancient Middle East of a common social, judicial, political, and religious structure was sustained and gave expression to medieval civilization, especially in the Latin West. Church and state became so closely associated that they were virtually identical, as in the cases of the sacred and secular in preliterate societies. As Dante (1265–1321) contended in De Monarchia (“Concerning the Monarchy”), the pope, as the head of the spiritual aspects of society, and the emperor, as the ruler of the temporal areas of concern, were equally ordained by God to exercise their functions in their respective spheres of power and influence for the welfare of mankind. If this duality of control did not endure, because the church gradually usurped more and more of the civil jurisdiction and dominated emperors, kings, and other ecclesiastical rulers, the unification of the body politic was rendered more complete as an integrated whole, and the life and character of medieval civilization was determined through the papacy and its priesthood.In Vedic India, the early period of Hinduism, when the priestly caste ( Brahman, or Brahmana) was vested in a particular tribe or special class, it occupied the primary place of importance in the segmentation of Hindu society. The king was subordinate in some respects to the Brahmans, though at one time both sometimes were chosen from the Kshatriya, or warrior caste. Nevertheless, because the existence of the universe and all cosmic processes were made to depend upon sacrificial offerings, the king delegated such functions to the priests before the end of the 7th century BC, the priests having usurped that position previously held by the kings. The priesthood then exercised supreme control over the fortunes of the gods and men, of heaven and earth, and of the state, though not infrequently priests worked in the service of princes. The Brahmans, however, were so firmly established in the caste system as the twice-born masters of sacrifice and of exclusive sacred knowledge that they were viewed as holding the universe in their grasp. As “lords of creation” by divine right they were divided into 10 tribes, above all other castes. They were required to pass through four ashramas (ashrama) (the celibate religious student, married householder, forest hermit, and wandering ascetic), or conditions of life, prior to and after marriage, to become anchorites (or hermits), and to attain the plenitude of their status, vocation, and authority, thus renewing the creative process by the due performance of the sacrificial offering.Against this Brahmanic sacerdotalism and its caste organization, the reaction noted in the Upanishads (Upanishad) (writings representing the end of the Vedic period), about 1000–500 BC, introduced a mystical conception of the priesthood in Hinduism, and subsequently in Buddhism. Living as hermits in the forest, groups of mystics, reacting to Brahmanic ritualism, gathered around them disciples to learn and propagate a philosophical doctrine based upon the quest to discover a new function for the priesthood, in which the identification of the inner eternal self of man ( atman) with the divine ground of the universe (brahman (brahma)) was achieved by asceticism, renunciation of the world, and mystical experience and realization, rather than by the sacrificial offering. This quest was eventually associated with the meditative techniques of Yoga (mental and physical exercises) and opened the way for the rejection of the exclusive claims of the Brahmans in favour of the mystical insights and esoteric knowledge accessible to all who adopted the Upanishadic teaching and way of life.With the establishment of the four ashramas, sacrifice and Brahmanic study of the Vedas were rehabilitated and brought into relationship with the Upanishadic tradition. The Brahman was thus regarded as occupying the highest state of life; he wasone who has sensed the deepest self and acts out of that consciousness, [communicating it to others], . . . gives moral guidance, . . . lays down the science of values, draws out the blueprints for social reconstruction, and persuades the world to accept the high ends of life. (From S. Radhakrishnan, Eastern Religions and Western Thought.)This view has lacked, however, a conception of the godhead with whom personal relations are possible, thereby making the priesthood an aspect of an impersonal divine power (brahman), of a pantheistic principle executing its functions with automatic precision by virtue of its sacerdotal equipment, of an alternating mystical and ascetic priestly sublimation.In Jainism and Buddhism, arising within Brahmanism as nontheistic sectarian movements, the Brahman priesthood was sublimated and the Vedic caste and sacrifice eliminated. In their place a monastic (monasticism) system was evolved, with monks and nuns devoted primarily to rigorous asceticism in the quest of perfection and in the pursuit of chastity and truthfulness. Complete detachment from all phenomenal possessions and connections in Jainism (founded by Mahavira in the 6th century BC) made paramount the mendicant life of meditation and spiritual exercises dependent upon the fulfillment of vows of poverty. The functions of the priesthood were sublimated in a process of self-salvation, centred around the purpose of the deliverance of a suffering humanity from the cycles of rebirth. Since in Buddhism tanha (“desire”) was regarded as the fundamental cause of dukkha (“the burden of existence”), priestly intervention and the sacrificial (sacrifice) offerings were considered to be of no avail in the pursuit of the Eightfold Path leading to the passionless peace of nirvana (the state of bliss).In the absence of any conception of a deity in Buddhism, the question of sacerdotal mediation could be ignored, though in the Mahayana (“Greater Vehicle”) school and in the Tantric (Vajrayāna) (esoteric, magical) school some elements of the priestly tradition survived. The earliest converts to Buddhism were Brahmans for the most part, and a religious organization in monasteries developed, with various prescribed roles for their inhabitants, with daily routines, certain periods devoted to alms and quests, and periods for sacred learning and the translation of literary and theological works. To these activities were added other functions, such as recitations of the sacred texts at births, marriages, and in sicknesses to keep evil influences at bay. In the temples, shrines were erected to the honour of the eternal Buddha, and the image of the Blessed One on a lotus bedecked with flowers has become the central object of worship in certain Buddhist groups. The recitation of the ancient Pali sutras (divine revelations) is believed to transmit the merit inherent in the texts, as is the endless repetition of the sacred formula Namu O-mi-to (Amida-butsu), “Homage be to the Buddha of infinite light.” This, however, is not a sacerdotal devotion performed by, or requiring the presence of, a priest. Buddhism, in fact, has never been able to produce a strong and lasting ecclesiastical organization or a hierarchical segmentation (as in Hinduism), because it has interpreted unity in terms of Becoming, instead of in terms of Being.Buddhism, Taoism, and Shintō in China and JapanIn the Mahayana Buddhist sects, the monks, and those who are popularly known as bonzes, can hardly be said to exercise definitely sacerdotal functions in the temples, monasteries, and shrines. For the most part these functions have been confined to recitations and invocations, which all of the believers share. In China the Taoist (Daoism) “priesthood” emerged as an organized institution at the beginning of the Christian Era. Some were celibates and others were married, living ordinary domestic lives. A number were mendicants and some engaged in alchemy and astrology; others were illiterate. There were also those who assisted in ceremonies and collecting the revenues. In the 6th century AD, in imitation of Buddhism, the Taoist celibates lived in monasteries with a patriarch as the head and interchanged facilities with their Buddhist counterparts. In the Zen contemplative sect in Japan, an attempt was made to attain a state of enlightenment ( Satori) by a strict discipline and training in quasi-yoga intuitive methods, without priestly intervention or divine grace. The Zen temples and halls of meditation have become centres of learning, art, and education as well as of vigorous austerity and contemplative mysticism, which has not been without attractions to various persons of the West in recent times.When Buddhism reached China, Japan, and Tibet in the opening centuries of the Christian Era, it came under the influence of the indigenous faiths, cults, and social structures, and, reciprocally, it became a most important influence, adapting its beliefs and customs to those already established in these regions. In the second half of the 6th century AD, after Buddhism had acquired official recognition, pagodas, temples, and monasteries were erected with ornamentations of Buddhist origin. Buddhism adapted itself to Shintō, the native religion of Japan, and to its shrines, festivals, and rites. The functions of the four priestly classes (e.g., as ritual experts, diviners, musicians, female dancers, and “abstainers” to ward off pollution) that emerged from the family or tribal cults of Shintō were absorbed by Buddhism.When Shintō was restored as the national religion (church and state) of Japan in the 19th century, after a period of decline, the Shintō and Buddhist priests were assigned their respective duties and offices by the State Department of Religion without discrimination, for the maintenance of reverence for the gods and love of country (the Truth of Heaven and the Way of Humanity) and proper respect for the sacral emperor (the mikado). This dual sacerdotal combination lasted only until 1875, because Buddhism and Shintō were basically incompatible. This resulted in Shrine Shintō becoming the national faith under the Imperial family, maintaining its divine status, cultic practices, and priesthood, but leaving Buddhism free to propagate its dharma (or law) in its own way. New rituals and ceremonies were composed by the government for use at the Shintō shrines, and the duties and grades of the priests were fixed (see photograph—>).The modern situationIn recent years, in Christianity especially, notwithstanding the doctrinal divergencies and modes of expression in the nature and function of the priesthood, new approaches have been made by both Catholic and Protestant theologians, liturgical scholars, and laypersons. This is particularly apparent in the ecumenical and liturgical movements in Western Christendom, in the administration of the sacraments, and in the participation of the laity in the liturgy and in the other offices. In Roman Catholicism, especially under the influence of the second Vatican Council (1962–65), and in the contemporary Anglican Convocations, the “priesthood of the laity (priesthood of all believers)” has been more widely recognized and practiced, though this has been a cardinal doctrine of Protestantism since the Reformation. Laypersons trained in liturgical functions have assumed functions, such as reading of the Scriptures and administering the eucharistic elements of bread and wine, in various Protestant churches and, in some instances, in Roman Catholic celebrations that in the past have been the prerogatives of priests. In the Eastern Orthodox churches (Eastern Orthodoxy), such movements and influences have been less effective and operative, largely because of the heavy pressure they endured from governments that were hostile in the formerly communist countries where Orthodox membership is concentrated. They have always, however, preserved a living unity of faith, worship, and organization. Priesthood is inherent in these institutions; it has proved to be the unifying, stabilizing force in Eastern Orthodoxy, the second largest Christian body (after Roman Catholicism), beset as it has been by so many hazards and hostilities in its long and checkered history.The Rev. Edwin Oliver JamesAdditional ReadingThe nature, characteristics, and significance of priesthood in primitive cultures ancient and modern are discussed in Grahame Clark, Archaeology and Society, 3rd ed., rev. (1957); and Émile Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, 2nd ed. (1976; originally published in French, 1912). Cultural and scientific developments are examined in Jacquetta Hopkins Hawkes and Leonard Woolley, Prehistory and the Beginnings of Civilization (1963). The prominent features of priests and kings in the rise of civilization are considered by Harold Peake and Herbert John Fleure, The Corridors of Time, vol. 4, Priests & Kings (1927). Gunnar Landtman, The Origin of Priesthood (1905); and E.O. James, The Nature and Function of Priesthood (1955, reissued 1961), are comparative and anthropological studies of the subject in its wider aspects, with full bibliographies.The organized priesthoods in ancient Egypt and the Middle East are treated in James Henry Breasted (ed.), Ancient Records of Egpyt, 5 vol. (1906–07, reissued 1988), and Development of Religion and Thought in Ancient Egypt (1912, reissued 1986); and Henri Frankfort, Ancient Egyptian Religion (1948, reissued 1961). The available Sumerian evidence is produced by S.N. Kramer, Sumerian Mythology (1944, reprinted 1988). S.H. Hooke, The Origins of Early Semitic Ritual (1938, reissued 1980), surveys the priestly aspects of the autumnal festival. The Canaanite counterparts are recorded in Cyrus Herzl Gordon, Ugaritic Literature (1949); and Godfrey Rolles Driver, Canaanite Myths and Legends, 2nd ed. (1978). A full bibliography on the Hellenic conceptions of priesthood is appended to the article by W.K.C. Guthrie, “The Religion and Mythology of the Greeks,” in The Cambridge Ancient History, 3rd ed., vol. 2, part 2 (1961), pp. 851–905. The origin and status of the Levites and the Levitical code in the Hebrew priesthood are investigated by Theophile James Meek, Hebrew Origins, rev. ed. (1950, reissued 1973). Julia M. O'Brien, Priest and Levite in Malachi (1990), contains an up-to-date survey of research on the Israelite priesthood, as well as a discussion of prophetic critiques of the priesthood and the temple cult.The origin of the Christian priesthood is addressed in Kenneth E. Kirk (ed.), The Apostolic Ministry (1946, reprinted 1962). Studies of the modern situation of the priesthood in Christianity include Bernard Cooke, Ministry to Word and Sacraments: History and Theology (1976), a study of the evolution of ministry in the Christian church; Max Thurian, Priesthood and Ministry: Ecumenical Research (1983; originally published in French, 1970), providing an excellent overview of the theology of the ordained ministry in Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and contemporary Calvinism; and Kenan B. Osborne, Priesthood: A History of the Ordained Ministry in the Roman Catholic Church (1988), a comprehensive history. An overview of research on the Roman Catholic priesthood is Dean R. Hoge, Raymond H. Potvin, and Kathleen M. Ferry, Research on Men's Vocations to the Priesthood and the Religious Life (1984); a more recent essay is Andrew M. Greeley, “A Sea of Paradoxes: Two Surveys of Priests,” America, 171(2):6–10 (July 16, 1994). Much contemporary Christian, and especially Roman Catholic, discussion regarding the priesthood focuses on the question of women's ordination. Jacqueline Field-Bibb, Women Towards Priesthood: Ministerial Politics and Feminist Praxis (1991), argues in favour; while Manfred Hauke, Women in the Priesthood? A Systematic Analysis in the Light of the Order of Creation and Redemption (1988; originally published in German, 1982), argues against.The Vedic, Brahmanic, and Upanishadic conceptions of priesthood and the predominance of the Brahman caste in Hinduism are discussed in Arthur Berriedale Keith, The Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and Upanishads, 2 vol. (1925, reprinted 1989); S. Radhakrishnan, The Hindu View of Life (1927, reissued 1980), and Eastern Religions and Western Thought, 2nd ed. (1940, reissued 1991); J.H. Hutton, Caste in India, 2nd ed. (1951); and R.C. Zaehner, Hinduism (1962, reissued 1977), with a full bibliography. C.J. Fuller, Servants of the Goddess: The Priests of a South Indian Temple (1984), analyzes the complex interrelationships between the priests of the Mīnākṣī Temple in Madurai and the economic, political, and social structure of contemporary India. V. Bouillier and G. Toffin (eds.), Priesthood, Power, and Authority in the Himalayas (1989), in English and French, is a collection of ethnographic papers concerning the role of the priesthood in Buddhism, Hinduism, Islām, and two tribal religions, the Tharu of Dang and the cult of Kham Magar. The sublimation of priesthood in Buddhism in India, China, and Japan is treated in Paul Dahlke, Buddhism and Its Place in the Mental Life of Mankind (1927); and Edward Conze, Buddhism: Its Essence and Development (1951, reissued 1975). D. Howard Smith, Chinese Religions (1968), introduces religious thought and sacerdotal practice in China. Religious Studies in Japan (1959), a collection of papers from the ninth International Congress for the History of Religions, is a very informative composite volume in English by a group of Japanese scholars. Texts concerning the Zen sect include Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki, Manual of Zen Buddhism, 2nd ed. (1950, reissued 1983); and Alan Watts, The Way of Zen (1957, reprinted 1989); while reference is made to it in R.C. Zaehner, Mysticism, Sacred and Profane (1957, reissued 1980). The priesthood in Shintō is discussed in D.C. Holtom, The National Faith of Japan (1938, reissued 1965).The Rev. Edwin Oliver James Ed.
* * *