Angel Holmes (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
ladytetra777) wrote2024-01-02 04:12 pm
ladytetra777) wrote2024-01-02 04:12 pm
Entry tags:
The Many Paths of the Independent Sacramental Movement, Conclusion
“You know it when you see it” rings as a common response to Plummer’s interviews on independent sacramentalism. While there may not be a standard definition for this form of worship and practice, there appears to be a mood. Independent churches may range from similar to drastically different from Christian orthodoxy, but many elements forbidden from mainstream worship appear as celebrated components of these churches. Plummer’s field work sees him everywhere from ecclesiastical Gnostic churches to the houses of priests that practice solo. As he writes, some form of celebrating the eucharist is one of the only constants across these different churches, denoted by “sacrament” in the name.
What I make of this is that freedom of worship yields itself to authentic expression. There is no objective criteria barring any practitioner Plummer has interviewed or group he has studied from legitimacy, even if that group or individual is not recognized by a larger church organization. Instead, what I see is a recognition of the Divine and attempts to work with it. All these forms of independent sacramentalism therefore have the advantage of personalization. I say this as an LGBT+ person that may not be able to practice or seek ordination with all mainstream Christian groups: customizing a preestablished blueprint can in turn increase the intimacy of the practice, and I see that present in a congregation like St. John the Beloved, where a person’s background as LGBT+ presents no obstacles to practice. Researching this church online, it appears like a Catholic church I would’ve visited growing up, the main difference being *who* is eligible for ordination.
This “whatever works” approach is finely tuned, creating such a wide field of independent churches. Plummer’s documented visits convey the feeling of family, and even if that family is not the idyllic nuclear American unit, I am convinced of the efficacy of this movement in its tender portrayals. Channeling this energy into magickal practice would mean embracing a sense of freedom. Other practitioners of magick I have spoken to tell me that I am too “by-the-book”, and if these churches are capable of finding God despite no support from the Vatican, there may not be a need for those books to further my practice, or at minimum a need to be so stubborn when being given advice.
I am not going to say there was one exact purpose in assigning this text for seminary. Yes, a bit of history on contemporary Gnostic movements is mentioned, as well as brief discussions on figures like Crowley and Steiner who were directly involved in magickal practice. However, I think the broadened horizons of seeing just how many different ways a church can exist and its congregation can coexist is the bigger takeaway. Part of the value in Plummer’s work is seeing corners of American life that I (and I’m assuming most Americans) do not know about. This comes an understanding that they are *free* to practice as they do, which ironically feels more American in spirit than having an overseas organization dictate what actions constitute legitimate worship, and who is allowed to lead that worship.
I am currently planning on reading the William James text next, and pending on how this report and that report turn out, I would then like to perform the Sacrament of Blessing for the Order of the Cleric in Gnostic Lesson 2. I do not know if this style of writing and communication works and would appreciate any feedback you have to offer. Thank you!
What I make of this is that freedom of worship yields itself to authentic expression. There is no objective criteria barring any practitioner Plummer has interviewed or group he has studied from legitimacy, even if that group or individual is not recognized by a larger church organization. Instead, what I see is a recognition of the Divine and attempts to work with it. All these forms of independent sacramentalism therefore have the advantage of personalization. I say this as an LGBT+ person that may not be able to practice or seek ordination with all mainstream Christian groups: customizing a preestablished blueprint can in turn increase the intimacy of the practice, and I see that present in a congregation like St. John the Beloved, where a person’s background as LGBT+ presents no obstacles to practice. Researching this church online, it appears like a Catholic church I would’ve visited growing up, the main difference being *who* is eligible for ordination.
This “whatever works” approach is finely tuned, creating such a wide field of independent churches. Plummer’s documented visits convey the feeling of family, and even if that family is not the idyllic nuclear American unit, I am convinced of the efficacy of this movement in its tender portrayals. Channeling this energy into magickal practice would mean embracing a sense of freedom. Other practitioners of magick I have spoken to tell me that I am too “by-the-book”, and if these churches are capable of finding God despite no support from the Vatican, there may not be a need for those books to further my practice, or at minimum a need to be so stubborn when being given advice.
I am not going to say there was one exact purpose in assigning this text for seminary. Yes, a bit of history on contemporary Gnostic movements is mentioned, as well as brief discussions on figures like Crowley and Steiner who were directly involved in magickal practice. However, I think the broadened horizons of seeing just how many different ways a church can exist and its congregation can coexist is the bigger takeaway. Part of the value in Plummer’s work is seeing corners of American life that I (and I’m assuming most Americans) do not know about. This comes an understanding that they are *free* to practice as they do, which ironically feels more American in spirit than having an overseas organization dictate what actions constitute legitimate worship, and who is allowed to lead that worship.
I am currently planning on reading the William James text next, and pending on how this report and that report turn out, I would then like to perform the Sacrament of Blessing for the Order of the Cleric in Gnostic Lesson 2. I do not know if this style of writing and communication works and would appreciate any feedback you have to offer. Thank you!
no subject
You don't need my permission, by the way, to perform any of the rituals in the Gnostic Lessons. You and you alone get to decide when you're ready for them. By all means proceed with the work!
no subject