The new Rule 3 - no more tourist vs. pilgrim debates

[C clearly]

Rule 3 to me simply says do not judge your fellow travellers(?) - pilgrims or tourists or any combination thereof.

A subtle difference is that rule 3 actually says "Do not write about" those judgements.

The rules on the forum can only be applied to what people write on the forum. We are struggling for words that describe what writings are not allowed. We cannot control what judgements or rude thoughts they might privately make.

I am confused as to why we even need this discussion. Does it matter if travellers are tourists or pilgrims?

We are having this discussion because many recent arguments and bad feelings have resulted from the way some people present their opinions and information. To some people, apparently it does matter whether travelers are tourists or pilgrims. We are now saying that forum members must park that distinction and argument at the forum door.)

 

[TravellingMan22]

A subtle difference is that rule 3 actually says "Do not write about" those judgements.

The rules on the forum can only be applied to what people write on the forum. We struggle for words that describe what writings are not allowed. We cannot control what judgements or rude thoughts they might privately make.


We are having this discussion because many recent arguments and bad feelings have resulted from the way some people present their opinions and information. To some people, apparently it does matter whether travelers are tourists or pilgrims. We are now saying that forum members must park that distinction and argument at the forum door.)

I only rejoined yesterday but this conversation has been great and I guess exposes how daft ‘labelling’and ‘oneupmanship’ is. I guess people just get carried away and I hope this will help get everyone back on course.

Behaviour of this type I guess is not uncommon in life. The person who saw a band in a local pub versus the person who became a fan when they became famous. In the UK lots of this type of debates around football and who are the ‘real fans vs plastic fans’!

Daft really!

 

[DoughnutANZ]

It is kind of strange to me that the rules clearly exclude those who have not walked 100 km, even though there are many people who go to Santiago on a religious pilgrimage and who do not walk. Excluding those people from eligibility for the compostela tells me that the powers that be are more interested in maintaining some sort of “prize value” for those who make a certain physical effort than they are in recognizing the sincere religious intent of many people who are true believers and have come to venerate St. James.

It isn't strange to me, the 100/200klm rule is purely commercial. If the pilgrim office did away with it then the various local government agencies would quickly be up in arms and putting pressure on the pilgrim office to change it back.

 

[Teez]

We are starting another thread on this specific rule, because it did provoke some questions and concerns when it was first announced (as Rule 14, but it’s still pretty much the same now that it’s been moved to Rule 3). Ivar is going to delete all of the comments in the general rules discussion so that we will have a clean document that does nothing other than lay out the rules. We thought it would be helpful to have a discussion here that will hopefully clear the air and then serve as something we can refer people to when the issue arises.

First, here is the new rule:
3) No arguments about who is a tourist and who is a “real" pilgrim. The forum is intended for all who are interested in the Camino. Please do not challenge the sincerity, intentions, or authenticity of another person’s Camino.

Despite some concerns voiced by forum members, it is absolutely not our intention to stop discussions about pilgrimage, about what pilgrimage means to you, and about your experiences as a pilgrim. Our only target are those dismissive and disparaging comments that sugggest that we can label you as either a tourist or a pilgrim depending on whether you use pack transport, sleep in hotels, book through an agency, take a taxi, etc. In our view, those factors have nothing to do with the state of mind or intent of the person going to Santiago, so we would like to keep those judgments off the forum.

As an example, some members probably remember a recent thread linking to an article discussing the revival of pilgrimage. The OP requested that the thread be deleted, but you might be interested to know that it was the incendiary political commentary in the linked article, and not the discussion of pilgrimage, that had gotten our attention and would probably have led to the thread’s closing.

To close with a bit of nostalgia — The very first post on the forum, written by Ivar, welcomed us with these words:

There are mainly two groups of people that travel to Santiago, pilgrims and tourists. This board is meant for both types of visitors, the board is about Santiago de Compostela, no matter how you got here you will have something interesting to share.

We want to restore that equal opportunity welcome — no matter what your mindset, and no matter how you got here, you are welcome on the forum.

Yes! Because of our ages (77 and 83) we now do all of the things that are often criticised. On earlier Caminos we didn’t but increasing health issues have meant we must change some of our ways. I have frequently felt my blood pressure rise when reading derogatory comments on such as us. The passion to walk the Camino is just as strong, but the ability to do so is diminishing. Our necessary adjustments do not nullify our intention and our achievement.

 

[trecile]

I am confused as to why we even need this discussion. Does it matter if travellers are tourists or pilgrims? This site provides information to those who need it - whatever there reasons. Not for us to judge.

Yes, that's exactly the spirit that we are trying to foster.

 

[henrythedog]

I am confused as to why we even need this discussion. Does it matter if travellers are tourists or pilgrims? This site provides information to those who need it - whatever there reasons. Not for us to judge.

Yes, clearly it matters to some and over an extended period distinctions have been drawn between the two two types of ‘traveller’ (Although definitions may vary).

The overriding culture on here is of polite civilised exchange of knowledge on topics pertaining to ‘Camino’ and so, sometimes, a number of us have to hold back on our more strident opinions for the greater good. (I know that sounds like the plot of a Disney film, but that’s how it is).

Anyway, don’t come over all self-righteous on here, you’ll be up against serious competition.

 

[Blister Bill]

I love how this rule's introduction has, with this post, prompted pretty much the discussion it appears its trying to avoid in justification. I for one am not a fan of censorship especially as those easily offended or incapable or robust discussion can just choose not to participate - the joy of the electronic medium. It just feels overly school teacher-ish and one wonders where it stops. It just feels there is a more officious heavy handed approach with the moderation. Previously I've found some of the discussion especially on this subject thought provoking with perspectives I hadn't considered as I reflected on my own first camino but as highlighted it's the forum owners prerogative.

A more useful rule might be one along the lines that suggests prior to posting a question a search is made to see if it's already been asked - and answered ad nauseam - previously!

Ps. Anyone being offensive presumably is covered under Rule No 1 - the first rule of camino club. Rule 6 has always confused me. If we have no personal comments there wouldn't be much on here !

 

[peregrina2000]

I love how this rule's introduction has, with this post, prompted pretty much the discussion it appears its trying to avoid in justification.

I just don’t see that anywhere in this thread. Which posts are you referring to? In fact, my reaction has been the opposite — one of appreciation for the way in which this discussion has highlighted and reiterated broad forum agreement that the tourist vs. pilgrim label is unhelpful and irrelevant, while discussions about our own personal camino journeys, what motivates us, and why we do it the way we do are essential to the vitality and relevance of the forum.

 

[VNwalking]

I am confused as to why we even need this discussion. Does it matter if travellers are tourists or pilgrims?

Well, no. Of course it doesn't matter.
And if everyone had that attitude there would be no need for a rule.

But a rule is needed because there is always someone who makes the distinction in a pejorative way - and innocent discussions go become personal and finger-pointy.

So the rule is a guardrail to keep threads on track.

 

[Blister Bill]

I just don’t see that anywhere in this thread.

Really ? Have a read back through and not sure why you are linking with yourself. I personally don't care what motivates a person to walk or what label you wish to apply to one's self. Presumably if you're applying a judgement label to someone else, which could be considered rude or insulting, its already covered by rule number one.

 

[VNwalking]

applying a judgement label to someone else, which could be considered rude or insulting, its already covered by rule number one.

Not necessarily.
The new rule doesn't explicitly say 'rude or insulting,' but merely says (basically) keep the labels you put on others to yourself. Saying to another poster, 'You are a tourist' is enough to violate the new guideline, but it's not overtly insulting.

It makes perfect sense to me.

 

[plonkydonkey]

I love how this rule's introduction has, with this post, prompted pretty much the discussion it appears its trying to avoid in justification.

My understanding of the rule is that it will no longer be tolerated if, in your reply to a question, you make assumptions, judgements or accusations about that person's intentions for doing the Camino. I don't see any of that in the discussions on this thread. In fact it has been quite uplifting and refreshing.

As a side note I have nothing but praise for the the mods commenting on this thread. It's great to see a unified front and most impressive to me is the beautiful way they have articulated their thoughts around this rule. @peregrina2000 especially - without exception, your posts show a knack with words, an ability to cut through the noise with a clean and simple answer, and all with a healthy dose of empathy shining through.

 

[ChrisG1]

Well, no. Of course it doesn't matter.
And if everyone had that attitude there would be no need for a rule.

But a rule is needed because there is always someone who makes the distinction in a pejorative way - and innocent discussions go become personal and finger-pointy.

So the rule is a guardrail to keep threads on track.

I wasn't questioning the need for the rule, more about why people feel they need to make that judgement.

 

[Kanga]

I think the whole "pilgrim v tourist" is a non issue. In my view there is no dichotomy. End of story.

There are practical issues that arise as a consequence of the mode of travel by people and I think it is reasonable for those to be discussed on the forum. For example some albergues distinguish or give preference (or used to, in the past) to people who travel by foot carrying their own luggage, over people who have vehicular support. People who have no vehicular support are generally physically less able to travel further than those with vehicular support. Some albergues do not allot beds to cyclists until after a certain hour. Because it is assumed cyclists can more easily travel away from the route to find accommodation, or can travel further.

Hospitaleros will always make exceptions. Reasons include seasonal issues (eg winter), physical frailty, illness, disability. Today some accommodation will not accept "suitcases" or unaccompanied luggage because of staffing issue, opening hours, liability issues.

None of the above has anything to do with motivation.

I think we can reasonably discuss those issues without offending the new Rule 3 and with no judgment or labels involved.

When I think back, I can think of only two times there was any real distinction made on the Camino between a "pilgrim" and a "tourist". One was with in the interview by Madam Debril who for years determined who, on arriving in St Jean Pied de Port, would get a credential. Apparently she based this on whether they were a "worthy pilgrim", in the words of @Bradypus who experienced her judgment first hand, and apparently was found wanting! She was long gone even before my first walk in 2001. The other was the requirement by the Cathedral authorities for the issuing of a Compostela that one had walked with religious or spiritual intent to worship at the tomb of St James. Today there is not even a requirement for that. Walking the last 100km seems sufficient.

 

[Perambulating Griffin]

The other was the requirement by the Cathedral authorities for the issuing of a Compostela that one had walked with religious or spiritual intent to worship at the tomb of St James. Today there is not even a requirement for that. Walking the last 100km is sufficient.

Yes and no? I have met many who walked for the adventure and the exercise but who intended to fudge it at the end and claim the "spiritual reason" (rather than the admitted health or adventure reasons). It's between them and their consciences I guess. I don't know why they do it when the Distance certificate is quite lovely itself.
At any rate the compostela does requires 100km AND a religious or spiritual intent to make the walk in a state of true faith to the tomb of the Apostle.
I don't have my own compostelas at hand right now, so can't reproduce the text, but it does require more than sheer KMs, and does state a clear devotional attitude.

 

[Kanga]

Yes and no? I have met many who walked for the adventure and the exercise but who intended to fudge it at the end and claim the "spiritual reason" (rather than the admitted health or adventure reasons). It's between them and their consciences I guess. I don't know why they do it when the Distance certificate is quite lovely itself.
At any rate the compostela does requires 100km AND a religious or spiritual intent to make the walk in a state of true faith to the tomb of the Apostle.
I don't have my own compostelas at hand right now, so can't reproduce the text, but it does require more than sheer KMs, and does state a clear devotional attitude.

I just edited my post to say "walking the last 100km seems sufficient". I know what the Compostela says, but few questions asked. In contrast to when I first walked.

 

[trecile]

It's between them and their consciences I guess. I don't know why they do it when the Distance certificate is quite lovely itself.

Or they can ask for the equally lovely "Welcome Certificate."
I don't know why they do it either.

 

[C clearly]

I love how this rule's introduction has, with this post, prompted pretty much the discussion it appears its trying to avoid in justification.

Then you have missed the point of the rule, which says "Please do not challenge the sincerity, intentions, or authenticity of another person’s Camino." That refers to challenging another individual's Camino. Where has this happened in this thread?

This thread is an illustration of how discussion of the broad topic is allowed.

 

[Silencio Por Favor]

I only rejoined yesterday but this conversation has been great and I guess exposes how daft ‘labelling’and ‘oneupmanship’ is. I guess people just get carried away and I hope this will help get everyone back on course.

Behaviour of this type I guess is not uncommon in life. The person who saw a band in a local pub versus the person who became a fan when they became famous. In the UK lots of this type of debates around football and who are the ‘real fans vs plastic fans’!

Daft really!

Real Pilgrims versus Plastic Pilgrims, sorry forgive my childish vibe.

 

[Blister Bill]

Then you have missed the point of the rule, which says "Please do not challenge the sincerity, intentions, or authenticity of another person’s Camino." That refers to challenging another individual's Camino. Where has this happened in this thread?

This thread is an illustration of how discussion of the broad topic is allowed.

Perhaps - but I think its giving it all oxygen and in discussion both labels have been used. Less is more especially when it comes to rules. If it crosses over and is insulting - which as soon as you put a label onto someone is usually crossing the line - then it could already have been dealt with under Rule 1. It really is a non-issue.

 

[VNwalking]

Less it more especially when it comes to rules.

In your opinion. Respectfully, not everyone would agree with that. Rules offer constraints for people who stubbornly want to just say what they want regardless of what is useful, and who that affects.

 

[Blister Bill]

In your opinion. Respectfully, not everyone would agree with that. Rules offer constraints for people who stubbornly want to just say what they want regardless of what is useful, and who that affects.

Yep...only offer my opinion ! You are 100% right about useful opinions. I'm amazed, for example, when someone asks for help on a certain route at a certain time of year and gets advice from someone who hasn't done that route or walked at that time of year at all. There is already a rule for those who are offensive and a mechanism for recidivist offenders. Simple rules, good moderators, crack on.

 

[JabbaPapa]

Growing up in a very judgmental environment, I learned to "label" everyone as "bad/sinner" or "good/saint". This was a major problem for me as I entered adulthood, completely unprepared to deal with the real world that exists in the spectrum of shades of gray.

Most labels are really just descriptive rather than "judgmental" ; except when someone considering the labels starts judging others.

The labels foot pilgrim, bike pilgrim, Spanish pilgrim are just descriptive, and are not judgments.

 

[Bristle Boy]

Most labels are really just descriptive rather than "judgmental" ; except when someone considering the labels starts judging others.

The labels foot pilgrim, bike pilgrim, Spanish pilgrim are just descriptive, and are not judgments.

Quite true...but these descriptive "labels" are rarely, if ever, used.
The descriptive label "real pilgrim" is and is in more common usage as is the term tourist.
I feel this explanation of an amendment/addition to the existing framework of rules is beneficial to a forum which should foster inclusivity and an acceptance that everyones camino is different.

 

[JabbaPapa]

I see that according to Wikipedia, 5,000,000 pilgrims travel to Fátima every year. Of that number, about 40,000 walk. Yet there seems to be no debate about who is a tourist and who is a pilgrim. I suspect that is because the tradition of the pilgrimage to Fátima is way older than the tradition of walking to Fátima, which as I see it, has evolved in tandem with the rise of walkers to Santiago on the Camino.

No not really -- people have either been walking or travelling by other means to each pilgrimage destination for as long as those pilgrimage destinations have existed. Walking to Fátima has existed since the period of the apparitions, whilst others at the time travelled there by other means.

The two major pilgrimage destinations with any emphasis on walking as preferable to other methods of travel are Santiago and Jerusalem, but these are exceptions to the general rule where no method of travel to a particular shrine is considered as "better" than the others. But this is from old Mediaeval Christian tradition, not modern innovations nor contemporary expectations nor judgments. The walking was (and still is by some) viewed as a means of divesting oneself spiritually for purification and devotion on the journey to those particular shrines. The other major shrines generally had (and have) not those particular devotions and traditions attached to them, but other ones instead.

The pilgrimages to Lourdes and Fátima, for instance, are Marian and more devotional, and even the long-standing tradition of walking to Fátima from the villages in the region is more festive than sacrificial ; most Christian pilgrimages are festive and not centred on spiritual purification via material difficulty. Fátima foot pilgrims in groups from the villages typically organise a food & drinks party every day that they travel. As do the coach pilgrims to Fátima, where there are outdoor tables permanently set up for that very purpose. And the sick travelling to Lourdes seeking healing are looking for reprieve from material difficulty !!

Pilgrims to Fátima, Rome, Lourdes, Chartres, or wherever are pilgrims, howsoever they may have travelled, with a more strictly religious definition of the word ; no pilgrims to those shrines are considered "better" or "worse" than others if they've walked or haven't.

 

[Chizuru]

I wonder what is intended here. There are already active sub-forums on other pilgrimage routes in Europe and elsewhere. Presumably these started because there was an interest in these routes because someone either wanted to report on them or enquire about them. One way or another, it seems that we have been able to accommodate discussion about pilgrimage to sacred destinations similar to Santiago de Compostela, and should continue to do so.

Yes, there is a wealth of experience out there of pilgrims who have wandered far, doing other routes. It would be a pity not to be able to get advice about those ways.

 

[JabbaPapa]

I see Fatima, more like Lourdes. It's a holy site, not a pilgrimage site. While I am sure pilgrims go to both places on foot, the vast majority go by some other means. Same with the Vatican and Jerusalem. Very few walk to them.

Those are all major pilgrimage destinations, and it simply isn't correct to say that pilgrims means "foot pilgrims", which simply is not the case. The vast majority of pilgrims to important or major Christian shrines travel there by motor/air/rail transport.

I think even among Santiago pilgrims, the foot pilgrims are in the clear minority of them. Only some minor local shrines will, from tradition, have a majority of foot pilgrims, and usually those are one day pilgrimages.

The false suggestion that that only foot pilgrims are "pilgrims" is something that rule 3 is written for.

 

[David Tallan]

If the local Galician council or any other government department or the church, in Spain, officially classifies what a pilgrim is and what isn't, will that be applied to rule 3? So for instance if they said that a pilgrim is X and a tourist is Y and that is our (possibly legal) definition. I don't think they ever would, but for sake of clarification, I will ask the question.

Personally, I don't think it should be. If a governing body in Spain (secular or ecclesiastical) adopts definitions of "pilgrim" and "tourist", that will be their definition, for their purposes, but it doesn't have to be ours.

 

[JabbaPapa]

It isn't strange to me, the 100/200klm rule is purely commercial.

No, it's mainly administrative -- if they gave compostelas to every religious pilgrim (as they used to) in addition to the foot/bike/horse etc. pilgrims, it would be millions per year, not hundreds of thousands.

Impossible to organise and unaffordable.

 

[David Tallan]

I see Fatima, more like Lourdes. It's a holy site, not a pilgrimage site. While I am sure pilgrims go to both places on foot, the vast majority go by some other means. Same with the Vatican and Jerusalem. Very few walk to them. I suppose that's the rub. If i'm honest, I don't see the Cathedral in Santiago as being at the same level as Fatima or Lourdes or the Vatican. It's a church at the end of the day and is no different to the other churches (Oviedo, Potes and probably many others) in Spain that supposedly contain relics.

I wonder how many people walk to Mecca? Or if people on bulletin boards have similar discussions and debates over the definition of a pilgrim.

If people travel to a site because of its holiness (Lourdes, Fatima, Jerusalem, Mecca) then it is a pilgrimage site by the most common English usage of the word. Just because many pilgrims walk to Santiago doesn't change the meaning of the word in English.

 

[Chizuru]

Quite true...but these descriptive "labels" are rarely, if ever, used.
The descriptive label "real pilgrim" is and is in more common usage as is the term tourist.
I feel this explanation of an amendment/addition to the existing framework of rules is beneficial to a forum which should foster inclusivity and an acceptance that everyones camino is different.

I don't think the problem is the word 'pilgrim' and 'tourist' but the judgemental terms often used before each of those words! 'Real' pilgrim, 'mere' tourist. I have seen those combinations so often that even if the word 'mere' isn't written in front of the word 'tourist', you can still feel its invisible presence and the smug self-righteousness lurking in front of the word 'pilgrim'!

 

[LTfit]

It's quite astounding, this will be post #132. I have nothing to add to my previous post #59 but am truly surprised how much traffic Rule 3 has caused.

Ultreia

 

[Kirkie]

It's quite astounding, this will be post #132. I have nothing to add to my previous post #59 but am truly surprised how much traffic Rule 3 has caused.

Ultreia

I am not surprised.
It tells me there is a deeper assessment needed today of the rules than when the forum was set up.
Evidence shows we can argue here on the head of a pin.
Back to basics:
what is the forum for?
Who is the forum for?
How many pertinent sideshows can it sustain?
Not only sideshows - look at the very new appeal for help from the family of a pilgrim who is seriously ill in hospital in Santiago.
Yes, the forum is a wonderful, valuable resource.
For anyone choosing to walk on any one of the many ways to Santiago for whatever reason.

 

[OZAJ]

Why the concern about what other people are doing and their reasons for and methods of doing it?

Surely it is about INTENTION. Your intention. Forget about others in this regard.

Can I discern a hint of sinful pride in this?

 

[VNwalking]

Can I discern a hint of sinful pride in this?

I don't see it in this thread, to be honest. We're just discussing the nuances of what can be said here, and how.

 

[sggarlick]

Thanks again for the great information. I hadn’t really considered there would be a choice, so yet another thing for me to consider during my walk. Compostela or Welcome certificate? If I’m true to how I start my walk, then it will be the certificate, which would be great to receive. Presume I have to specifically ask for this on arrival?

 

[VNwalking]

Compostela or Welcome certificate? I

They are both beautiful.
You can also get a distance certificate.

 

[trecile]

Presume I have to specifically ask for this on arrival?

Yes, you do.

 

[Luka]

I welcome the new rule 3.

We all change with time.

There have been many inflammatory posts against not "real" pilgrims over the years in here. When I was a spring chicken at 55, in 2008, i could tend to lean towards these ideas.

Today, at the age of soon 70, with arthritis in both knees (due to many Caminos; God knows I know many ways in Spain), I know that the only way to do another Camino for me now, is to adjust to my circumstances: I will walk shorter days, I may use pack transfer some days bc my knees hurt so much, I may some days become a taxi- or busigrino bc of pain, I may use better accomodation than albergues now and then, although I actually love the albergue life and want to have it as often as possible.

So if you see me hopping off a bus and go to my place, let it be known that it is because it is the only way I now can continue to do the Way.

I still consider myself a pilgrim. I just do it as best I can.

However I am much younger I am in the same boat. The side effects of breastcancer medication have caused quite a lot of joint problems. Since April I am coping with a persistent Achilles tendon injury. In a couple of days I'll start walking the Camino Sanabrés and that will unfortunately be with a lot of help from buses and taxis. It is the only way I will (hopefully) still be able to experience the Camino.

 

[ShoshTrvls]

Two separate items. The distance certificate is an optional extra to accompany either the Compostela or a welcome certificate. The pilgrim office does not issue the distance certificate by itself.

It is interesting that the Welcome Certificate is not mentioned on the official website - is getting it discouraged?

 

[Bradypus]

It is interesting that the Welcome Certificate is not mentioned on the official website - is getting it discouraged?

Maybe some of the regular pilgrim office volunteers like @t2andreo can answer that one. It has never been widely promoted.

 

[dougfitz]

What is wrong with simply wanted to go on a hike on a trail where you know you will see beautiful sites, be immersed in a unique culture, meet people from all over the world, and know there is a bed and a meal at the end of each day? Is that not a good enough “purpose?”

@ShoshTrvls, I doubt there is anything 'wrong', but only you could answer your question. What I can ask you to think about is how you might consider doing that.

There is a an infrastructure of albergues that are available for pilgrims undertaking the Pilgrimage to Santiago, which I generally interpret as being with the intent to visit the Cathedral at SDC. In some of these, accommodation is offered on a donativo basis, or at levels that make one wonder how much the owners are effectively contributing from their own pockets to support pilgrims walking to Santiago. Many of these places will be staffed by volunteers who have covered the costs of their own travel to take up their voluntary role. Some might be fortunate enough to combine their stint as volunteers with a pilgrimage of their own before or after they have volunteered, but not all are able to do this.

If, as is proposed here, one is just going on a hike for the reasons outlined, is it appropriate to seek to use this pilgrim accommodation? There are, after all, other accommodation options now available that if one is not walking or riding the Pilgrimage to Santiago, why would one even consider using accommodation that is intended to support those that are?

Would it even be appropriate to use a credential under these circumstances, given the conditions that one has agreed to when accepting and using that document?

 

[ShoshTrvls]

@ShoshTrvls, I doubt there is anything 'wrong', but only you could answer your question. What I can ask you to think about is how you might consider doing that.

There is a an infrastructure of albergues that are available for pilgrims undertaking the Pilgrimage to Santiago, which I generally interpret as being with the intent to visit the Cathedral at SDC. In some of these, accommodation is offered on a donativo basis, or at levels that make one wonder how much the owners are effectively contributing from their own pockets to support pilgrims walking to Santiago. Many of these places will be staffed by volunteers who have covered the costs of their own travel to take up their voluntary role. Some might be fortunate enough to combine their stint as volunteers with a pilgrimage of their own before or after they have volunteered, but not all are able to do this.

If, as is proposed here, one is just going on a hike for the reasons outlined, is it appropriate to seek to use this pilgrim accommodation? There are, after all, other accommodation options now available that if one is not walking or riding the Pilgrimage to Santiago, why would one even consider using accommodation that is intended to support those that are?

Would it even be appropriate to use a credential under these circumstances, given the conditions that one has agreed to when accepting and using that document?

Yes, the Credencial situation for non-believers is an interesting one, isn’t it? According to the official website, “This Credencial is only for pilgrims on foot, bicycle or horseback, who wish to make the pilgrimage with a Christian sentiment.” I’m not sure what exactly a “Christian sentiment” means since one can now get a Compostela if you walk for “spiritual,” but not necessarily Christian, reasons, and a Welcome Certificate if you are walking for the experience of walking. But you can’t get a Compostela or even a Welcome Certificate without a stamped Credencial. (Can you arrive at the Pilgrim’s office with a plain white paper properly stamped twice a day and get a Welcome Certificate?). Then again, maybe a “Christian sentiment” can mean simply walking the Camino in an appreciative and charitable way, no?

But no worries with regard to me “taking advantage” of anyone; I will be paying my way, not staying in albergues and not getting a Compostela. (I do intend to visit the Cathedral - I hope that’s still ok.)

 

[sggarlick]

Personally, I don't think it should be. If a governing body in Spain (secular or ecclesiastical) adopts definitions of "pilgrim" and "tourist", that will be their definition, for their purposes, but it doesn't have to be ours.

This thread has got me wondering what it is to be a pilgrim (other than the verses I sang as a choirboy). I would ask here, but that would probably just get my post deleted . Can anyone point me at an acceptable site that provides a definition of pilgrim and pilgrimage?

 

[Kirkie]

Yes, the Credencial situation for non-believers is an interesting one, isn’t it? According to the official website, “This Credencial is only for pilgrims on foot, bicycle or horseback, who wish to make the pilgrimage with a Christian sentiment.” I’m not sure what exactly a “Christian sentiment” means since one can now get a Compostela if you walk for “spiritual,” but not necessarily Christian, reasons, and a Welcome Certificate if you are walking for the experience of walking. But you can’t get a Compostela or even a Welcome Certificate without a stamped Credencial. (Can you arrive at the Pilgrim’s office with a plain white paper properly stamped twice a day and get a Welcome Certificate?). Then again, maybe a “Christian sentiment” can mean simply walking the Camino in an appreciative and charitable way, no?

But no worries with regard to me “taking advantage” of anyone; I will be paying my way, not staying in albergues and not getting a Compostela. (I do intend to visit the Cathedral - I hope that’s still ok.)

Re your final question, or hope. Of course it is ok. No further explanation needed. It means something to you. Seize it when the moment comes.

 

[Kirkie]

This thread has got me wondering what it is to be a pilgrim (other than the verses I sang as a choirboy). I would ask here, but that would probably just get my post deleted . Can anyone point me at an acceptable site that provides a definition of pilgrim and pilgrimage?

I can't, nor would I want to. That is your task! Just keep on keeping on, and some fine day you will know. Everything.

 

[David Tallan]

This thread has got me wondering what it is to be a pilgrim (other than the verses I sang as a choirboy). I would ask here, but that would probably just get my post deleted . Can anyone point me at an acceptable site that provides a definition of pilgrim and pilgrimage?

I recommend the Oxford English Dictionary. It is my go-to reference for the meaning of words. That will give you the general English meaning(s) over time since the middle ages. Now, what these words mean to you, that you will have to work out for yourself.

 

[Bradypus]

I recommend the Oxford English Dictionary. It is my go-to reference for the meaning of words.

I am now picturing you walking up to O Cebreiro with the compact edition in your pack - all 3 volumes plus magnifying glass...

 

[BarbC]

Yes and no? I have met many who walked for the adventure and the exercise but who intended to fudge it at the end and claim the "spiritual reason" (rather than the admitted health or adventure reasons). It's between them and their consciences I guess. I don't know why they do it when the Distance certificate is quite lovely itself.
At any rate the compostela does requires 100km AND a religious or spiritual intent to make the walk in a state of true faith to the tomb of the Apostle.
I don't have my own compostelas at hand right now, so can't reproduce the text, but it does require more than sheer KMs, and does state a clear devotional attitude.

When I pre-registered for my Compostela online - there was a choice between religious or non-religious reasons - so not sure what you are saying.

 

[Perambulating Griffin]

When I pre-registered for my Compostela online - there was a choice between religious or non-religious reasons - so not sure what you are saying.

If you declare specifically non-religious reasons, you are offered a Distancia and and a Welcome certificate. If you claim "religious or spiritual", you are offered a Compostela. I am saying that people who like the look of the Compostela will claim "religious or spiritual" when they are very aware that they went for the outing and the exercise. I am also saying that it's up to them and their consciences.
However, to the best of my knowledge, nothing about the current compostela is governed by Canon law...

 

[peregrina2000]

When I pre-registered for my Compostela online - there was a choice between religious or non-religious reasons - so not sure what you are saying.

Here is the statement from the Pilgrim’s Office.

Until a few years ago, the compostela was only available to those who declared a spiritual or religious purpose. The more recent addition of “attitude of search” broadens that requirement considerably. I believe some forum member who had worked in the pilgrim’s office commented that the compostela is now essentially given to anyone who wants it, so long as the 100 km are satisfied.

To get the “Compostela” you must:​

• Make the pilgrimage for religious or spiritual reasons, or at least an attitude of search.
• Do the last 100 km on foot or horseback, or the last 200 km by bicycle. It is understood that the pilgrimage starts at one point and from there you come to visit the Tomb of St. James.
• You must collect the stamps on the “Credencial del Peregrino” from the places you pass through to certify that you have been there. Stamps from churches, hostels, monasteries, cathedrals and all places related to the Way are preferred, but if not they can also be stamped in other institutions: town halls, cafés, etc. You have to stamp the Credencial twice a day at least on the last 100 km (for pilgrims on foot or on horseback) or on the last 200 km (for cyclists pilgrims).

 

[Kathor1]

When I pre-registered for my Compostela online - there was a choice between religious or non-religious reasons - so not sure what you are saying.

The comment refers to the past when pilgrims filled in a paper-based form. You can see a copy here. The options for the motives for the pilgrimage were listed as Religious, Spiritual and Sports or Tourism.

Nowadays pilgrims fill in an online form, and as you have already mentioned, the options for the reasons for the pilgrimage are now listed as Not religious, Others and Religious.

It appears that nowadays everyone obtains a Compostela who fills in the online form, no matter what you tick. In the past it was said that only those would obtain a Compostela who ticked either Religious or Spiritual.

 

[David Tallan]

I am now picturing you walking up to O Cebreiro with the compact edition in your pack - all 3 volumes plus magnifying glass...
View attachment 153628

Mine only has 2 volumes plus the magnifying glass.

 

[Bradypus]

Mine only has 2 volumes plus the magnifying glass.

Sensible to opt for the lightweight travel version

 

[JabbaPapa]

I recommend the Oxford English Dictionary.

OK so OED 2nd Edition 2009 :

Pilgrim (examples not given)

[Early ME. pelegrim, pilegrim, repr. OF. *pelegrin, antecedent form to pèlerin (11th c. in Littré) = Pr. pelegrin, Cat. pelegri, peregri, It. pellegrino, Sp. peregrino:—L. peregrīn-um one that comes from foreign parts, a stranger, f. peregrē adv., from abroad, abroad, pereger that is abroad or on a journey, f. per through + ager field, country, land: see peregrine. In Romanic, peregrino became, by dissimilation of r…r, pelegrino, pelegrin, whence F. pèlerin. In Eng. (rarely in OF.), final n became m, making pelegrim, pilegrim, pilgrim (cf. OHG. piligrīm), also pelrimage: see pilgrimage. (Gower has also the later Fr. form, pelerin.)]

B.B Signification.

1.B.1 One who travels from place to place; a person on a journey; a wayfarer, a traveller; a wanderer; a sojourner. (Now poet. or rhet. in general sense.)

2.B.2 spec. One who journeys (usually a long distance) to some sacred place, as an act of religious devotion; one who makes a pilgrimage. (The prevailing sense.)

Then some meanings referring to North American colonists.

 

[BarbC]

The comment refers to the past when pilgrims filled in a paper-based form. You can see a copy here. The options for the motives for the pilgrimage were listed as Religious, Spiritual and Sports or Tourism.

Nowadays pilgrims fill in an online form, and as you have already mentioned, the options for the reasons for the pilgrimage are now listed as Not religious, Others and Religious.

It appears that nowadays everyone obtains a Compostela who fills in the online form, no matter what you tick. In the past it was said that only those would obtain a Compostela who ticked either Religious or Spiritual.

Well I guess I could just re-register and get a new QR code - we are doing it for many reasons - but decided against ticking that box - it's very confusing. We might get spiritual along the way - so there you go.

 

[Kathor1]

Well I guess I could just re-register and get a new QR code - we are doing it for many reasons - but decided against ticking that box - it's very confusing. We might get spiritual along the way - so there you go.

Well as I said there is no option for "spiritual" as a reason for pilgrimage in the current registration process for the Compostela. A discussion about whether those who ticked such an option might have done so for the right or the wrong reasons is a discussion of the past and seems to be largely futile now.

Here is a screenshot of the current form (online registration):

 

[JabbaPapa]

Well I guess I could just re-register and get a new QR code - we are doing it for many reasons - but decided against ticking that box - it's very confusing. We might get spiritual along the way - so there you go.

If you evade the online not-that-well-coded QR version, you get the old-fashioned paper form instead, and can tick whichever multiple boxes you like, and not just one only, as if every pilgrim could only ever have one exclusive and predetermined singular "reason" or "motivation".

Religious or spiritual is most definitely on that paper version.

 

[Bradypus]

Here is a screenshot of the current form (online registration):

Doesn't "Religious" and "Not Religious" cover everyone? I wonder what "Others" is supposed to include?

 

[JabbaPapa]

Doesn't "Religious" and "Not Religious" cover everyone?

As descriptions for the "purpose" of one's Camino clearly not, given that multiple purposes exist. And I'm not really sure how "not religious" might be a "purpose".

Purposes are positive things that are definable in and of themselves, and not merely the absence of some other purpose that one might not have.

Quite apart from which, "Religious" and "Not Religious" are not absolutely exclusive pure binary terms absent overlap or grey areas nor indeed even space between them.

 

[Kathor1]

Doesn't "Religious" and "Not Religious" cover everyone? I wonder what "Others" is supposed to include?

You don't expect me to answer questions about the UX (user experience) quality of this website, are you ? One cannot even put the blame on the translation, the choices are the same in Spanish.

The main point is, however, this is what current peregrin@s see when they register for a Compostela. There is also no mention whatsoever of a Welcome Certificate anywhere on the Registration webpage. The registration window is the first window they see, there are no explanations, and they also see a box where they can tick "Print mileage certificate".

 

[JabbaPapa]

It's bad coding. Not excluding the extremely limited choices of which "camino" you took and where you "started" it.

 

[Albertagirl]

I am somewhat confused by the content of this thread. Having read most of it, I think that it intends to stop unpleasant and judgemental posts about why or how someone else has made/done (I cannot say "walked") a camino to Santiago. I think back to my first awareness of the camino de Santiago. A senior couple in my neighbourhood had travelled to Santiago from Canada using available methods of transport, and were interested in sharing their experience with me. At about the same time, my boss at work, who was a Catholic priest, was sharing his experience of dropping in at Santiago while on a European bus trip. I had, years previously, made a pilgrimage to Israel using various travel methods, but not at all on foot. Since, I had spent much time walking alone in the mountains of Alberta, but now was feeling rather old to carry the gear. Somehow, all these things came together to start me on an endless series of walking pilgrimages to Santiago. I am grateful that they did. But I do not see any reason for judging anyone elses mode of transport or reasons for the journey.

 

[trecile]

It's bad coding. Not excluding the extremely limited choices of which "camino" you took and where you "started" it.

At least it's a lot better than the previous iteration!

 

[Camino Chrissy]

I am somewhat confused by the content of this thread. Having read most of it, I think that it intends to stop unpleasant and judgemental posts about why or how someone else has made/done (I cannot say "walked") a camino to Santiago.

I think the threads intentions are good.
I have been on this forum for quite a few years and I definitely have witnessed a handful of members who think it is far superior to walk every step, wing it exclusively, and carry your own pack every step of the way. They push their opinion on the matter, and have said it time and again whenever the topic comes up. The attitude is not kind to those who do their camino differently, but they speak the praises of "their way" as if it is the only worthy way. If this were not so and I am being delusional, why do other members often feel guilty for using a day pack and often feel criticized?
I hope the addition to rule #3 will temper the often condescending comments by those who see themselves as purists.

 

[dbier]

Sadly, there have been several judgmental posts against the original posters in several different threads over the last few months.

If those posts were meant to encourage the original poster to consider other travel plans and/or to approach their Camino in a spirit of openness - well, that considerate spirit did not come through in the words chosen. Thus, the re-iteration/iteration of the rule.

As I see it, the intent of the rule is to cease judging whether another *person* is a "pilgrim," "tourist," both, or neither, and whether that other person is better or worse for a commenter applying a label to the person.

 

[alexwalker]

Here is the statement from the Pilgrim’s Office.

Until a few years ago, the compostela was only available to those who declared a spiritual or religious purpose. The more recent addition of “attitude of search” broadens that requirement considerably. I believe some forum member who had worked in the pilgrim’s office commented that the compostela is now essentially given to anyone who wants it, so long as the 100 km are satisfied.

To get the “Compostela” you must:​

• Make the pilgrimage for religious or spiritual reasons, or at least an attitude of search.
• Do the last 100 km on foot or horseback, or the last 200 km by bicycle. It is understood that the pilgrimage starts at one point and from there you come to visit the Tomb of St. James.
• You must collect the stamps on the “Credencial del Peregrino” from the places you pass through to certify that you have been there. Stamps from churches, hostels, monasteries, cathedrals and all places related to the Way are preferred, but if not they can also be stamped in other institutions: town halls, cafés, etc. You have to stamp the Credencial twice a day at least on the last 100 km (for pilgrims on foot or on horseback) or on the last 200 km (for cyclists pilgrims).

Who will not feel spiritual on the Camino, however they choose to do it?

 

[C clearly]

I would also like to point out that sometimes people perceive negative judgement when none is intended. Perhaps they have received comments elsewhere that have sensitized them, so they overreact to what might be an innocent suggestion.

There is nothing wrong with talking about why you like to carry your own pack, rather than transport it. Just don't go on and on about it on a thread about bag transport, or even drop it in as an irritant on the thread.

 

[Camino Chrissy]

Sadly, there have been several judgmental posts against the original posters in several different threads over the last few months.

This has been going on for years; not just months. It eventually always comes back to the table. I personally don't appreciate when the word "intention" is sometimes included in some of the seemingly self-righteous posts, categorizing people's reasons, motives, or how they do their camino. It's no one else's right to judge, or even care about another person's intention for walking the Camino. I fall into all the categories on both sides of the debate as I have walked eight times on various Caminos. I do not judge others, and prefer not to be judged; I suffer no guilt for my choices.

 

[C clearly]

I personally don't appreciate when the word "intention" is sometimes included in some of the seemingly self-righteous posts,

I know what you mean, as the word gets used a lot and sometimes I'm not sure what is intended . It is interesting to look at different definitions. However, I don't think there is anything wrong with the word itself. It can be used in the most tolerant posts as well as the self-righteous ones. We all have intentions for our Camino, whether we analyse them or not. Otherwise we wouldn't go! On the forum, we just don't want people commenting negatively on another person's intentions for their Camino.

 

[Camino Chrissy]

On the forum, we just don't want people commenting negatively on another person's intentions for their Camino.

Exactly, but it has happened often over time...by a few, and is the only reason the word kind of rubs me wrong when said by a "few".

Edited to add...or trumping up their own intentions as if they are of a superior status and of a higher caliber/calling. These are the ones I have noticed time and again, and of which I speak.

 

[thejoker]

I hope the council leaders of SdC read this thread to help them decide who will and won't have to pay the 'tourist tax' when it is implemented in 2025.

 

[C clearly]

Exactly, but it has happened often over time...by a few, and is the only reason the word kind of rubs me wrong when said by a "few".

Edited to add...or trumping up their own intentions as if they are of a superior status and of a higher caliber/calling. These are the ones I have noticed time and again, and of which I speak.

Ok, but my point was that sometimes readers might be misjudging the intentions of the writer. If those words are actually used, please report the post.

 

[dougfitz]

I hope the council leaders of SdC read this thread to help them decide who will and won't have to pay the 'tourist tax' when it is implemented in 2025.

As @K_Lynn noted earlier, and I agreed, anyone looking in on our community will see us as tourists first and foremost. Our status as pilgrims will be secondary. I don't think that will make one iota of difference to any of us being required to pay such a tax.

 

[dougfitz]

Re your final question, or hope. Of course it is ok. No further explanation needed. It means something to you. Seize it when the moment comes.

Hmm. Well I took it that @ShoshTrvls was asking a rhetorical question where the answer was self evident. I hope I am correct in that assessment. I wouldn't like to think that seeking our 'approval' for such things might become the norm.

 

[dougfitz]

It's bad coding. Not excluding the extremely limited choices of which "camino" you took and where you "started" it.

I wouldn't be so quick to blame the app developers without knowing what the Pilgrim Office specification called for. They might well have achieved the required result. In any case, any fix is in the hands of the Pilgrim Office if the application is not meeting their requirements.

 

[David]

I agree completely with not aiming personal attacks against others.

I have just read every single post ... has everyone actually forgotten that the Caminos are Roman Catholic pilgrim routes to the shrine and remains of St James? That it has been so for some 1200 years? and that no matter how welcoming the Catholic church is to all 'non-religious' people, even producing special finishing documents for them, that they still see it as just that, sacred and holy pilgrim routes to the remains of St James for religious and devotional purposes - pilgrimage.

If we are not to be divisive and accusatory (which is a good thing) then all we need do is to accept that all are 'called' - for what and for why is not important and also unknowable .. therefore method of getting to Santiago, claimed beliefs or claimed lack of beliefs are also unimportant if all are 'called'. Or am I missing something here?

 

[VNwalking]

then all we need do is to believe that all are 'called' - for what and for why is not important .. therefore method of getting to Santiago, claimed beliefs or claimed lack of beliefs are also unimportant if all are 'called'. Or am I missing something here?

Your faith is touching, @David, but not everyone believes in 'being called.'

Simple civility and fellow feeling should be enough to guarantee harmony here - but we're human beings and it's a rare person who has those traits all the time. So rules are good guardrails.

 

[dougfitz]

If we are not to be divisive and accusatory (which is a good thing) then all we need do is to accept that all are 'called' - for what and for why is not important and also unknowable .. therefore method of getting to Santiago, claimed beliefs or claimed lack of beliefs are also unimportant if all are 'called'. Or am I missing something here?

Perhaps, but if you are, I think for most of us as pilgrims it shouldn't matter. It is related to at least one decision recently, that to ban the acceptance of suitcases at some albergues. It seems evident to me from questions that some members are asking that if they are being called at all, it is not to walk to the tomb of the apostle. Noting that one of the credential's purpose is to give those who do intend to walk to the Cathedral of Santiago access to hostels offered by the Christian hospitality of the Way, it seems axiomatic to me that someone who isn't walking to Santiago wouldn't be entitled to such hospitality. But is that really the nature of the Christian hospitality being provided along the camino routes?

What makes this complicated is that the Cathedral of Santiago is not the only significant religious or sacred place that people might choose as their pilgrimage destination on the Iberian Peninsula. One doesn't need to search far to find these, on pilgrimage routes in their own right, and along or near one of the routes to SDC. People travelling to these destinations appear to me to have as much right to Christian hospitality as pilgrims as any that are going to SDC.

Then there are those who don't walk for the purpose of visiting any significant sacred or religious place. My wife was one of these when she and I walked the CF some years ago. She visited the cathedral and attended mass not out of any Christian sentiment or spiritual search. She was motivated by proving to herself that she could undertake the physical challenge of walking across Spain, and doing those things was part of experiencing, with others, the culmination of that endeavour. She asked for the Welcome Certificate at the Pilgrim Office. Ironically, we found later they had given her a Compostela.

I think that the real outliers are those that use the Camino routes because they present convenient and well organized places along which to have a good walk for a few days, a few weeks, or even a whole summer. I wouldn't think of myself as a pilgrim were I to do that. I suspect that I have met people who were doing that, but some time ago I realised that I didn't need to make any judgements about that, either as a fellow pilgrim or as a hospitalero. As the latter, it was sufficient that they had a credencial if they wanted to stay, eat and sleep. As a fellow pilgrim, I could keep their company or not as I chose.

And this is really the point. I realised that it made no difference to me as a pilgrim and as a hospitalero to even consider judging whether someone was or wasn't a pilgrim in terms described by the Pilgrim Office.

If someone declared to me that they weren't walking for religious or spiritual reasons or in an attitude of search, and went on to ask for a Compostela, I might think that they had changed their minds about that along the way. I did on my first Camino, I see no reason why others won't also. More, if I thought someone was being a prying busybody by asking about these things, I would be more likely to give them an answer that avoided engaging in any further discussion on that matter than to necessarily be completely open about this.

Provided the rule isn't used to stop us helping those who do want to think and reflect on either the nature of pilgrimage generally, the Pilgrimage to Santiago more specifically, or their own journey, then I think we will have a good outcome.

 

[David Tallan]

What makes this complicated is that the Cathedral of Santiago is not the only significant religious or sacred place that people might choose as their pilgrimage destination on the Iberian Peninsula. One doesn't need to search far to find these, on pilgrimage routes in their own right, and along or near one of the routes to SDC. People travelling to these destinations appear to me to have as much right to Christian hospitality as pilgrims as any that are going to SDC.

A perfect example of this is one of the Caminos I just walked, the Camino de San Salvador (or Camino del Salvador, depending on whom you talk to). It goes from Sahagun to Oviedo. By pretty much any measurement, it lengthens your journey (if you are then continuing on to Santiago) and takes you away from the direct route to Santiago de Compostela, which from Sahagun must be on the Frances rather than the Primitivo. The religious point of this pilgrimage route has nothing to do with the relics of St. James and everything to do with relics associated with Christ.

 

[thejoker]

As @K_Lynn noted earlier, and I agreed, anyone looking in on our community will see us as tourists first and foremost. Our status as pilgrims will be secondary. I don't think that will make one iota of difference to any of us being required to pay such a tax.

Given how much the pilgrimage has been promoted over the years and how much business it has brought to the city it will be interesting to see how this tax is levied and whether they do indeed start labelling pilgrims as tourists by charging them this new 'tourist tax'.I foresee some logistical difficulties unless a big U-turn and a blanket 'tourist' label on everyone not using a pilgrim only albergue.

 

[dick bird]

Given how much the pilgrimage has been promoted over the years and how much business it has brought to the city it will be interesting to see how this tax is levied and whether they do indeed start labelling pilgrims as tourists by charging them this new 'tourist tax'.I foresee some logistical difficulties unless a big U-turn and a blanket 'tourist' label on everyone not using a pilgrim only albergue.

Not sure what point is being made here. Nor how it is relevant.

 

[trecile]

Given how much the pilgrimage has been promoted over the years and how much business it has brought to the city it will be interesting to see how this tax is levied and whether they do indeed start labelling pilgrims as tourists by charging them this new 'tourist tax'.I foresee some logistical difficulties unless a big U-turn and a blanket 'tourist' label on everyone not using a pilgrim only albergue.

I honestly doubt that pilgrim only albergues will be exempt from the tax.

 

[thejoker]

Not sure what point is being made here. Nor how it is relevant.

Yes, upon reflection, probably the wrong thread to include the subject of a potential tourist tax that may or may not apply to pilgrims. This discussion is probably best left for if/when it happens.

 

[Marbe2]

I think this means that the mods will petition Ivar for a pay raise.

You all deserve it, give them a raise, Ivar! But I think another point for readers is that this Forum IS a business! Some of the readers are also tour guides, own albergues or restaurants, transport baggage, or write camino books or create apps, or create paying blogs, etc. They make money off camino customers. It is a business for some. Alienating potential walkers in not good for business! And I mean this in a positive way.

Personally, I have always been amazed that so many folks get out of sorts on this topic. I get it about bikes on a trail because they pose danger to walkers and vice versa. Or trash on the camino…. But who is harmed by a walkers personnel intention for walking, or whether one stays in a four star hotel or a donativo, or whether one ships a bag, or uses a $6000 tour? Generally when we tear someone else down, it is because we have a need to elevate ourselves.

 

[ShoshTrvls]

Hmm. Well I took it that @ShoshTrvls was asking a rhetorical question where the answer was self evident. I hope I am correct in that assessment. I wouldn't like to think that seeking our 'approval' for such things might become the norm.

It was rhetorical, yes.

 

[BillW]

It struck me when I did the Camino that everyone makes a series of decisions that defines their pilgrimage:

• How far you travel.
• What mode of transportation you use.
• What you carry.
• What type of lodging you stay in.
• What route you take.
• How much planning you do.
• What language you speak.
• What technology you use.
• How much money you spend.
• What role God plays in your journey.

Our human nature sometimes leads us into thinking some things are right, and somethings are wrong.

But, when you look at this list, it seems a bit ridiculous to think that any of my choices are better or worse than any of yours.

All that to say, I appreciate the spirit of the new rule, and hope it will help more of us (including me) celebrate the different ways we all pursue our pilgrimages.

 

[Camino Chrissy]

Good thoughts, @BillW.
I will add...
*What kind of foods we choose to eat.

 

[Dani7]

What stood out to me and touched me deeply for my first ever Camino this spring was this: I met people from almost every country, with different cultures, languages and beliefs. Some were picking up where they left off, some were doing only one section for various reasons, and everyone had their personal reasons for how they were doing it. The most incredible thing was…most of us were walking with a common goal, to get to Santiago.

I never saw pilgrims or tourists. I saw people. I saw families. I saw the very young and much older. A community of souls who had purpose. I can’t remember one day where I was not moved by this. We were so very different yet had this common desire to put one foot ahead of the other and just walk. The « how » or « why » mattered little.

This forum is a community of people from all over the world who have so much more in common than not. It’s quite magical.

 

[trecile]

I think this means that the mods will petition Ivar for a pay raise.

You all deserve it, give them a raise, Ivar!

Lest anyone think that being a moderator is a paid position - it is not, @peregrina2000 was just joking. Though when I was in Santiago last month Ivar did treat me to chocolate and churros.

 

[JabbaPapa]

Given how much the pilgrimage has been promoted over the years and how much business it has brought to the city it will be interesting to see how this tax is levied and whether they do indeed start labelling pilgrims as tourists by charging them this new 'tourist tax'.I foresee some logistical difficulties unless a big U-turn and a blanket 'tourist' label on everyone not using a pilgrim only albergue.

From an article I read earlier in the British online press, looks like it would be + €0.50/night for pilgrims who sleep in "Albergues", but a higher tax up to €2.50 for those sleeping in hotels and so on. This is speculation on my part from a quoted range of tax numbers.

 

[C clearly]

From an article I read earlier in the British online press, looks like it would be + €0.50/night for pilgrims who sleep in "Albergues", but a higher tax for those sleeping in hotels and so on.

Please, let's not divert into a discussion of a tax that is not even in place yet.

 

[Peter Fransiscus]

I honestly doubt that pilgrim only albergues will be exempt from the tax.

True, everyone who sleep in a bed will pay a tax.

 

[David Tallan]

...But who is harmed by a walkers personnel intention for walking, or whether one stays in a four star hotel or a donativo....

Some of us can remember, before the infrastructure got to its current state, when those who could afford private accommodation were encouraged to use it and leave the refugios and albergues for those pilgrims who could not afford the alternatives.

 

[Marbe2]

Some of us can remember, before the infrastructure got to its current state, when those who could afford private accommodation were encouraged to use it and leave the refugios and albergues for those pilgrims who could not afford the alternatives.

Yes, I recall this…and I certainly do so. I certainly would encourage everyone who has the means to consider bypassing an albergue in high season if they can afford it and the trails are crowded. But many pilgrims may be as well off as tourists, so I see no need for the distinction.

 

[alexwalker]

IMHO, the message from the mods/Ivar is clear and good. It seems this thread is starting to go off-topic.

 

[CindisCamino]

I welcome the new rule 3.

We all change with time.

There have been many inflammatory posts against not "real" pilgrims over the years in here. When I was a spring chicken at 55, in 2008, i could tend to lean towards these ideas.

Today, at the age of soon 70, with arthritis in both knees (due to many Caminos; God knows I know many ways in Spain), I know that the only way to do another Camino for me now, is to adjust to my circumstances: I will walk shorter days, I may use pack transfer some days bc my knees hurt so much, I may some days become a taxi- or busigrino bc of pain, I may use better accomodation than albergues now and then, although I actually love the albergue life and want to have it as often as possible.

So if you see me hopping off a bus and go to my place, let it be known that it is because it is the only way I now can continue to do the Way.

I still consider myself a pilgrim. I just do it as best I can.

Well said and Buen Camino! I had to reschedule my walk from June to end of August for a major surgery I had. I am going to walk, was cleared by my doctor, but he wants me to do shorter days, rest often and use a baggage service. So although I can’t do my walk the way I wanted I won’t let this stop me. So if you see me walking slowly along the trail, say hi and know that I am embracing this dream I’ve had for 30 years! Let’s be gentle with others, we never know their circumstances.

 

[DJwalKing]

What he did not do, and has never done, is to tell us who is who.

I think an even more important distinction is to not claim that one is superior or better than the other. Yes, there are differences on what they do, how they do it, and why they do it. But what's important is THAT they do it.

 

[David]

Perhaps, but if you are, I think for most of us as pilgrims it shouldn't matter. It is related to at least one decision recently, that to ban the acceptance of suitcases at some albergues. It seems evident to me from questions that some members are asking that if they are being called at all, it is not to walk to the tomb of the apostle. Noting that one of the credential's purpose is to give those who do intend to walk to the Cathedral of Santiago access to hostels offered by the Christian hospitality of the Way, it seems axiomatic to me that someone who isn't walking to Santiago wouldn't be entitled to such hospitality. But is that really the nature of the Christian hospitality being provided along the camino routes?

What makes this complicated is that the Cathedral of Santiago is not the only significant religious or sacred place that people might choose as their pilgrimage destination on the Iberian Peninsula. One doesn't need to search far to find these, on pilgrimage routes in their own right, and along or near one of the routes to SDC. People travelling to these destinations appear to me to have as much right to Christian hospitality as pilgrims as any that are going to SDC.

Then there are those who don't walk for the purpose of visiting any significant sacred or religious place. My wife was one of these when she and I walked the CF some years ago. She visited the cathedral and attended mass not out of any Christian sentiment or spiritual search. She was motivated by proving to herself that she could undertake the physical challenge of walking across Spain, and doing those things was part of experiencing, with others, the culmination of that endeavour. She asked for the Welcome Certificate at the Pilgrim Office. Ironically, we found later they had given her a Compostela.

I think that the real outliers are those that use the Camino routes because they present convenient and well organized places along which to have a good walk for a few days, a few weeks, or even a whole summer. I wouldn't think of myself as a pilgrim were I to do that. I suspect that I have met people who were doing that, but some time ago I realised that I didn't need to make any judgements about that, either as a fellow pilgrim or as a hospitalero. As the latter, it was sufficient that they had a credencial if they wanted to stay, eat and sleep. As a fellow pilgrim, I could keep their company or not as I chose.

And this is really the point. I realised that it made no difference to me as a pilgrim and as a hospitalero to even consider judging whether someone was or wasn't a pilgrim in terms described by the Pilgrim Office.

If someone declared to me that they weren't walking for religious or spiritual reasons or in an attitude of search, and went on to ask for a Compostela, I might think that they had changed their minds about that along the way. I did on my first Camino, I see no reason why others won't also. More, if I thought someone was being a prying busybody by asking about these things, I would be more likely to give them an answer that avoided engaging in any further discussion on that matter than to necessarily be completely open about this.

Provided the rule isn't used to stop us helping those who do want to think and reflect on either the nature of pilgrimage generally, the Pilgrimage to Santiago more specifically, or their own journey, then I think we will have a good outcome.

Perhaps you would prefer 'drawn' to Camino? I didn't mean my "are called" in a necessarily narrow Catholic religious sense, fixed to Christianity and their particular explanation of what God is - I meant it in a more open sense and, yes, perhaps I should have used 'drawn' to Camino - because we both know - we All know - people are. They hear about it, it nags at them, odd synchronicities happen - the scallop shell embedded in a wall in a country three thousand miles away, the overheard snatch of conversation in a cafe, the turning the tv on for the news but it is on a channel that is showing a pilgrim documentary ...we all know this stuff, it is too beyond "co-incidence" (whatever that really means) to be random ... and eventually the nagged surrenders and goes on Camino.
To me it doesn't matter at all that they think they are non religious, have no interest in Santiago, St James, etc - the thing is, the reality is, that of all the walks/hikes they could have gone on in this world they had to go to Camino - that my view.

Therefore my point was that were we all to accept that all are called to Camino - drawn to Camino .. then this "who is a real pilgrim" disappears, whatever or whichever way we get to Santiago? Who cares - they were called (drawn) they answered, and there they are - and then we are all become one diverse tribe, one family - diverse, difficult like all extended families, but one.

 

[Peter Fransiscus]

I think an even more important distinction is to not claim that one is superior or better than the other. Yes, there are differences on what they do, how they do it, and why they do it. But what's important is THAT they do it.

I have absolutely no problem with that.

Where I have a problem with is , the people who make trouble with the security guards at the Pilgrims Office and find it strange that the police are called, or with people who yell at one of the Sisters and myself. While we volunteer there, I don't have a good word for people like this.