Prophetism Research Paper

What is essential to the notion of prophecy, then, is the relatively emotional proclamation of a religious message that has been revealed personally in a nonroutine and nonmundane manner. Prophets are called to their mission and compelled to follow it whether voluntarily or, as is not uncommon, very reluctantly.

The category of prophet as a religious specialist or type of religious figure is one which owes much to Weber who gives it a central role in his sociology of religion. For Weber a prophet is ‘a purely individual bearer of charisma, who by virtue of his mission proclaims a religious doctrine or divine commandment’ (1965). Weber distinguishes the prophet from the category of priest. The priest commands religious authority on the basis of a position within a sacred tradition or religious organization and dispenses salvation by virtue of holding an office while the prophet commands religious authority on the basis of personal charisma and recognition of a personal calling to a mission through revelation. The term ‘charisma’ is used by Weber to refer generally to extraordinary powers essentially of a magical or non-mundane nature. The priest for Weber is thus the upholder and guardian of tradition while the prophet is a religious innovator or at least a radical revitalizing force.

Weber is careful to distinguish the prophet from a number of other types of religious specialist. While the authority and following of prophets may be based upon magical charisma they are not primarily magicians or workers of miracles. The prophet is concerned primarily with doctrine and commandment. It is this that distinguishes the prophet from the mystagogue whose following is based purely upon attribution of magical powers. Yet it is rare that prophets are not expected to give proof of their particular gifts and such proof has more often than not taken the form of possession of magical abilities. Reflecting the fact that charisma may be either inherent or acquired through undergoing extraordinary experiences or practices, these capacities may be inherent in the person or may be acquired through, e.g., ascetic regimes or cultivation of ecstatic states.

Again, while prophets engage, in many instances, in divinatory activities, as was the case, e.g., with the Biblical nebiim (singular nabi), they may be distinguished from diviners on the basis that it is normal for the latter to be economically recompensed for their services. Prophets provide their spiritual revelations gratuitously and, indeed, often unbidden. To do otherwise would be to undermine their distinctive claim to religious and spiritual influence.

Likewise, Weber distinguishes the prophet from related or similar religious specialists such as legislators, arbitrators, social reformers, orators and teachers on the grounds that lacking in the case of all of them is the proclamation of a religious truth on the basis of personal revelation. Later usages of the term ‘prophet’ are often less precise and looser than Weber’s but in general at the root of them is this specific emphasis upon a purely personal revelatory impulse and calling.

Weber distinguished between two fundamentally different types of prophecy. In the ‘ethical’ or ‘emissary’ type, exemplified most clearly by figures such as Zoroaster or Muhammad, the prophet is an instrument for the proclamation of the message or commandments of a god. The doctrines proclaimed by such a prophet take the form of ethical duties. In the ‘exemplary’ type, most clearly exemplified by the Buddha, the prophet proclaims a soteriological message by personal example and demonstration of the means or path to salvation which others are free to follow to their personal benefit if they wish or ignore to their personal detriment.

In both cases the prophetic revelation acts to promote a meaningful understanding of life in relation to the whole of reality to which conduct must be brought into alignment if salvation is to be attained. It involves the construction of a cosmos as a meaningfully ordered totality. As Parsons (1965) says ‘the prophet is above all the agent of the process of breakthrough to a higher, in the sense of more rationalised and systematised, cultural order, an order at the level of religious ethics, which in turn has implications for the nature of the society in which it becomes institutionalised.’ While there is such a stress in Weber’s characterization of the prophet upon the construction of a more rationalized and systematized meaningful order, prophecy, Parsons is careful to point out, is not fundamentally an intellectual or theological enterprise but frequently takes emotional and sometimes even violent forms.

Weber’s most extensive analysis of specific prophetic activity and prophetic movements occurs in his study of the development of Judaism, in his Ancient Judaism (1952), a development in which the Biblical prophets are given a crucial role. Weber traces the emergence of a new type of prophet towards the end of the period of the confederacy that he distinguishes from the earlier ecstatics or nebiim and the roeh or oracle givers. These new prophets saw themselves as called upon to transmit the will of Yahweh to the people and to the rulers. Early prophets of this type did not pronounce unless solicited but progressively they spoke independently and increasingly critically of the political authorities. From the time of Elijah onwards prophets spoke as much to the masses as to the rulers culminating in a situation in which the prophets became the intellectual leaders of the opposition against all that monarchy was perceived to stand for—centralization of power and government, heavy taxation, and social injustice.

Not that Weber considered social justice to be their primary concern. It was the destiny of the state and of the people that motivated their essentially religious yet inextricably political message. It was their purely religious concerns with fulfilling the commandments of Yahweh that brought upon them the opposition of the authorities. For Weber the Biblical prophets represented the values and ethos of the presettlement confederacy.

Classical Biblical prophecy in Weber’s analysis is characterized by independence, spontaneity, and disregard for popularity among any sector of Israelite society. It was indifferent to economic, material, or other reward in contrast to other types dependent for their livelihood upon prophecy and prediction. They were at best tolerated and not infrequently persecuted.

While not primarily diviners and seers the classical Biblical prophets nevertheless stressed the dire fate that Israel would suffer if it did not keep the terms of its covenant with God. Such was the precarious situation of the Israelite states in Palestine that gloomy predictions were not uncommonly fulfilled. The religious conduct of the Israelite people was linked intimately by the activities of the prophets to their material and political fate and to that of the state.

The conditions which promoted the development and impact of prophetic currents of this type were those of military and political insecurity and unpredictability. Weber considers that new religious insights rarely occur in the main centers of civilization but rather in areas on their periphery which are subject to their influence and pressure. Those who live in such regions repeatedly are given reason to question the meaning of events that affect them. Unlike the inhabitants of long stable, politically secure, and settled regions who tend to take the world for granted, those outside these areas constantly are puzzled by the turn of events; ‘the possibility of questioning the meaning of the world presupposes the capacity to be astonished about the course of events’ (Weber 1952).

Subsequent research on Biblical prophecy has often been critical of aspects of Weber’s analysis and by implication of his analysis of prophecy and prophetism in general. Berger (1963) and Turner (1974) have questioned whether the Biblical prophets were the independent force based upon pure charismatic authority and motivated entirely by religious concerns that Weber portrays them as being. In fact, the classical Biblical prophets are more likely, according to some recent research, to have occupied official positions in the cult of Yahweh. The conclusion that writers such as Turner draw from this, that it requires us to reconsider Weber’s understanding of prophetic charisma as an autonomous and personal force and to recognize that it arises from the incumbency of positions in an established social institution is, perhaps, rather extreme. It is likely that there were several different types of prophet in ancient Israelite society. Emmet (1956), who considers that Weber equates prophecy with charismatic authority which she finds too restrictive, usefully differentiates a number of types of prophet. First, there is the institutional prophet who fulfils a traditional and established role. Second, corresponding to Weber’s charismatic prophecy, there is the leader of a movement which seeks radical change. Finally, there are prophets who do not attract a personal following but who act as independent critics, advocates of reform or who provide moral leadership. While the prophets associated with the Temple in Jerusalem, whose function was an institutionalized one within the Temple cult, were perhaps more numerous, the classical Biblical prophets with which Weber was concerned may be considered to be of a different type. Whether they enjoyed greater autonomy and independence stemming from personal charisma is still, however, open to question.

Weber’s stress upon the charismatic authority of the classical Biblical prophets has been challenged by Petersen (1979) on the grounds that there is no evidence that they were leaders with a group of followers, which he claims is implied by Weber’s notion of charismatic authority. Neither is it useful, in his view, to characterize Biblical prophets as office holders. The dichotomy between charismatic leader and office holder is, in any case, he argues, far too strictly drawn. We are led, therefore, to question whether the Israelite prophets could have provided the breakthrough that Weber attributes to them. In a later work Petersen (1981) argues that we may get a better understanding of the Biblical prophets if we see them as having a specific role. He applies role theory in an analysis of their position in Israelite society based upon a close examination of the use of a variety of terms in Hebrew used to refer to such figures. The results show that there was more than one type of prophetic role in this society. Some held established positions in the official cult and operated also by offering a personal service for a fee. Others, termed central morality prophets, pronounced as individuals at times of crisis but in order to uphold established values and institutions. Still others, peripheral prophets, operated outside institutional contexts and established values.

Also doubtful of the simple dichotomy of functionary vs. autonomous charismatic is Lang (1983). The prophetic tradition, he argues, was largely an institution of the land-owning nobility that enabled them to express publicly their political views. He attempts to show that the prophets were largely from a land-owning, noble background. While they were not chosen by formal procedures but simply emerged, they nevertheless, according to Lang, had to learn how to be an acceptable prophet and to observe the rules governing appropriate behavior for prophets. They were closer, however, to Emmet’s third type, in Lang’s view, and not wholly established functionaries within the cult. The contrast between charisma and tradition in discussions of prophetism is indeed often overstated. Lang points out that they are often bound up with one another in complex ways such that prophetic charisma can be seen as a force for renewal which emerges within traditional structures at certain times. It is a force that changes and reforms without destroying.

While the Weberian view of Biblical prophecy has, in recent decades, been questioned by some, it has for others stood the test of time and deeper scrutiny rather more robustly. Williams’ analysis of sources (1969), e.g., supports the view that many of the classical prophets were independent of the official cult. A detailed study by Wilson (1980) is alert to the complexities and differences between periods and regions. He contrasts the premonarchical Ephraite tradition of the North with the monarchical period in both the Northern and Southern kingdoms and also different periods and circumstances in the South. In the premonarchical North, prophetic behavior was expected to conform to familiar patterns regarding the stereotypical linguistic style in which pronouncements were made and to customary behavioral patterns. This clearly suggests that these prophets occupied a defined position and role within the central religious institutions of the society. In the monarchical period prophets seem to have become figures of less central significance but rather more peripheral to the established religious institutions and rather more concerned with producing change. In Judah, however, political circumstances and alliances differentially affected the type of role and significance that prophets had. Some, standing outside the established cult, were more critical of the status quo while others exercised a more supportive function. This reminds us that prophetism, at least of this type and in these circumstances, may not simply refer to a movement or development led by a prophetic figure but to a dynamic situation of struggle to define or lay claim to the accepted interpretation of a religious tradition or interpretation. Lang (1983) points out that, like many prophets in various traditions and cultures, Jeremiah engaged in conflict with rival prophets opposed to his policy of accommodation with the Babylonians and who advocated total resistance.

Such debates highlight the extent to which Biblical prophecy, and it is an observation applicable to all prophecy, is associated with crises which, while differing extensively in kind, generally call forth a questioning of the status quo and of established institutions and patterns of power and authority. This point has been made by Carroll (1979) in the case of ancient Palestine and Weber’s analysis. The religiouspolitical factions that tend to emerge in such circumstances may understandably become aligned with pro-regime and anti-regime types of prophecy.

Not that this necessarily means that prophetism is really a form of politics under the guise of religion. As Albrektson (1972) notes, Weber may well be correct in attributing to the Biblical prophets motives which were primarily religious. Circumstances often made their pronouncements political in tone but at root they were essentially utopian and idealistic rather than pragmatic or designed to stir up political opposition for its own sake.

The political element in prophetism is a factor that comes to the fore most notably in studies of those forms of prophetism that can be described as millennial. It is in the context of the quite extensive studies of such movements that prophetism has been most systematically examined. Not all prophetic movements are millennial and not all millennial movements are prophetic, though most are. It is prophetic millennial movements, however, that have received most attention (see, e.g., Wilson 1975). The role of the prophet in millennial movements varies. Such movements may be initiated by the visions, revelations, and activities of a prophet. Once underway they may call forth a prophet who focuses relatively disordered and uncoordinated activities of participants and who gives coherent expression to previously vague, inchoate, and diverse ideas. The appearance of the prophet transforms millennial ferment into a millennial movement.

The role of the prophet in the millennial movement generally has been found to reflect Weber’s emphasis upon prophetism being associated with social and political crisis or radical social change. On the other hand, it is rarely a complete break with the past and more often a process of bridging past and present, the traditional and the new. The prophetic message in such movements tends to reinterpret old understandings in ways appropriate for an altered situation while at the same time adding new elements and opening up the imagination to new possibilities. The prophet gives concrete expression to what are often inarticulate feelings and ideas and channels them into a program of action promising redemption from current ills. The prophet helps those who are confused by circumstances of change, uncertainty, and instability to comprehend and grasp the meaning of their situation by offering insight derived from special revelation which through understanding points the way forward for remedying what is unsatisfactory. Prophetic movements frequently are found in circumstances of disaffection in which a population is subject to foreign or colonial rule or have little comprehension of the mechanisms and structures of power or how to operate within them in order to ameliorate their situation. The prophet provides the missing knowledge and means of finding solutions. It is significant that many prophetic leaders of such movements are more knowledgeable than their followers as a result of wider experience through travel, limited education, or access to information. The prophet, by providing a focus, is often able to bring together otherwise fragmented communities and diverse groups previously unable to operate in concert in the pursuit of common aims. What is promised, however, is not simply material but also usually, and more significantly, moral and emotional redemption through the recovery of lost personal and cultural dignity and sense of self-worth.

Bibliography:

1. Albrektson B 1972 Prophecy and politics in the Old Testament. In: Biezais H (ed.) The Myth of the State. Almqvist and Wiksell, Stockholm, Sweden
2. Berger P 1963 Charisma and religious innovation: the social location of Israelite prophecy. American Sociological Review 28: 940–50
3. Buss M J 1980 The social psychology of prophecy. In: Emerton J A (ed.) Prophecy. W. de Gruyter, Berlin
4. Carroll R P 1979 When Prophecy Failed: Cognitive Dissonance in the Prophetic Traditions of the Old Testament. Seabury, New York
5. Emmet D 1956 Prophets and their societies. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 86: 13–23
6. Lang B 1983 Monotheism and the Prophetic Minority: An Essay in Biblical History and Sociology. Almond Press, Sheffield, UK
7. Parsons T 1965 Introduction. In: Weber M (ed.) The Sociology of Religion. Methuen, London
8. Petersen D L 1979 Max Weber and the sociological study of ancient Israel. In: Johnson H M (ed.) Religious Change and Continuity. Jossey Bass, San Francisco
9. Petersen D L 1981 The Role of Israel’s Prophets. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series, 17
10. Turner B S 1974 Weber and Islam. Routledge, London
11. Weber M 1952 Ancient Judaism. Free Press, Glencoe, IL
12. Weber M 1965 The Sociology of Religion. Methuen, London
13. Williams J G 1969 The social location of Israelite prophecy. Journal of the American Academy of Religion 37: 153–65
14. Wilson B R 1975 Magic and the Millennium. Paladin, St Albans, UK
15. Wilson R 1980 Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel. Fortress Press, Philadelphia, PA