Is the Mitre a representation of Dagon,

the Fish God?

 © ECC+Cnmd All Rights Reserved

 Maybe yes, maybe no - there are as many think it is as think it isn't. Those who think it isn't are all from the Roman Church. I have been hard at work, researching it all so you can make your own mind up.

I must stress that these are my conclusions and I will not force them upon anyone joining us from other Jurisdictions. This is really to offer an item of historic interest as well as as a disclaimer to any critics desperate for an excuse to condemn the consecration of a woman for no other reason than I am refusing to wear the ornate garb Christ's bishops are so fond of. If others within the ECC read this and make the same decision as me, to avoid being associated with a symbol of paganism, then all to the good!

One thing I have stressed is that we desperately want to bring the Church of Christ back to Christian basics. We have too much Franciscan and Poor Clare in us all to engage in the rituals of pomp and ceremony coupled with ill-informed traditions. I have heard with my own ears - a bishop tell me (when I had said his 'outfit' was ridiculously ornate) that everything he wore was to glorify God. What a load of tosh. His actions should have done that, not his clothing.

I have always viewed the mitre as a pointless (forgive the pun) and rather strange looking hat. I have never looked at it more deeply because as a woman priest I never thought I would be faced with the reality of wearing one. Since I am now having to examine all of the earthly trappings associated with consecration, I have chosen to look at this more closely. I now appreciate more fully why I haven't ever liked the mitre. I never saw the point of it before and now I realise it is not just a superfluous piece of head wear... it could even be a tribute to a pagan god of Babylon.

I always felt in my heart it didn't make any difference to the spirituality, holiness or validity of the consecration of any bishop (male or female) if not worn... and now I know it doesn't. I have researched this and cannot find any evidence from the Church that the mitre is a represenation of Dagon, mainly because the Roman Church has come up with many excuses as to why it should be worn. This uncertainty, if not cover-up, bothers me greatly. Now I am in the position of being able to make as close to an informed decision this lack of Roman Catholic history can offer me. There is plenty of secular information available and is all rather compelling.

Dagon was 'got rid of' by Christians in 402 AD and the Mitre was introduced by the Roman Church around the 10th Century. The question I ask is this. Is it the case that Christians reintroduced Dagon, a fish god they had got rid of in 402 AD, through the design the hat of the bishop? And if yes... why? Could it be blurred boundaries yet again between paganism and Christianity? Do we ignore the Commandment 'You shall have no other gods before me' and risk breaking it just to wear a fancy 10th Century Roman introduced hat which may have its foundings in a pagan god?

"When the Philistines took the ark of God, they brought it into the temple of Dagon and set it by Dagon. And when the people of Ashdod arose early in the morning, there was Dagon, fallen on its face to the earth before the ark of the LORD. So they took Dagon and set it in its place again. And when they arose early the next morning, there was Dagon, fallen on its face to the ground before the ark of the LORD. The head of Dagon and both the palms of its hands were broken off on the threshold; only the torso of Dagon was left of it. Therefore neither the priests of Dagon nor any who come into Dagon's house tread on the threshold of Dagon in Ashdod to this day."
- 1 Sam 5:2-5  

Dagon was a major Semetic god, of grain and agriculture. He was worshiped by the early Amorites and also the Biblical Philistines. The etymological root of the name is dgn (in Ugartic) and dagan (in Hebrew). According to the Phoenician author Sanchuniathon, “And Dagon, after he discovered grain and the plough, was called Zeus Arotrios” (arotrios means ploughman).

 "Now the lords of the Philistines gathered together to offer a great sacrifice to Dagon their god, and to rejoice. And they said: "Our god has delivered into our hands Samson our enemy!" When the people saw him, they praised their god; for they said: "Our god has delivered into our hands our enemy, The destroyer of our land, And the one who multiplied our dead."
- Judges 16:23-24

The god Dagon first appears in records about 2500 BC. He is mentioned occasionally in early Sumerian texts, but only becomes prominent in later inscriptions as a powerful and warlike protector. In an Assyrian poem, Dagon appears as a judge of the dead. A late Babylonian text makes him the underworld prison warder of the seven children of the god Emmesharra. It is likely that Marnas was the Hellenistic expression of Dagon, whose temple was burned by the Roman emperor in 402. In 1928 the theory was asserted that Dagon was never originally a fish god, but once he became an important god of maritime cities he evolved into one.

Resource: The Jewish Encyclopedia:

Not much is known about the worship of Dagon. But Dagon’s temple at Ashdod (mentioned in Scripture) was burned by Jonathan Maccabee (according to Josephus).

Resource: Encyclopedia Mythica:

Dagon was also the father of Baal. Among the Canaanites, baal eventually assumed the position of god of fertility, which Dagon had previously occupied. Dagon was sometimes associated with the mermaid deity Derceto (which may account for the theory of Dagon being portrayed as a merman). The Philistines imported Dagon from Babylonia. The notion that Dagon was a god whose upper body was that of a man and the lower body of a fish has been prevalent for decades. This idea may stem from a linguistic error in translating a derivative of the Semitic dag. The word dagan means corn or cereal. There is no archaeological record to support the theory that Dagon was represented by a merman (despite those who taut Phoenician coins).

The latest dates recorded for anyone worshiping Dagon was in 402 AD if you believe that the Greeks were worshiping Dagon as Marnas - and it was the Christians who destroyed Marnas worship. Most of Dagon worshippers were gone by the advent of Jesus. 402 AD gives plenty of time for Dagon’s influence to be felt in Christianity and more pertinently here, the design of the mitre.

Resource: Pagan Origins of Catholicism – The Fish Hat (Mitre)

“The two-horned mitre, which the Pope wears, when he sits on the high altar at Rome and receives the adoration of the Cardinals, is the very mitre worn by the priests of Dagon, the fish-god of the Philistines and Babylonians.”
- The Two Babylons ; Alexander Hislop; p. 215. Not only does the pope wear this “Mitre” hat, but so do the Cardinals on certain occasions when they are dressed in their royal regalia. The Mystery religion of ancient Babylon / Assyria, was noted for the priestly class of “Dagon” in much the same way that the “Mystery” religion of Rome has copied it. “The two-horned mitre, which the Pope wears, when he sits on the high altar at Rome and receives the adoration of the Cardinals, is the very mitre worn by the Priests of Dagon, the fish-god of the Philistines and Babylonians.” - The Two Babylons ; Alexander Hislop; p. 215

There’s nothing in the Bible that indicates that Jesus wore such a hat. Why does the Pope?

The fact is the origin of the hat goes back long before Jesus and can be traced to an ancient Babylonian fish-god named Dagon.

“…there are strong evidences that Dagon was Nimrod…. All scholars agree that the name and worship of Dagon were imported from Babylonia. ” - The Two Babylons, Hislop, p. 215 “In their veneration and worship of Dagon, the high priest of paganism would actually put on a garment that had been created from a huge fish! The head of the fish formed a mitre above that of the old man, while its scaly, fan-like tail fell as a cloak behind, leaving the human limbs and feet exposed.” - Babylon and Nineveh, Austen Henry Layard, p. 343

Now to the sanitized history of the bishop’s mitre.

From Wikipedia.com:

The mitre is the ceremonial headdress of bishops. It was originally a cap used by officials of the Imperial Byzantine court. It’s use dates back at least to the 8th century.

In Western Europe, the mitre was first used at Rome about the middle of the 10th century, and outside Rome about the year 1000 AD. The first written mention of it is found in a Bull of Pope Leo IX in 1049. By 1150 the use had spread to bishops throughout the West.

In the West, the mitre is a tall folding cap, consisting of two similar parts rising to a peak (like the Pope wears). In the East, the mitre is based on the closed Imperial crown of the late Byzantine Empire. It is made in the shape of a bulbous crown, completely enclosed. In the Coptic tradition, bishops wear a ballin, wound around the head like a turban. Syriac bishops wear a richly embroidered hood.

From Catholic.com:

From the 17th century much has been written concerning the length of time the mitre has been worn. Some say it is from the 8th or 9th centuries, some say not until the second millenium. But most evidence holds that the mitre was first used in Rome in the middle of the 10th century, and outside Rome about the year 1000 AD.

In the Greek Rite liturgical head covering weren’t worn by all bishops until the 18th century, before that only the Patriarch of Alexandria wore one. The Greek mitre is a high hat which swells out toward the top with a cross on the top.

So it would seem the Roman Church doesn't know if Dagon the fish god has influenced the wearing of the Mitre... or they are simply not saying! I have not found one single piece of Roman Catholic text explaining its origin - just the dates of its introduction.

Anti-Roman Catholic writers and historians say it absolutely depicts this god Dagon whose 'religion' died out in the BC years for the most part, although there were a few left 402 AD. The mitre doesn’t appear until the mid 10th century. And then there’s the problem that the mitre itself has gone through many stages. There is also the fact that the Eastern Rite Catholics don’t wear the Western style mitre to this day. No one from a Christian/Catholic view point will say for sure so personal conclusions must be made on looking at all the facts. I am not brainwashed by the RCC and neither do I have the ego fragile enough to need a big hat while God's people and clergy colleagues gape in supposed awe. For me the secular history is compelling!  

So for me to conclude I want firstly to consider God's Word:

"I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. You shall have no other gods before me."

With this firmly in my heart - I cannot nor will I ever wear a mitre. If the Mitre's design comes from the fish god Dagon - and I believe it does - why would I want to hurt God by breaking a Commandment just to wear a great big hat?

If my conclusions based on research are wrong and it isn't, then again, what is the Mitre's purpose? We know the apostles didn't wear one even though artists have taken liberties by painting them in - and we also know the Pharisees wore something similar. So really this has to be up to each person who is to be consecrated as a bishop. There is not one shred of evidence to say that the lack of a mitre invalidates a consecration. Individual consciences and interpretations of faith and history (as mine was) must be taken into account, and with this firmly in mind, I respect anyone else's decision to wear one but I also reserve the right to wonder why they want to.

I could not take the risk.