Weber sees ancient Israel as marked by a conflict between the Baal cult in
the North and the prophets and priests in the South (Weber 1952:282).
Prophets together with priests contributed to the process of religious ratio-
nalization: “Prophets and priests are the twin bearers of the systematization
and rationalization of religious ethics” (Weber 1963:45). The prophets worked
with the rationalization of the Torah of the Levite priests (Weber 1952:332).
Prophets systematized religion with a view to unifying the relationship of
man to the world, by reference to an ultimate and integrated value posi-
tion. On the other hand, priests systematized the content of prophecy or of
the sacred traditions by supplying them with a casuistical, rationalistic frame-
work of analysis, and by adapting them to the customs of life and thought
of their own stratum and of the laity whom they controlled. (Weber 1963:69)Prophets are guided by value rationality (ultimate ends), whose substance
the priests rationalized in a casuist manner (Weber 1978:24–25; Kalberg
1980:1155). The priest substantively rationalizes the value rationality of the
prophet. The value rationality of the prophets and the substantive rational-
ity of the priests are of different types but together created a dynamic, which
drove forward the process of religious rationalization. The tension and conflict
between the prophets and priests was structural and ideological (Schluchter
1981:46; Eisenstadt 1981:148).
The prophet is charismatic while the priest represents a return to tradi-
tional domination (Schluchter 1981:46; Raphaël 1981:238). The prophet delivers
the word; the priest interprets it. The prophet challenges the established order;
the priest defends it. Both see themselves as defenders of tradition. Charismatic
domination “becomes either traditionalized or rationalized, or a combination
of both” (Weber 1978:246). “In this process the two basically antagonistic
forces of charisma and tradition regularly merge with one another” (Weber
1978:1122; 1985:662). Charisma and tradition are antagonistic forces, which
merge with each other resulting in a synthesis, which is contradictory and
therefore dialectical.
The teachings of the prophets emerged within the context of a class conflict
between the plebeians who were declassed peasants and the patricians who
were aligned with the monarchy and the priest class. The prophets took the
side of the poor against the rich and powerful (Weber 1952:206, 277; Schluchter
1989:191; Shmueli 1968:236).
Kautsky and Bloch provide two different quotations from Amos, both of
which provide evidence of the economic exploitation and gross inequality
210 • Warren S. Goldstein