The interface between one's personal experience and the social aspect offered by religion is a much grayer area than I generally see posted round these parts. For example, the majority of the people in my old church had a personal experience of their God, which usually tied in to the experience of those around them and the consensus belief. It's easy to have an individual relationship with the sacred that closely mirrors that of the congregation if you restrict the amount of alternative sources of learning to things which are purely Biblical. However, that certainly doesn't mean their experience is any less personal and affecting, or any less sacred.
If we're to be honest, how many people actually want a uniquely personal, individual experience of the numinous, unlike anyone elses? Most people seem to be happy with just any sacred encounter, formulaic or otherwise.
If we're to look at society as a whole, then I think the role played by the shaman in the community is a good model. The shaman is a specialist like any other, comparable to a plummer or electrician, called in for specific tasks. Not everyone is called to do that kind of work, but everyone recognises and respects that it's important to have a fireman around when things catch fire... or if a cat gets stuck up a tree. Moreover, the shamans worked alongside the religious community, in a recognisably different role to the priest (although there are probably exceptions to this). In a perfect world, practitioners of magick would be able to do the same. In fact, in some areas it's already occuring, with some Christian groups working alongside witches in cases of psychic phenomena, exorcism and the paranormal (I can't remember the title of the book I read about this, but it was written by investigators of the paranormal based in Anglican churches - I think - and is sold in your average Christian bookshop. It had some fabulous guidelines for dealing with cases of possession). |
