Talk:High priest

High Priestess

High Priestess vs. High Priest When I click on High-Priestess the website directs to High-Priest. We all know what High-Priest is, we know male-dominancy and it is enough. I want to learn about High-Priestess. Can someone remade the High-Priestess page again, please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.214.115.116 (talk) 04:35, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comparisons have fairly little merit

I fear such comparisons have fairly little merit on the whole, simply mapping the function of a high priest in one religion against another fairly high position in another is likely to do little for enlightenment and much for misunderstanding. The role of such a person varies as much between different religeons as the names do, and it could cause confusion to attempt to consisely map it out like this with no further information.

For Christianity specifically, as that is the religion I am the most familiar, even though popes etc. could be considered to have the same leadership powers of a high priest, most Christians, catholic or otherwise would be loath to classify anyone, bar Aaron, Melchisideck or Christ himself as a high priest. This is because a high priest in Christian (and I presume at least pre-Talmud jewish also) beliefs, a priest is someone who can enter the holy of holies and communicate with god, worship him, and ask for forgiveness on behalf of the people. However in Christianity, attributing this role to an individual is this is seen as at least slightly heretical since one may already do such things directly through Christ himself.

I rewrote the paragraph on Christianity so it would not be "a high priest is" but rather "a high priest could sometimes be compared to" (I also removed the confusion between Catholicism and Christianity as a whole). I suspect some of the other religions (most specifically islam) will need similar modification. user:scarlet

Tarot High Priestess card

I was searching for the Tarot High Priestess card and was redirected to high priest which does not have a High Priestess link — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.155.221.230 (talk) 20:05, 2006 August 21 (UTC)

High Priestess vs. High Priest

I think it is arbitrary and offensive that High Priestess redirects to this page, where all the links about High Priestesses are relegated to the bottom of the list. I think that this page should be split into separate disambiguation pages for High Priest and High Priestess to avoid giving priority to the masculine page. Does anyone else have strong feelings about this? - AdelaMae ^{(talk - contribs)} 00:23, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

De-disambiguation

I propose to de-disambiguate this page. It is not really disambiguating anything, since all of the offices identified as types of high priests are merely different types of the same class of thing. bd2412 T 23:00, 23 October 2010 (UTC) That for the most part is due to translation. We may call vastly different positions high priest in English simply because that is how we decided to translate them that way. Also there seems to be a big difference between the idea of one wielding political (as in being higher than other priests in rank) or spiritual power (they wield a high holy authority.) An also there are titles that are completely symbolic or allegorical. PeRshGo (talk) 23:12, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the facts pertaining to the presence or absence of high priestesses? Please assist.

I came here from Lady-in-waiting#Africa, and was surprised to find nothing here about historical nor modern high priestesses, with the only fictional one that I saw being the tarot card. (I skimmed in disbelief.)

It's not true that we're just keeping this article gender-neutral, because if so, each instance of "high priest" would imply a possible "high priestess" unless otherwise specified, and that's not the way it is written. For the high priestesses' equal treatment's sake, either represent them here, or reinvent the current redirect. However, that's more than my life will allow me to do, so thanks in advance to anyone who can help! --Geekdiva (talk) 10:41, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on High priest. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130101114546/http://www.johneagleton.com/blog/12-general/314-neal-boortzs-commencement-speech to http://www.johneagleton.com/blog/12-general/314-neal-boortzs-commencement-speech

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:52, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]