- Time of past OR future Camino
- Most years since 2012
Remove ads on the forum by becoming a donating member. More here. |
---|
A subtle difference is that rule 3 actually says "Do not write about" those judgements.Rule 3 to me simply says do not judge your fellow travellers(?) - pilgrims or tourists or any combination thereof.
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 am confused as to why we even need this discussion. Does it matter if travellers are tourists or pilgrims?
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.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.)
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.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.
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.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, that's exactly the spirit that we are trying to foster.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).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.
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.I love how this rule's introduction has, with this post, prompted pretty much the discussion it appears its trying to avoid in justification.
Well, no. Of course it doesn't matter.I am confused as to why we even need this discussion. Does it matter if travellers are tourists or pilgrims?
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.I just don’t see that anywhere in this thread.
Not necessarily.applying a judgement label to someone else, which could be considered rude or insulting, its already covered by rule number one.
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.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 wasn't questioning the need for the rule, more about why people feel they need to make that judgement.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.
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.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.
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.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.
Or they can ask for the equally lovely "Welcome Certificate."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.
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?I love how this rule's introduction has, with this post, prompted pretty much the discussion it appears its trying to avoid in justification.
Real Pilgrims versus Plastic Pilgrims, sorry forgive my childish vibe.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!
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.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.
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.Less it more especially when it comes to rules.
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.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.
Most labels are really just descriptive rather than "judgmental" ; except when someone considering the labels starts judging others.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.
Quite true...but these descriptive "labels" are rarely, if ever, used.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.
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.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.
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.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.
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 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.
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.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.
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.It isn't strange to me, the 100/200klm rule is purely commercial.
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.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.
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'!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 am not surprised.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 don't see it in this thread, to be honest. We're just discussing the nuances of what can be said here, and how.Can I discern a hint of sinful pride in this?
They are both beautiful.Compostela or Welcome certificate? I
Yes, you do.Presume I have to specifically ask for this on arrival?
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.
It is interesting that the Welcome Certificate is not mentioned on the official website - is getting it discouraged?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.
Maybe some of the regular pilgrim office volunteers like @t2andreo can answer that one. It has never been widely promoted.It is interesting that the Welcome Certificate is not mentioned on the official website - is getting it discouraged?
@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.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?”
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?@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?
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 deletedPersonally, 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.
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.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.)
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.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.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?
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.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.
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.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.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.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.
Mine only has 2 volumes plus the magnifying glass.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
Sensible to opt for the lightweight travel versionMine only has 2 volumes plus the magnifying glass.
OK so OED 2nd Edition 2009 :I recommend the Oxford English Dictionary.
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.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 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.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".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.
Doesn't "Religious" and "Not Religious" cover everyone? I wonder what "Others" is supposed to include?Here is a screenshot of the current form (online registration):
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".Doesn't "Religious" and "Not Religious" cover everyone?
You don't expect me to answer questions about the UX (user experience) quality of this website, are youDoesn't "Religious" and "Not Religious" cover everyone? I wonder what "Others" is supposed to include?
At least it's a lot better than the previous iteration!It's bad coding. Not excluding the extremely limited choices of which "camino" you took and where you "started" it.
I think the threads intentions are good.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.
Who will not feel spiritual on the Camino, however they choose to do it?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).
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.Sadly, there have been several judgmental posts against the original posters in several different threads over the last few months.
I know what you mean, as the word gets used a lot and sometimes I'm not sure what is intendedI personally don't appreciate when the word "intention" is sometimes included in some of the seemingly self-righteous posts,
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".On the forum, we just don't want people commenting negatively on another person's intentions for their Camino.
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.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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.It's bad coding. Not excluding the extremely limited choices of which "camino" you took and where you "started" it.
Your faith is touching, @David, but not everyone believes in 'being called.'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?
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?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?
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.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.
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.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.
Not sure what point is being made here. Nor how it is relevant.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.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.
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.Not sure what point is being made here. Nor how it is relevant.
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.I think this means that the mods will petition Ivar for a pay raise.
It was rhetorical, yes.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.
I think this means that the mods will petition Ivar for a pay raise.
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.You all deserve it, give them a raise, Ivar!
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.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.
Please, let's not divert into a discussion of a tax that is not even in place yet.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.
True, everyone who sleep in a bed will pay a tax.I honestly doubt that pilgrim only albergues will be exempt from the tax.
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....But who is harmed by a walkers personnel intention for walking, or whether one stays in a four star hotel or a donativo....
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.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.
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.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.
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.What he did not do, and has never done, is to tell us who is who.
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.
I have absolutely no problem with that.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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?