I. My Purpose: The Fluff Bunnies, the Sources, and the Complaints
I. My Purpose: The Fluff Bunnies, the Sources, and the Complaints
The purpose of this essay is to inject a needed measure of common sense into the online and offline debates over the large body of mystical, magical, and spiritual practices that have come to be labeled "Traditional Witchcraft".
The word "witchcraft" means many things to many people. When the word "traditional" is added to it, it takes on new meanings. The word "witchcraft" was already a controversy-ridden term, but the addition of "traditional" brings the controversy to new heights (or depths, depending on your perspective). We human beings love traditions. We look to traditions for meaning, but also for authority- we can't escape the idea that if people have done something, believed something, or handed customs and ideas down for a very long time, they must have more power and potential truth in them.
From the very beginning of the modern Pagan movement, the term "witchcraft" has been involved, as well as people who called themselves "witches". And without fail, they have carried with them stories of "ancient traditions" that they believed themselves and their "witchcraft" to be a part of.
Today, nearly all their claims have fallen by the wayside, victims of honest research and revelations regarding the true sources of their "traditions". Anyone who reads Dr. Ronald Hutton's excellent work "The Triumph of the Moon" can see, in plain English, the beginning of clarity and truth with respect to the historical claims of both Wiccans and people who weren't Wiccan but still claimed to have "witch" traditions of great antiquity. Dr. Hutton did a more effective job of sinking the ship of falsehoods that had sailed since at least the mid 1950's, and which was, in a very real way, holding back the movement of modern Pagan Witchcraft.
Now, as a modern witch and occultist, I must say that I have no love for the (now famous) "fluffy bunnies" who manage to get most of the media's attention when it comes to things like "witchcraft" and modern occult subcultures. I'm not Wiccan, and I'll never be Wiccan; in my opinion, Wicca is a thinly-disguised form of monotheism; it is an amalgamation of many occult sources, most of very modern origin and nearly all of dubious scholarship, and it has fallen prey to the political and social agendas of ultra-liberals on both sides of the Atlantic (especially in America). And sadly, "Wicca" has gone on to define how nearly all modern non-occultists view "Pagan" religions and "Witchcraft" in the modern day.
While doing research for this essay, I looked up the word "witchcraft" in many dictionaries. All except one of them included a definition that was only one word: "Wicca". Wicca has managed to penetrate not only the popular consciousness, but the pages of dictionaries, as well. Tellingly, when I looked in unabridged Dictionaries from the 1920's or before, before there was a "Wiccan" movement, there was no mention of Wicca, with the exception of etymological information on the word "witch".
Before I continue on, it would be prudent for me to give a caveat: when I speak poorly of Wicca and its impact on modern day occult subcultures, I must admit that all true "Gardnerian Wiccans" that I have met- those who were actually initiated by initiates of Gardner- have never come off as fluffy or ridiculous. They have been mature occultists, in my experience. The countless "eclectic" Wicca movements, including those that cater specifically to politics and alternative cultures, have proven themselves to be nothing short of nonsensical, and at times harmful.
Like all serious occultists, I want sanity in my own personal path. I want the symbolic systems, occult forms, and practices that I am engaging to have some serious basis in reality, and yes, I would prefer that others before me had engaged these things, and experienced their effectiveness. I also want to avoid reactionary nonsense. But it’s so hard to have restraint in the face of the fluffy nonsense that buries genuine occultism like a mountain of cotton candy!
Recently, I have been seeing a lot of well-known writers and modern occultists allowing reactionary emotions to dictate their public statements and actions. While Wicca has tainted many wells, there are some things it cannot taint. Most modern Wiccans consider themselves "Witches" as well as "Pagans"- this is an undeniable fact. This has caused both "Witchcraft" (whatever it may have historically have meant) and "Paganism" to suffer under the weight of the stereotypes that have sprung up around Wicca. But no matter how much we dislike the stereotyping, and no matter how much we may wish to flee from association with fluff bunnies, we cannot assume that Witchcraft owes nothing to historical or traditional Paganism.
Because this is what I see happening; in their rush to disassociate themselves from fluff nonsense, many people are abandoning ships that should not be abandoned.
It's true that Wicca owes a lot to certain sources of scholarship that are seen as dubious today- Margaret Murray's writing comes to mind. But for all the fact that I agree that Murray's thesis regarding a Europe-wide cult of a Horned God is probably not based on reality, this does not mean that her entire body of work and research is not valuable, for other reasons. Certain very real historical customs and practices that she recorded (and some of the admissions from witch trials) are, in fact, aspects of genuine, pre-Gardnerian sorcery and witchcraft. To throw Murray away wholesale just to escape the abuse of her work carried on by most Wiccans in the modern day is absurd.
What I see occurring, every day, is this: people who have made their living in the occult world, and who sometimes wield influence over the thinking of modern students of the occult, are creating "orthodoxies" of their own, whether or not they consciously realize it. Orthodoxies form for many reasons; the main reason is this: the ideas and opinions of influential people often become the basis for orthodoxies.
It seems that some people have decided that they alone know what "Traditional Witchcraft" must be, and have begun waging a war of words to solidify their ideas. The sad part of these doomed efforts is the fact that they are mostly born in reactionary anger or disgust at what Wicca and other influences from the "new age" have done to the occult world.
The other troubling aspect of their efforts is that they have thrown away the idea that "Paganism" can have anything to do with modern witchcraft or occultism, a trend which is patently absurd. Why absurd? Because when you throw out Historical Pagan sources, and all their massive influence and impact on what we call "witchcraft" from any era, you are left with only two places to go to "find" the source of Witchcraft: Christian Folk-magic or heresies such as Luciferianism or Diabolism, or the so-called "cunning healers" of rural England and Europe that flourished in the later centuries, who were either well-meaning Christian herbalists, or well-known charlatans, doing fake healings and enchanting the superstitious country people for money.
This situation is unacceptable. "Traditional Witchcraft" is not merely Christian Folk-Magic or Ceremonial Cabbalism, nor is it merely "rural healing arts", huckster cures, or herbalism. Naturally, a good share of ego is involved in the efforts of those who think to define "Traditional Witchcraft" for us, by telling us what sources we can or cannot use, and by telling us where "real" Witchcraft is found, or where it isn't.
To answer the problem, I think that we all need to take a deep mental breath and take another look at the meanings of these words that we love to throw around- words like "witchcraft" and "traditional".
