The Idea of Pilgrimage

[Margaret Butterworth]

I first came across the idea of pilgrimage when I studied English Literature at school. One of our set books was the Prologue to the Canterbury Tales by Chaucer. A merry band of pilgrims set off from London to travel to Canterbury. Their destination was the tomb of Thomas a Becket, who was murdered in 1170. “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest” is an unsubstantiated quote of Henry II. Four knights did just that, right there in Canterbury Cathedral. The interesting thing to me, as a modern day pilgrim, is that these medieval pilgrims rode on horseback. Nowadays, purists believe that you should walk every step of the way to Santiago de Compostela. In the Middle Ages, the mode of transport was not important. You just had to get there!

 

[Kirkie]

I first came across the idea of pilgrimage when I studied English Literature at school. One of our set books was the Prologue to the Canterbury Tales by Chaucer. A merry band of pilgrims set off from London to travel to Canterbury. Their destination was the tomb of Thomas a Becket, who was murdered in 1170. “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest” is an unsubstantiated quote of Henry II. Four knights did just that, right there in Canterbury Cathedral. The interesting thing to me, as a modern day pilgrim, is that these medieval pilgrims rode on horseback. Nowadays, purists believe that you should walk every step of the way to Santiago de Compostela. In the Middle Ages, the mode of transport was not important. You just had to get there!

View attachment 178441

What a lovely image! And who will rid me of these turbulent other people? I am actually joking. I love the notion of pilgrimage. It may or may not be a Camino. When the two are in harmony, it is the alignment of forces that can lead to change, healing, discovery. I am just trying to take up your invitation, OP, to explore a little bit the idea of Pilgrimage. Thanks, it will help me to remember that my pilgrimage is never over, until it is!

 

[dougfitz]

Nowadays, purists believe that you should walk every step of the way to Santiago de Compostela.

I think we do ourselves and others a disservice by suggesting those who believe this are purists. It might be my personal goal, I expect many others will share that, and even perhaps encourage it. But while I am not sure what best describes those who want to mandate such notions, I know it certainly wouldn't be 'purist'.

 

[David]

Canterbury Tales is a truly funny book - the first in English too - but it isn't really about the pilgrimage to Canterbury, nor 'true' of pilgrimage to Canterbury. The pilgrimage is merely a vehicle to write a funny and caustic satire on society of that time.
The same with Trimalchio's Feast (by Petronius). It is not actually about a Roman dinner party, nor are the courses relevant or real - what it is is a hilarious and biting satire on wealthy Roman society of that time using a fictional feast as the vehicle for it.

As for the actual real pilgrimage, sure, most pilgrims walked - to own a horse meant wealth, a rare thing in those times (and these).

As an aside, leaving Pons (a few days north of Bordeaux) and passing through the old pilgrim hospital, the road through it has stone benches along either side for weary pilgrims and a long sealed up hatch to give out food .. there is plenty of medieval carved graffiti and about halfway down on the right hand side high up someone has carved their heraldic shield, using their dagger I should think. It could only have been carved by someone on horseback, an aristo, a knight - but plenty are at pedestrian pilgrim level.

 

[williamlittig]

I first came across the idea of pilgrimage when I studied English Literature at school. One of our set books was the Prologue to the Canterbury Tales by Chaucer. A merry band of pilgrims set off from London to travel to Canterbury. Their destination was the tomb of Thomas a Becket, who was murdered in 1170. “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest” is an unsubstantiated quote of Henry II. Four knights did just that, right there in Canterbury Cathedral. The interesting thing to me, as a modern day pilgrim, is that these medieval pilgrims rode on horseback. Nowadays, purists believe that you should walk every step of the way to Santiago de Compostela. In the Middle Ages, the mode of transport was not important. You just had to get there!

View attachment 178441

Yes, Pilgrims have intent, purpose and destination. They rely on their wits to find food and shelter. Schedules change as do routes and weather, yet they persist. It isn't a vacation, Pilgrims support themselves, reliance on transportation, booking reservations and baggage transport would have been laughable, some still laugh today.

 

[Robo]

Nowadays, purists believe that you should walk every step of the way to Santiago de Compostela. In the Middle Ages, the mode of transport was not important. You just had to get there!

Fair points.

And that opens up the question of whether it is the journey or the destination that is of importance.

In the Middle Ages, it was likely about the destination. After all the journey was somewhat perilous! And the only modes of transport were horses / wagons for the rich, and walking for the poor.

Whereas now, whilst the destination is certainly important, perhaps we also cherish the journey? The freedom from day to day duties, the community, the chance to get out in the fresh air, be active, to live a simple life...... These may not have been objectives in the Middle Ages

Have we, in modern times, raised the importance of the actual 'journey'? And Why?

 

[Margaret Butterworth]

The point I was trying to make is this: there is no prescriptive requirement to walk every step on the Camino (apart from the last 100k). In the Middle Ages, you could ride a horse if you wished. On my last couple of Caminos, I often travelled some parts by bus. At my age, I needed to take a break from walking. Regarding the destination issue: in medieval times people would be more interested in the need to secure a place in heaven, which is why they were on pilgrimage.

 

[Sirage]

Who knows? History tends to be written by, or for, the rich. (In other circumstances by the winners.)

We choose our own way.

 

[Walkalong]

Purists? Sounds exclusionary. There is no requirement to walk the last 100K, or collect stamps, or participate in clever mid-evil or modern marketing schemes.

But there is a lot to be said for a journey, preferably a long journey, undertaken by the simple means, carrying minimal kit, with minimal planning, sharing kindness with others. It can be a very humbling, freeing experience.

 

[Kirkie]

Yes, Pilgrims have intent, purpose and destination. They rely on their wits to find food and shelter. Schedules change as do routes and weather, yet they persist. It isn't a vacation, Pilgrims support themselves, reliance on transportation, booking reservations and baggage transport would have been laughable, some still laugh today.

You bring to mind a hardy pilgrim i know who lives in Warsaw. She does what it says on the tin. I could not do justice to describing her approach, it is based on some planning, but a lot of counting on being recognised in her pilgrim status. It works for her. I do not mean recognised in terms of fame, rather as being welcomed in a climate where pilgrimage is respected. On a camino path in Poland.

 

[Turga]

high up someone has carved their heraldic shield, using their dagger I should think. It could only have been carved by someone on horseback, an aristo, a knight

Pilgrim on stilts? Pilgrim carrying a ladder?

 

[JabbaPapa]

The interesting thing to me, as a modern day pilgrim, is that these medieval pilgrims rode on horseback. Nowadays, purists believe that you should walk every step of the way to Santiago de Compostela. In the Middle Ages, the mode of transport was not important. You just had to get there!

Most modern pilgrimages are agnostic as to the means of transportation, and when I say "most", that's actually the vast majority of them.

Without even considering the many non-Christian pilgrimage destinations in the world, most Christian pilgrims travel by coach or by train in groups with their parish or diocese, or in smaller self-organised groups, family and/or friends. Our local 1st May Marian Pilgrimage to Notre Dame de Laghet gathers hundreds of pilgrims, some going up by coach, most by private car, some on foot.

I'm no longer sure of the stats at Compostela itself, as the numbers of foot/bike/horse pilgrims going there via the Camino has grown massively over the past ten years, but a decade ago and longer the non-Camino pilgrims to Santiago were clearly the majority of pilgrims ; and even in the 2020s, foot pilgrims are a minority of people in the Pilgrim Masses at the Cathedral.

Even just in Spain, I believe that more make a pilgrimage to Montserrat in any year year than to Santiago, and Nuestra Señora del Pilar in Zaragoza, the other major Jacobean pilgrimage destination, has pilgrim numbers comparable to those at Santiago.

What's peculiar about Santiago is its strong tradition of foot pilgrimages as a major proportion of travels to it, something it shares with the other major Christian pilgrimages only in the pilgrimages to Jerusalem and Fátima. Of course all of the pilgrimage destinations both East and West have some degree of foot pilgrimage, from the smaller and most local ones to the most major of them. But as to the pilgrimage to Rome for instance, whilst there is a huge network of Via Romea foot pilgrimage routes throughout Europe, exactly comparable to the Camino, as to the Roman pilgrimage itself the means of travel there is completely irrelevant, except for one's own personal reasons.

The Way of Saint James to Santiago de Compostela is greatly exceptional in this regard in comparison to Christian Pilgrimages in general.

 

[Corned Beef]

As travelling by horse / coach in the Middle Ages would be for the well-heeled (pun), pilgrimage by foot would be the default choice. Of course you could also use Shank's Pony or 'sur la mule de cordeliers'

 

[David Tallan]

Canterbury Tales is a truly funny book - the first in English too - but it isn't really about the pilgrimage to Canterbury, nor 'true' of pilgrimage to Canterbury. The pilgrimage is merely a vehicle to write a funny and caustic satire on society of that time.
The same with Trimalchio's Feast (by Petronius). It is not actually about a Roman dinner party, nor are the courses relevant or real - what it is is a hilarious and biting satire on wealthy Roman society of that time using a fictional feast as the vehicle for it.

As for the actual real pilgrimage, sure, most pilgrims walked - to own a horse meant wealth, a rare thing in those times (and these).

As an aside, leaving Pons (a few days north of Bordeaux) and passing through the old pilgrim hospital, the road through it has stone benches along either side for weary pilgrims and a long sealed up hatch to give out food .. there is plenty of medieval carved graffiti and about halfway down on the right hand side high up someone has carved their heraldic shield, using their dagger I should think. It could only have been carved by someone on horseback, an aristo, a knight - but plenty are at pedestrian pilgrim level.

To be sure, the pilgrimage is a vehicle to tell the tales that Chaucer wished to tell, some of which were very satirical, some of which were not. But I am not so sure as you that it is completely false to pilgrimage at the time. Personally, I think that would make it a less effective vehicle.

We do know from the Codex Calixtinus that some pilgrims rode. He talks of the dangers to pilgrims' horses, and some of the stages are of a distance that only makes sense for a rider.

I suspect that pilgrims in the middle ages traveled according to their means. The lower classes walked, and the middle and upper classes rode. There were certainly a lot more peasants than middle class or nobility, but I'm not sure whether the demographics of the Camino matched those of society as a whole.

In terms of the present day, we've heard the story of one of our members who had just walked to Santiago and was told by a pilgrim purist, arriving in a bus from Germany with a number of other pilgrims and some priests, that he wasn't really a pilgrim because he hadn't travelled as she had, with priests. Purists come in different flavours.

Here on the forum, especially in a thread like this one, let's all be cognizant of Rule #3. While it is okay to talk about the nature of pilgrimage, it isn't okay to say to someone, as the German bus lady told our Forum member, that they are not a real pilgrim.

 

[Rick of Rick and Peg]

[...] that he wasn't really a pilgrim because he hadn't travelled as she had, with priests. Purists come in different flavours.

Such as those who say suffering on the journey is required. Anyway, I'm wondering how to draw the Venn diagram here.

 

[Kathar1na]

While it is okay to talk about the nature of pilgrimage, it isn't okay to say to someone, as the German bus lady told our Forum member, that they are not a real pilgrim.

The German bus lady - she is becoming a forum fixture.

We know nothing about her. I like to think that she came from Bavaria where Catholic group pilgrimages on foot with singing and praying have an uninterrupted tradition of many centuries. I think that she should be forgiven that she had not been familiar with Camino culture which at the time (around 2002) had barely been developed and was really not more than some 10 years old.

I think that these are three different worlds with only superficial parallels: the medieval pilgrimages; Catholic group pilgrimages; Caminos. And that is why it is of little relevance for Camino peregrinos, imho, that Chaucer’s group travelled on horseback, as interesting as it may be.

This is probably what a foot pilgrimage looked like for the German bus lady in the year 2002, namely something similar to this tradition, 200 years old without interruption and, btw, over 110 km:

 

[dick bird]

Just to illustrate the point about modern pilgrimage, this (the one on the RHS, obviously) was on a wall in Logroño.

 

[markie6]

Mode of transport for the Purists could also be High Horse

 

[David]

Thinking about 'walking purists' - is quite funny really as no one walks their pilgrimage to Santiago ... unless they actually live on a Camino everyone uses transport; aeroplanes, trains, ships, buses, cars ... then they get off before they arrive in Santiago (wherever they have decided "the start" is) and walk the rest .... a true purist would surely have to step out of their front door and walk all the way? -
- might get a bit wet crossing oceans but this might work ..

 

[Pafayac]

Have we, in modern times, raised the importance of the actual 'journey'? And Why?

Because the destination does not matter.
Indeed most of Camino pilgrims don't care about the fact that St James is or not really buried in Santiago, if his relics are there...
However, consider true live pilgrimage like Mecca, Lourdes, Fatima, Virgen de Guadalupe... in these case the journey does not matter, the goal is to reach the target.

 

[Kathar1na]

where Catholic group pilgrimages on foot with singing and praying have an uninterrupted tradition of many centuries

Just in case it isn't clear for those who are not familiar with this idea of pilgrimage on foot: The singing of hymns and other songs and the praying is done while the group is walking. If you zoom into the photo you do not only see the person at the front who carries a crucifix decorated with flowers, you also see a member of the group carrying a loudspeaker. That is standard equipment for a pilgrimage on foot; it is used for the communal singing and praying.

Note that the conversation between the forum member and the German bus lady was not about mode of transport although she travelled by bus and he was on foot. It was about the idea of pilgrimage, about the inner catalogue that each of us has.

So perhaps we ought to ask ourselves what informs and forms our inner catalogue about what the "idea of pilgrimage" and in particular the "idea of Camino" is. A movie from 2010? Blogs and vlogs and YouTube videos about walking the Camino de Santiago? Who and what makes us believe that we ought to walk 500 km or 800 km on foot to Santiago and makes us talk about taxigrinos and busgrinos in a dismissive or mocking manner which is a nearly daily occurrence on the forum, or who and what makes us become defensive when we ourselves or others don't walk all the way? I think that is the question we ought to ask ourselves ...

BTW, there is a market for loudspeakers for pilgrimages on foot in Germany with numerous different models. Below is another newspaper photo. This pilgrimage has a tradition that goes back to 1672. It is a group pilgrimage on foot to the Apostle Saint Matthew's relics in Trier. Over 120 km btw and about 40 km daily. Of course they have a bus at their disposal for those who can't walk it all on each day. The organiser is quoted as saying "Wemme he net bedde, komme me net ahn!“" - "If we don't pray we won't arrive!" And that's one reason why they carry a loudspeaker.

 

[Bristle Boy]

I just don't think it necessary to engage your "inner Silas" to atone for your sins nor to explain a motivation or your dedication for walking a camino.
.

 

[JabbaPapa]

the destination does not matter.

????!!!?? I cordially disagree.

However, consider true live pilgrimage like Mecca, Lourdes, Fatima, Virgen de Guadalupe... in these case the journey does not matter

Of course the journey matters in these cases !!

 

[Pafayac]

????!!!?? I cordially disagree.

Santiago, the destination matters in the sense that it is the attraction pole for many people, and because most of us intent to meet them.
But, please suppose that among the first time Camino walkers, some cannot walk the Camino (because of injury, disease, lack of time...): how many would try to reach Santiago by other means ?

Of course the journey matters in these cases !!

Travelling to Mecca, Lourdes, Fatima... implies finding a transport mean to reach the destination but I never heard about the right way to go there.
Another example is Chartres: every year, in May, many pilgrims start from Paris to Chartres by feet. The target is not very particular in the sens that there is a beautiful cathedral but no specific meaning attached to it. It's just a pretext to gather on the route.
If one year Chartres becomes unreachable, the pilgrimage can remain toward Orleans or Le Mans or Beauvais...
It is not true for Mecca, Lourdes or Fatima.

 

[Kathar1na]

Another example is Chartres: every year, in May, many pilgrims start from Paris to Chartres by feet. The target is not very particular in the sens that there is a beautiful cathedral but no specific meaning attached to it. It's just a pretext to gather on the route.

I agree to some extent but not to all of it .

The pilgrimage that you refer to is a modern Catholic group pilgrimage on foot from Paris to Chartres. Again, btw, over some 120 km or so. It is, however, somewhat inspired by the medieval pilgrimage to a relic known as Veil of Our Lady, i.e. one of the Marian pilgrimages that became especially popular towards the end of the Middle Ages, I think, and that are nowadays the main idea of pilgrimage in Europe and elsewhere: Fatima and Lourdes are essentially Marian pilgrimages. They are related to Marian appearances and not to the relics of saints.

The Caminos do not fit into this idea of pilgrimage. The contemporary idea of Camino de Santiago is essentially secular.

 

[Kathar1na]

What a lovely image!

It is indeed a lovely image. I've seen it before and today I got a little curious.

I had always assumed that it is an illustration from a manuscript of Chaucer's tale. Imagine my surprise when I learnt today that it isn't. It is an illustration from the "Troy Book and the Siege of Thebe" by John Lydgate. The author apparently imagines meeting the Southwark pilgrims after their arrival in Canterbury. The image shows them leaving Canterbury.

Nevertheless: It is an illustration from a 15th century manuscript and they are on horseback.

This, of course, may give rise to questions about the Idea of Returning from Santiago de Compostela ...

 

[JabbaPapa]

Santiago, the destination matters in the sense that it is the attraction pole for many people, and because most of us intent to meet them.

I think you are assuming your own purposes to be more general than they are.

Which is by no means to dis them -- we all certainly have our own personal means and purposes -- but I find that this recent discussion of destination and journey, as if they were somehow opposite or different to each other in some way, to be misleading and unhelpful.

Pilgrimage and the pilgrimage to Santiago and the Way of Saint James and "the Camino" just simply have not the kinds of divergences of approach or practice that are sometimes alleged.

But, please suppose that among the first time Camino walkers, some cannot walk the Camino (because of injury, disease, lack of time...): how many would try to reach Santiago by other means ?

Before the invention of public transport, very few -- but more and more from the 15th Century onwards.

As to the 20th and 21st Centuries, the great majority.

I think that you are falsely seeking to restrict the Way of Saint James into a walking paradigm, whereas it is and always has been primarily a pilgrimage per se. Foot pilgrims are the exception, rather than the rule.

Travelling to Mecca, Lourdes, Fatima... implies finding a transport mean to reach the destination but I never heard about the right way to go there.

There is no "right way" to make one's pilgrimage to the Tomb of the Apostle in Santiago de Compostela either. Pilgrims who journey there in their private cars are Pilgrims.

Another example is Chartres: every year, in May, many pilgrims start from Paris to Chartres by feet. The target is not very particular in the sens that there is a beautiful cathedral but no specific meaning attached to it. It's just a pretext to gather on the route.

That is completely false. But there's a rule about no discussion of religion ...

If one year Chartres becomes unreachable, the pilgrimage can remain toward Orleans or Le Mans or Beauvais...

That is to completely misunderstand that pilgrimage.

It is not true for Mecca, Lourdes or Fatima.

This journey versus destination narrative is a false dichotomy. Pilgrimage is always about both journey and destination -- and return !! -- even if some people's individual notions of "the Camino" or "Caminos" might diverge therefrom.

 

[JabbaPapa]

The pilgrimage that you refer to is a modern Catholic group pilgrimage on foot from Paris to Chartres.

One particular organised yearly pilgrimage is most certainly not the whole of pilgrimage to Chartres, and the vast majority of Chartres pilgrims over the course of any given year will not travel to the Cathedral on foot.

Not even all foot pilgrims to Chartres will belong to that particular organised pilgrimage effort.

My own foot pilgrimage to Chartres was a part of my 1994 from Paris to Santiago.

The Caminos do not fit into this idea of pilgrimage.

This is quite false, sorry.

The contemporary idea of Camino de Santiago is essentially secular.

That many people "doing the Camino" have their own non-religious purposes does not make the Way of Saint James nor more deeply the pilgrimage to the Tomb of the Apostle into something secular in "essence".

It is a religious pilgrimage, regardless of how many nowadays find themselves upon the Way for various non-religious purposes of their own. And nothing wrong with those purposes.

 

[David Tallan]

I think that you are falsely seeking to restrict the Way of Saint James into a walking paradigm, whereas it is and always has been primarily a pilgrimage per se. Foot pilgrims are the exception, rather than the rule.

...

There is no "right way" to make one's pilgrimage to the Tomb of the Apostle in Santiago de Compostela either. Pilgrims who journey there in their private cars are Pilgrims.

I absolutely agree with you, but I can understand others who have been led to a different opinion by the decisions of the Church authorities in Santiago regarding to whom they will give the Compostela.

 

[Kathar1na]

People who define themselves as lapsed Catholics, Anglicans, Protestants, Buddhists, Hindus, atheists, Jewish, Muslims, agnostics, or Shintoists also define themselves as pilgrims on the way to Santiago. I cannot think of any other pilgrimage (other than those modelled after the contemporary Caminos) that incorporates such a broad spectrum and a better word than secular to describe the contemporary idea of Camino de Santiago pilgrimage and pilgrims. That individual persons define it differently for themselves does not change the general concept.

PS: I had to edit the post because one of the world religions had been omitted. The listed sequence is random. The rules and system of granting Compostelas do not define the contemporary idea of Camino pilgrimage either.

 

[Kathar1na]

This is too cute not to share: There is a world famous altarpiece in the Cathedral of Ghent in Belgium. It is known as "The Adoration of the Lamb" and consists of several panels. One panel shows a group of men on horses. Have a look at the riders in this panel and at the riders on the book cover of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales - shown as a mirror image below. The white horse? The two men riding next to each other with heads slightly bent towards each other, one in dark clothing and the other with a red square hat and broad collar? The rider shown in profile with the pointy beard?

Aren't they amazingly similar?

 

[Blister Bill]

Of course the destination matters otherwise what is the point? As always, we're only discussing the mode of transport. It's not the Compostella which is the issue (which should be entirely up to the issuing organisation to determine who qualifies), for me it was the silly distance certificate. My Camino learning is to not be phased by the people claiming they've walked so far when they haven't. Two of mine are wildly inaccurate anyway. Having the privilege of walking from home recently it is a very surreal experience to walk out your front door.

I find the practicing of humility at times a challenge. Recently this was especially the case when 30km short of SdC on a rather wet day, passing a large number of walkers crammed in a bus shelter like sardines waiting for a bus disappointing and dishonest but that is their choice. As a school teacher used to say before exams: "you're only cheating yourself "! The looks on their silent faces said it all.

PS as for Mr Chaucer's tales, I think an intimate knowledge of pilgrimage at the time gave the book the credibility to be effective.

 

[Blister Bill]

Just in case it isn't clear for those who are not familiar with this idea of pilgrimage on foot: The singing of hymns and other songs and the praying is done while the group is walking. If you zoom into the photo you do not only see the person at the front who carries a crucifix decorated with flowers, you also see a member of the group carrying a loudspeaker.

BTW, there is a market for loudspeakers for pilgrimages on foot in Germany with numerous different models. Below is another newspaper photo. This pilgrimage has a tradition that goes back to 1672. It is a group pilgrimage on foot to the Apostle Saint Matthew's relics in Trier. Over 120 km btw and about 40 km daily. Of course they have a bus at their disposal for those who can't walk it all on each day. The organiser is quoted as saying "Wemme he net bedde, komme me net ahn!“" - "If we don't pray we won't arrive!" And that's one reason why they carry a loudspeaker.

View attachment 178547

I'm a huge believer in silent prayer.

Can I request the moderators intervention to remove any mention of loudspeakers from the forum, least it gives ideas.

The night walking, bag rustling, door slamming, nuclear powered unfiltered torch brigade is challenging enough but pilgrims with loud speakers ??? Perish the thought !

 

[Kathar1na]

I'm a huge believer in silent prayer.

Can I request the moderators intervention to remove any mention of loudspeakers from the forum, least it gives ideas.

The night walking, bag rustling, door slamming, nuclear powered unfiltered torch bridge is challenging enough but pilgrims with loud speakers ??? Perish the thought !

If you are not joking - which I assume you are - then I would wonder whether you saw any word in the comments other than "loudspeaker" and the colour red.

 

[Perambulating Griffin]

Fair points.

And that opens up the question of whether it is the journey or the destination that is of importance.

In the Middle Ages, it was likely about the destination. After all the journey was somewhat perilous! And the only modes of transport were horses / wagons for the rich, and walking for the poor.

Whereas now, whilst the destination is certainly important, perhaps we also cherish the journey? The freedom from day to day duties, the community, the chance to get out in the fresh air, be active, to live a simple life...... These may not have been objectives in the Middle Ages

Have we, in modern times, raised the importance of the actual 'journey'? And Why?

The short answer is that the New Age junk (yeah… I’m actually really excited about a forthcoming academic book from the UofT press “Fascist Yoga”…) has turned everything into “the journey is more important than [anything else]”… total garbage if you ask me. It leaves all the room for ego, and self-involvement, removes the obligation to focus on whose regions one is tromping through… it’s very much of the egocentric current moment. I’m sure that early pilgrims, if they could even comprehend it, would be appalled.
“The journey” is, as it is deployed now, all about the internal… whereas pilgrimage has always been directed at something outside oneself. A destination… in which we owe something outward…
Edited to add:
"Outward" in the sense of specific veneration of relics... but also something that the more recent scholar, Marcel Mauss (early 20th C) helps us to understand as part of an economic system of gift exchange. Because pilgrims (I mean the ones who self designate[d] as such) understood that one had to seek the intercession of a given saint in order to have a specific need met. One did not make pilgrimage just for fun (though it could have been a relief, yes). But the idea that one would arrive at the pilgrimage site and dismiss it as irrelevant would not have made sense to those seeking what pilgrimage promised.
reading backward, we see that long pilgrimage made by walking did have many things to offer in terms of improved health for those early ones making their way to Santiago, but they probably would not have counted the walking itself or its miseries as among their blessings. Better food, given in exchange for carrying the intentions of those who could not go? That would have been very welcome. The medical care that hospitals along the way could offer would have been the best the age had to offer (but also, the dangers of the road make that a complicated exchange). Fresh air and steady exercise probably *did* help cure minor ailments and lead to what we now refer to in mental health literature as the "benefits of self-efficacy". So in all of this, anyone making their way without a nefarious motive would have felt an obligation outward -- to the Saint, and to the cathedrals along the way with their own important relics, and to those along the way who supported them.
I can't guarantee that they weren't stealing grapes and leaving poop on the trails, but the various literatures show is that while, yes, per Canterbury, people claiming piety could get up to no good, for the most part, people were sincere in their efforts to make pilgrimage to a site.
Most medievalists and medical historians are pretty familiar with the literature. The rest of us, less so. Dorsey Armstrong is a good person to start with ...

 

[Perambulating Griffin]

Because the destination does not matter.
Indeed most of Camino pilgrims don't care about the fact that St James is or not really buried in Santiago, if his relics are there...
However, consider true live pilgrimage like Mecca, Lourdes, Fatima, Virgen de Guadalupe... in these case the journey does not matter, the goal is to reach the target.

...a consequence of the generosity of those who provide hospitality (in the antique sense from Matthew) have maintained the camino routes as open to anyone... (and this may be a collision of policy decisions of the mid-20th C to increase tourism and revenue generation being woven in with the separate hopes of the church that in the rise of secularism, a healthy number of walkers would nonetheless find themselves to have been pilgrims on arrival). We know that this hope is why the Cathedral decided, for example, to allow "spiritual" reasons for seeking the Compostela. Basically, hoping for the "come to Jesus" moment to happen.
Mecca is most definitely an exclusive pursuit (the expense, the failure to keep those who cannot afford the air-conditioned tents safe from heat...) and is intended only for observant Muslims. The other sites have specific blessings that the faithful seek there and the point is the be *there*, not to *get there*.
But the question that plagues us, one way or another, is whether this "journey matters more" leads to the kinds of abuses of region and destination that we see out there (from the banalities of littering, to the dismissal of SdC as nothing more than the last stamp before catching transit out...).
I am curious to know more from @Kathar1na about the walking prayer history... because yes... "pilgrimage is prayer with the feet" is a kind of truism, and I absolutely know this to be reflected in the floats carried in festivals for feast days for the saints... and I am not sure that we can tease out what of a long distance walk is "just walking" from what might be "prayer with the feet"... and yet, I dare say that "out there" we know it by its littering, by its disregard for local culture, and so on.

 

[Tincatinker]

I made my first pilgrimage to Muxia, to our broken boat. I walked because that was what my grandmother told me we did.

I walked mostly along the western coasts of France and then the northern coasts of Spain, possibly on bits of the classic French routes and certainly on bits of the Norte.

I wanted to understand why that symbol of the sundering sea and the broken boat and the inherited sense of loss was so prevalent. I got there and I watched the sun set and I watched the waves slop around those stones - and then I walked home and got a job and a family and I inherited a tribe and the years rolled by and from time to time I put another stone on my cairn.

And then, in 2012 I made a conscious pilgrimage to the shrine of one who may have stood with the divine. When I got there I realized that that journey was no different to the one I had made in my youth. I got there and I gazed at that splendid casket and then I turned around and I went home.

The “idea of pilgrimage”? The journey to a sacred place. I think it’s the journey but I’ll probably have to keep trying to understand

 

[Kirkie]

I made my first pilgrimage to Muxia, to our broken boat. I walked because that was what my grandmother told me we did.

I walked mostly along the western coasts of France and then the northern coasts of Spain, possibly on bits of the classic French routes and certainly on bits of the Norte.

I wanted to understand why that symbol of the sundering sea and the broken boat and the inherited sense of loss was so prevalent. I got there and I watched the sun set and I watched the waves slop around those stones - and then I walked home and got a job and a family and I inherited a tribe and the years rolled by and from time to time I put another stone on my cairn.

And then, in 2012 I made a conscious pilgrimage to the shrine of one who may have stood with the divine. When I got there I realized that that journey was no different to the one I had made in my youth. I got there and I gazed at that splendid casket and then I turned around and I went home.

The “idea of pilgrimage”? The journey to a sacred place. I think it’s the journey but I’ll probably have to keep trying to understand

I believe your second sentence in the last paragraph says it.
I don't know what humility means to you, but that is what I see in your final sentence.

 

[Robo]

The short answer is that the New Age junk (yeah… I’m actually really excited about a forthcoming academic book from the UofT press “Fascist Yoga”…) has turned everything into “the journey is more important than [anything else]”… total garbage if you ask me. It leaves all the room for ego, and self-involvement, removes the obligation to focus on whose regions one is tromping through… it’s very much of the egocentric current moment. I’m sure that early pilgrims, if they could even comprehend it, would be appalled.
“The journey” is, as it is deployed now, all about the internal… whereas pilgrimage has always been directed at something outside oneself. A destination… in which we owe something outward…
Edited to add:
"Outward" in the sense of specific veneration of relics... but also something that the more recent scholar, Marcel Mauss (early 20th C) helps us to understand as part of an economic system of gift exchange. Because pilgrims (I mean the ones who self designate[d] as such) understood that one had to seek the intercession of a given saint in order to have a specific need met. One did not make pilgrimage just for fun (though it could have been a relief, yes). But the idea that one would arrive at the pilgrimage site and dismiss it as irrelevant would not have made sense to those seeking what pilgrimage promised.
reading backward, we see that long pilgrimage made by walking did have many things to offer in terms of improved health for those early ones making their way to Santiago, but they probably would not have counted the walking itself or its miseries as among their blessings. Better food, given in exchange for carrying the intentions of those who could not go? That would have been very welcome. The medical care that hospitals along the way could offer would have been the best the age had to offer (but also, the dangers of the road make that a complicated exchange). Fresh air and steady exercise probably *did* help cure minor ailments and lead to what we now refer to in mental health literature as the "benefits of self-efficacy". So in all of this, anyone making their way without a nefarious motive would have felt an obligation outward -- to the Saint, and to the cathedrals along the way with their own important relics, and to those along the way who supported them.
I can't guarantee that they weren't stealing grapes and leaving poop on the trails, but the various literatures show is that while, yes, per Canterbury, people claiming piety could get up to no good, for the most part, people were sincere in their efforts to make pilgrimage to a site.
Most medievalists and medical historians are pretty familiar with the literature. The rest of us, less so. Dorsey Armstrong is a good person to start with ...

Well, that put me in my place!
I will bow to your greater knowledge on the topic and not speculate!

 

[Perambulating Griffin]

Well, that put me in my place!

No... it's not about you. Unless you think it is.
It is an account of how "journey" came to overpower the site of something holy as motivation.

 

[Robo]

No... it's not about you. Unless you think it is.
It is an account of how "journey" came to overpower the site of something holy as motivation.

It was in response to my post........
But perhaps only the final question.
Sorry for any misunderstanding

 

[Perambulating Griffin]

It was in response to my post........
But perhaps only the final question.
Sorry for any misunderstanding

Yes, it was a sincere reply to the final question.
And Dorsey Armstrong is only one, mostly literature intro the issue, but the explanation for why *arriving* at a place of corporeal healing mattered so much and any journey was merely the largely perilous and unavoidable reality (unless one was lucky enough to live near a sacred site already) has everything to do with ill health, and with plagues in particular. The other big issue in play, and from an earlier point (roughly 400 years) were The Crusades.
I mean… it’s a fascinating history that is both dark and brilliant… threaded together, inextricable…
But the idea of the journey being more important is deeply modern, very secular and at least for the last 3 decades, very tied to both current “wellness” industries and the 1980’s New Age-y bunk of the Shirley MacLaine variety.
If I am impatient with the latter it is because the “me, me, mine, MY” approach to Camino is in evidence in the litter, in the disregard for local culture, in the dismissal of practice…
I take it from the ways that you post, and what you post about, that your question was sincere, and that you are as concerned about respect for land and people in places that are not ours.
So I gave a sincere answer.

 

[Robo]

@Perambulating Griffin . It's an interesting point, the journey v the destination.

Regarding the 'modern' attitude toward Pilgrimage, and I can only speak for myself of course......

The destination is of greater importance to me. It's the whole reason and purpose for my Pilgrimage. Without it there would be no point. It would just be a pleasant walk, and I can do that at home. And I don't do similar walks at home.........because they seem pointless.

But the destination shapes my journey. It gives the journey meaning and context. It's a time for spiritual reflection, and being thankful. But it's both an inner and outer journey. Because the Pilgrimage requires support from those along the way. To whom we are grateful. And it's a chance to live a simple life, with simple pleasures. To appreciate what we have. To appreciate the marvels we see along the way. To visit the open churches. To be ever grateful every day. Maybe it teaches us humility?

Perhaps the journey is a cleansing, 'realignment' or renewal process, before we reach the destination?

But, I often feel like the journey is the destination. Sorry to use that phrase. But the most profound spiritual moments for me are along the journey. Alone. Always. Not amongst the hustle and bustle of Santiago. I visit the cathedral at a quiet time, maybe an 'off peak' Mass, and to have have a few moments in the Crypt, and to reflect on my journey. And to give thanks.

Walking on to Muxia, then provides a 'wind down', and further reflection before entering everyday life once more. And I don't know why, but sitting on the rocks at Muxia feels like a more fitting 'destination'....... Maybe it's the calming effect and lack of crowds?

Sorry to ramble.

And thanks for the reading tips.
It's good to reflect on these things.

 

[Perambulating Griffin]

...

The destination is of greater importance to me. It's the whole reason and purpose for my Pilgrimage. Without it there would be no point. It would just be a pleasant walk, and I can do that at home. And I don't do similar walks at home.........because they seem pointless.

But the destination shapes my journey. It gives the journey meaning and context. It's a time for spiritual reflection, and being thankful. But it's both an inner and outer journey. Because the Pilgrimage requires support from those along the way. To whom we are grateful. And it's a chance to live a simple life, with simple pleasures. To appreciate what we have. To appreciate the marvels we see along the way. To be ever grateful every day. Maybe it teaches us humility?

But, I often feel like the journey is the destination. Sorry to use that phrase. But the most profound spiritual moments for me are along the journey. Alone. Always. Not amongst the hustle and bustle of Santiago. I rarely go to mass there now as the Queues are hundreds of metres up the street. I visit the cathedral at a quiet time, to have have a few moments in the Crypt, and to reflect on my journey. And to give thanks.

....

Sorry to ramble.

And thanks for the reading tips.
It's good to reflect on these things.

No need to apologise. Of course I take your point in the sense that I too could just fly to Santiago, a place that I adore, and spend a week or two there instead of several on the trail.
So why do I bother to walk when I find the "journey" discourse so annoying?
And this is only for me, separate from the question of how we raised the importance of the journey, but the walking part is for me a gift that comes from the fact of the destination... it's a very good "hidden curriculum" if you will allow me to borrow a phrase from theories of education (stated intent vs other hidden intentions).
As you say... I could go for a walk anywhere, and I often do; the terrain near my quite rural home is very similar to bits of the Primitivo... but I prefer to travel a great distance... and I see the walking part as both wind down from a grind to retirement here (I love what I do but hate the setting in which I do it) and as a clearing my head and heart to receive what the Saint has to offer.
As you say yourself, the destination shapes the journey; clearly not all people have elevated the walking over the destination (but many have and they deride those whom the Church blesses for arriving at the shrine -- which is all that matters). Then there are the "enlightened" journey proponents who simply scoff at the culture of faith that feeds the hospitality that supports their journeys. Yuck.
On my first go, I wasn't much on speaking terms with JMJ, but I also did not see the journey as more important than the destination... I was just there to see what I would find.
Now I tell my priest that I went looking for crumbs and received the whole loaf... but I doubt I would ever have found that without aiming for the destination. Learning about the magnificent diversity on the various roads is, for me, icing... not integral.
I hope to have a not-distant future in which I am planted in the lee of a Cathedral somewhere along the Primitivo. And when I am very old rather than "young old" I will probably give up walking, but I won't abandon the destination... for I shall become one with it. So to speak.

 

[lalaone]

Journey or Destination? It’s an interesting question for sure. I appreciate reading the back-and-forth here.

Personally, my mind is taken back to funerals in the traditional Lutheran church of my youth. There, the deceased were described as making “their Pilgrim’s way” to heaven. In that sense, the journey was life itself, with all its meanderings, but with a finite, desired destination. Both mattered equally, it seemed.

Maybe part of the tension is around whether a pilgrimage's end is a place physically on this earth, or not? Or, more pertinently, if there are certain physical destinations - sacred destinations - where the divine breaks through more often, such as Santiago de Compostela? We might be dealing with metaphors upon reality, or reality upon metaphors, and back again, through centuries and through our own phases of life. Thinking of those old funeral services...and a transformative pilgrimage to Santiago... I hedge on those questions and appreciate both journey and destination equally for now, though that might change in time.

 

[David]

I think that to understand what the Camino, re journey vs destination, is (or was) one needs to go back to the roots.

It is a Roman Catholic religious pilgrimage to the tomb of St James, a man who was with and knew Jesus .. from a time when there was only the Catholic church and the Catholic mindset. A medieval pilgrim didn't decide to tick it off their bucket list of things to do - leave their farm and family for a year or more, to possibly not even return .... they went as a penitent ... why? because they believed (or their priest had told them) that they had deeply offended in some way against God .. and this could be demonstrated to them as barren fields, sick children .. guilt was common, very common, so pilgrimage.

So the destination was the tomb of St James and the journey was penance, and they cannot be separated, each relies on the other ... which is why it seems odd in modern times to see pilgrims apparently having a holiday, their rooms safely booked, their baggage carried, just a tiny pack with a sandwich and small bottle of water .. where the penance? Although we should understand that the burden can be in the heart and mind, not in external preferences.

In England metal detectorists often dig up opened lead Ampulla from Santiago ... once carrying a holy fluid, brought carefully and reverently home to be opened by the village priest at a ceremony on their most barren field ...

Therefore to a Catholic, to a Christian, the destination is both physical and spiritual - St James, to stand there after an arduous penitential journey, to open one's heart and plead .. for forgiveness? help? sometimes thanks.
The journey therefore necessarily needs to be one of penance, focussed on the destination ... there is a motto "no pain no gain" and any spiritual pilgrim on deep pilgrimage to St James understands this.

And we needn't believe that this is now a secular world, that pilgrimage and belief is no longer relevant - there are 1.2 billion Roman Catholics in this world, and 1.2 billion of other Christian denominations - 2.4 billion is a lot of people.

The rest? Well of course, a beautiful hike in gorgeous countryside in a foreign land, bountifully provided for by baggage transport, smartphones to book night stays and Ubers for when a section is boring or too hilly; cheap accommodation, cheap pilgrim meals, volunteers helping where they can, instant friends, and the benefit of an international airport in Santiago - what's not to like? - and, as the Church believes, all are called, even if they don't know that yet.

 

[Kirkie]

@Perambulating Griffin . It's an interesting point, the journey v the destination.

Regarding the 'modern' attitude toward Pilgrimage, and I can only speak for myself of course......

The destination is of greater importance to me. It's the whole reason and purpose for my Pilgrimage. Without it there would be no point. It would just be a pleasant walk, and I can do that at home. And I don't do similar walks at home.........because they seem pointless.

But the destination shapes my journey. It gives the journey meaning and context. It's a time for spiritual reflection, and being thankful. But it's both an inner and outer journey. Because the Pilgrimage requires support from those along the way. To whom we are grateful. And it's a chance to live a simple life, with simple pleasures. To appreciate what we have. To appreciate the marvels we see along the way. To visit the open churches. To be ever grateful every day. Maybe it teaches us humility?

Perhaps the journey is a cleansing, 'realignment' or renewal process, before we reach the destination?

But, I often feel like the journey is the destination. Sorry to use that phrase. But the most profound spiritual moments for me are along the journey. Alone. Always. Not amongst the hustle and bustle of Santiago. I visit the cathedral at a quiet time, maybe an 'off peak' Mass, and to have have a few moments in the Crypt, and to reflect on my journey. And to give thanks.

Walking on to Muxia, then provides a 'wind down', and further reflection before entering everyday life once more. And I don't know why, but sitting on the rocks at Muxia feels like a more fitting 'destination'....... Maybe it's the calming effect and lack of crowds?

Sorry to ramble.

And thanks for the reading tips.
It's good to reflect on these things.

Before reading on, @Robo , let me bow. Thank you for your open and sincere words.

 

[Kathar1na]

am curious to know more about the walking prayer history... because yes... "pilgrimage is prayer with the feet"

I cannot say much about a walking prayer history. I saw the expression “making pilgrimage is praying with your feet” the first time when I read about the creation of a “Luther Way”. The Protestant Churches do not have a tradition of pilgrimage, they do not have relics, they do not have saints, they do not have intercessors. The slogan “Beten ist Pilgern mit den Füßen” appears to be popular with circles close to both Protestant and Catholic German language churches, so essentially Germany and Austria. It could be that it was coined by Dorothee Sölle. I don’t know much about her. She was a prominent theologian - a radical one (in this context “radical” has the opposite meaning of fundamentalist/evangelical).

I don’t think that the slogan fits the general idea of Camino Pilgrimage. It is more about meditative walking with elements like quietness (not silence), slowing down, and an emphasis on the “inner”.

Now that I think about this a bit more: There is in fact a movement for modern day pilgrimage that has been inspired by modern Camino pilgrimage but is not directly related to it. It does not need a holy site with a traditional narrative of a saint or a miracle as its destination. I am also thinking of the efforts of the BPT in Britain with their philosophy of pilgrimage on foot where you are invited to “bring your own faith” and the destination is a location with some kind of spiritual significance but not necessarily a traditional pilgrimage destination.

Pilgrimage under such umbrella concepts are in general shorter pilgrimages on foot so the obsession or the dogma or the idea of having to walk several hundreds of kilometres and many days on foot without any use of motorised transport now and then is a non-issue.

 

[Kirkie]

A childhood memory. Walking among crowds of big people chanting prayers... I just found this link. Pilgrimage. Another expression of same.

Carfin Grotto - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Kathar1na]

The journey therefore necessarily needs to be one of penance, focussed on the destination

Phew, sin, penance, repentance - it is way too complicated to discuss on this forum how this is understood in our times, and how these ideas are understood in the various faiths (Catholic, Protestant, Jewish and many others where I don't even know that they have these concepts) in our times. And such a discussion is way too close to the forum rules because too many posters are not able to separate their personal interpretation from the mainstream ideas in the various religions.

In forum posts it usually boils down to a simplistic "It is a pilgrimage!!!!" "You must suffer". "You must struggle on and keep walking and not take the bus".

I am just quoting from Wikipedia: "Typically in the non-Protestant view, the attitude of penance or repentance can be externalized in acts that a believer imposes on themselves, acts that are called penances." That is not a universally shared idea as internal change is what is required and this does not need an external "obra" and it certainly does not require continuous walking over several hundred kilometres.

Notwithstanding that identifying as a Camino pilgrim is not subject to rules made in Santiago I often like to point out the text of the contemporary Compostela compared to the traditional Compostela: The traditional text confirmed that the holder had gone through Confession and Absolution and received the Eucharist. These words are gone. In its place there are (Latin) words that can be interpreted as a confirmation that the holder had been on a quest - and these Latin words are understood by those who obtain a Compostela in good faith as either a quest with Christian attitude or a more vague spiritual quest and attitude.

The idea of pilgrimage - in theory and practice - did change throughout the centuries.