Thoughts About the Elusive Golden Age of Occultism

Beware of Fools as Prophets

Some have said that the 1960's was the start of the Occult Revival, and that the subsequent decades of the 70's, 80's and even the 90's represented some kind of golden age of magic and occultism. I might agree with that depending on how you define a golden age. Now some folks are saying that where the past decades were the golden age, the whole movement now is in obvious decline in the second decade of the 21st century. I am, of course, referring to yet another “counter intuitive” whining rant from Nick Farrell on his blog of personal propaganda and self aggrandizement.

Having lived through this period, particularly the 1960's and 70's, I think that I can weigh in to declare that the supposed golden age wasn’t much of a golden age, and that while things are changing, the immanent decline of public occultism and magic is not really occurring. In fact, all we can really say is that things are rapidly changing and where they will ultimately lead us is something that cannot be predicted right now. I know it’s fashionable to make declarations of doom, but if we can cut the drama out of our considerations and really look at how things have changed, we will see that there is both good and bad with the current state of the practice of magic and occultism in our post-modern world. It’s a grey world out there, and it has been a grey world for quite a long time, probably since the beginning when hominids climbed down from the trees.

Another problem I have with the trope of the “immanent decline of public occultism” is that the words “public occultism” represent a kind of oxymoron. Are we talking about what people are doing (or saying that they are doing) on public media? Can we make any kind of generalization about these various individuals who are supposedly occultists, or at least promoting themselves as such? Occultism is by definition a study and practice of things that are hidden and inexplicable, and the kind of operating environment that occultists have used since the advent of the modern age is one that is cloaked in secrecy and discretion. Or perhaps I could say it more appropriately, they are doing the work and don’t have time to build up a proper contextual linguistic architecture to talk about it to those who would otherwise neither know, care nor understand.

True and sane occultism, as well as the art and practice of magic, has always been the proclivity of a very small minority of seekers. When something is popular and in-fashion it gets talked about, sometimes excessively by the masses; but that talk is mostly just gossip mixed with misinformation and the constant rehashing of urban myth. I think that it’s true that there will always be a small fraction of the population who have the necessary critical thinking skills and the gravitas to adopt a regimen of study and discipline in order to function as occultists and magicians.

What I am trying to say is that things weren’t rosy or golden during the period from the 1960's through the 1990's as far as magic and occultism were concerned. I should know this simple fact because I started my occult path in the very late 1960's, although I didn’t actually start to do any real occult work until the early 1970's. I know what it was like back then because I lived it. Books were scarce and expensive, there were a lot of “pulpy” pocket books being cheaply printed that packaged misinformation along with a lot of plagiarized material from other sources. The only version of Agrippa’s Occult Philosophy that was available in English was the late 18th century re-printed to death plagiarism entitled “The Magus,” which, as it turned out, was a very poor copy of the original. 

There were a few grimoires that were available (Key of Solomon, Lemegaton and Abramelin), some early renditions of the Book of Shadows (Lady Sheba’s “Book of Shadows”), and some obscure publications of books written by Regardie, Butler, Knight and Gray along with some republished Crowley, Mathers and Levi. The double hard-cover edition of the Golden Dawn was quite expensive for many to purchase and own, and other materials, such as swords, daggers and church incense were hard to find.

Occult bookstores were rare and only existed in some large urban cities, and it wasn’t unusual to either travel to these distant places to buy supplies or take a chance on some cheap mail-order catalog. Teachers and knowledgeable individuals were also rare and usually lived in either the West or East Coast, or in the UK (which was far from where I lived). We would write long letters to those authors who were still alive and beg them to reveal some of their experience and unpublished knowledge. It was a time when there were very few local organizations, teachers, or even materials. Most of the available books had very little information about how to actually organize, develop and practice ritual or ceremonial magick. It was a time where many had to experiment, almost extemporaneously as it were, and most of the magicians I have known from that period failed more often than succeeded. Those who lived near a functioning occult lodge or coven and gained admission were the very lucky few. The rest of us had to persevere with very limited knowledge, experience and guidance. Many of us were self-made magicians and occultists because we had no other choice.

Most of the pulpy occult books from that time have thankfully passed into oblivion, but there were quite a few of them. (I know, because I certainly bought quite a number of them, and later tossed them aside.) I can also remember buying cheap paper bound reprints of various occult articles, the chapters from some book no longer available, or one of Crowley’s articles taken from the Equinox, a collection of books which was also prohibitively expensive when it was republished by Weiser in 1971. Those of us who were keen on occultism and magic made do with what we could find or afford, and from this sparse collection attempted to cobble together some kind of magical system that worked. There was a lot of experimentation going on at that time, but more people probably gave up and left the so-called movement than stayed on.

By the 1980's another group of people had appeared on the scene as the New Age became popular and fashionable. There was more information and material available than previously; but once again there was a lot of junk being published and a lot of people were only marginally interested in really doing the work and adopting a discipline. People got involved for a while, then they got frustrated or bored because the discipline of magic and the occult requires a persistent regimen, many years of practice and lots of experimentation, and they dropped out, too.

Over the decades I have seen the public get interested in magic and the occult, become superficially involved for a while and then drift off to do something else. The next “shiny” thing became all of the rage, but I, and a few others, were steadfast in our study, work and practice. We were a small minority then and we are still a small minority today. Nothing has really changed in regards to the number of people who seriously study and practice these disciplines. This is true in other areas of religious or mystical practices as well. Mass culture is diffident, fickle, constantly changing, superficial, and driven by urban myth and motivational reasoning. This hasn’t changed much in the decades since the 1960's, and it probably was also true in earlier periods of the modern epoch. Public occultism of any depth or seriousness has never really existed, and so to say that it is in decline is a ridiculous assessment. How can something decline that was never really a factor in the slow, steady development of these arcane subjects?

For me, ironically, the current times are a kind of golden age for occultism and magic. I make this bold statement simply from the standpoint of a ritual magician who has been studying and practicing for over 40 years. When I started out there was a paucity of material to study and examine, now there is a plethora, although as always, much of it is worthless to me. My studies have matured and branched out over the decades. I seldom read occult books these days, that is true, but my reason is that there is so much good academic material recently written about the history of magic and how it was practiced in the middle ages and the early renaissance. The historical study of magic is only a recent phenomenon, but it has made many obscure and unknown grimoires and other source material available that didn’t exist back in the 1970's and 1980's.

There is so much excellent written material out there that I don’t have time to read it all, and much of it is becoming freely available on the internet. I can’t tell how you important the internet has become to my studies and research. It saves me a lot of time from having to request books from interlibrary loan or to travel to university libraries in order to perform my research. This is what the advent of the information age is doing to all of the intellectual disciplines. Thinking about it makes me excited and takes my breath away. I only wish that I had another fifty or sixty years to see where this new wave takes our modern world.

Therefore, from my perspective, there is more quality information today about magic and occultism than at any previous time. It is also available on the internet, and this allows me to retrieve information without having to leave my house. If anything, I believe that things are getting progressively better for me and all of the other serious students and practitioners, and those who are too young to realize what an ordeal it was to get quality information in the past have no idea how lucky they are. What is still required are critical thinking skills, the ability to manage one’s time and resources, and the discipline to maintain some kind of on-going practice at all times.

Still, there are things in this information age that seems to perpetuate the ignorance, intolerance and bad manners that have also become a hall-mark of our age. Some of these points are made by Mr. Farrell in his article, so I don’t need to list them here. Perhaps one of the biggest changes that I have seen in the public arena is the erosion of any kind of formality, social rules or decorum. We live in a world of a callow disregard for authority, seniority, class, personal dignity and privacy. This was a phenomenon that started in the 1960's and has only grown stronger over the decades since. I learned the slogan “trust no one, question everything” back when I was a teenager, and it still resonates today, perhaps even more so. 

Therefore, anyone who has achieved any kind of position of respect or has seniority due to a long period of achievement can expect to receive little or no respect in this world. It is a time of the 24 hour news cycle where there are few heroes, and where everyone, high and low, is reduced to the common denominator. No matter what you have achieved or think is your due in terms of public regard, you can almost forget about getting any credit from anyone. People are often callow, self-absorbed, and they speak and behave without compassion or tolerance for other points of view. But none of this is something new or different than the way things have been since the last thirty years. Our heroes have been shown to be hollow and fake, and those who have espoused public piety and righteousness have been shown to be liars, hypocrites and shameless self-promoters. All of this has slowly infected western culture and it is now the rule of thumb. Americans seem to be the worst offenders, but then we tend to speak our minds without much thought or reflection.

What Mr. Farrell is complaining bitterly about in his blog article is nothing more than what has been occurring for decades in our public lives. Social media allows these excesses to be greatly amplified, giving cover to cowards and passive aggressive sociopaths who would be too frightened to express their misguided and obnoxious ideas, criticisms and declarations in a real public setting. The video screen along with a kind of comfortable anonymity and depersonalization gives such individuals the cover to behave in a truly despicable and outrageous manner. If someone were to behave this way in a public setting they would likely get the crap beat out of them, or at the very least, forcibly removed or evicted. Public media is a pretty rough place where all sorts of evils are perpetrated every moment of every day; but there are a lot of good things that happen, too. We just tend to hear about all of the bad things.

However, perhaps the most telling point in Mr. Farrell’s article is where he complains that experienced and knowledgeable teachers and occult leaders should be comfortably supported by their students and members of their organizations. This is the crux of his whining rant, that people don’t give him the respect that he feels is due isn’t so bad as the fact that he has to beg and borrow to function as a teacher. Oh my, the hardship of it all! It means that Nick has to have a career that pays his livelihood instead of being able to rely on the consistent generosity of his students. Here’s the quote, and in it you can hear the world’s smallest violin accompanying this pathetic, sobbing declaration.     

 “Teachers have a choice they either dumb down their message until they are just teaching New Age morons, or “satanise” [sic] the message so you are talking to gothic morons who want to scare their parents. Normally the teachers just never teach anyone. Orders find it difficult to get a enough money for candles and are meeting in people’s houses. Those who can meet a rent bill usually have large numbers who pay a tiny amount. Most of them rely on the cash and work of the leaders. ”   

It would seem to me that Mr. Farrell has created a new word, and it is “satanize.” He didn’t bother to start it with a capital “S” so I thought at first that the word was “sanitize,” but I digress. 

Still, of all of the ten points that Nick has made, and they all represent minor pitfalls for anyone who is seriously practicing their occultism or magic, this one caught my attention. What planet does Mr. Farrell live on? Has it not always been the responsibility of an occultist or magician to engage with the world in order to make his or her living? Doesn’t that represent, in a word, that such an individual has enough personal power to be able to fully function in the world, perhaps even contributing something remarkable in however a significant or humble manner? 

As for teaching others, that is a special calling that requires the would-be teacher to expect to serve at his or her own expense the public and inspiring that one or two students out of those whom they teach into becoming true seekers themselves. It is a thankless and unrewarding job, and those who pursue it with a passion and an unflagging selfless devotion deserve a great deal of credit and regard, even though they will usually seldom see the overall benefits of their work.

Conversely, those teachers who engage in it expecting to be financially rewarded or by receiving the accolades of their students and peers should consider doing something else. Because they won’t ever become rich or famous teaching occultism and magic unless they become supreme hucksters like Koetting, Zink or Griffin. Even then, it isn’t guaranteed that they will be successful, but to promote one’s tradition and persona like Donald Trump is probably the only way to make occultism and magic really pay. While it is commendable that Mr. Farrell doesn’t seem so inclined (yet) to sell himself in such a shameless, grandiose and ridiculous manner, it is disheartening when he appears to add to the overall disinformation that is already out there on the internet by saying something as meaningless as “Public Occultism is dead.”

Managing an occult and magical discipline is really difficult in the post-modern world. There are really wonderful things going on at the same time that there all kinds of distractions, sources of misinformation, urban myth treated as the gospel truth, and a large population of self-absorbed and callous so-called students who are relentlessly searching but never finding satisfaction. It is sometimes a cacophony of distracting noise, and I often find myself avoiding not only the public arena but also social media. If I want to do the real work I can’t be distracted or otherwise sidelined, so I don’t respond to every request via chat or email, and sometimes I can go days without looking at my Facebook account. That is the price we pay for living in the information age, but I prefer it to what I had to do decades ago when resources were scarce and libraries were the hallowed repositories of whatever information might be available for arcane and obscure subject areas.  

Frater Barrabbas

New Rules #3: Whatever Nick Farrell says online is probably not only wrong, but the opposite is true. There might be a small kernel of truth in what he says, but who has the time to find it? It is better to get your information from reliable sources, like tabloids such as the Enquirer, the Star, the Globe, or the Sun. At least then you know that you are getting entertaining disinformation instead of hypocrisy or a pretension of seriousness and fact.

Spiritual Ancestors as Heroes

Recently I’ve had a very unpleasant experience arguing with an occult pundit (Nick Farrell) who basically called me a naïve fool because I honor my spiritual ancestors and treat them as heroes. Because I celebrate and honor my spiritual ancestors and treat them with a certain amount of reverence I am considered a dupe and a fool. The reason for this criticism, of course, is because I happen to revere such individuals as Alex Sanders, Gerald Gardner, Aleister Crowley, MacGregor Mathers, or any other number of occult founders and trail Blazers. I take an uncritical and positive outlook on these individuals because they have had such an impact upon my own workings and study. Maybe that’s being naïve and stupid, since in our current time it’s so trendy to be cynical, negative and disparaging of the occult luminaries of the past. I have been called a pathetic hero worshiper and that makes me the worst possible judge of anyone’s character, especially those who have been dead nigh these many years. Yes, I admit it, I’m rightfully found guilty of hero worshiping, but I think that I have an important reason for taking this stand.

It’s not as if I haven’t read about these individuals and know all too well that they were human beings with human failings and flaws. I have also talked to individuals who personally knew Alex Sanders and the consensus is that he was quite a disreputable character. There seems to be no lack of stories about things that Alex did that were notorious and completely over-the-top. It seems that everybody has an opinion about Alex who knew him, and most of those opinions tend towards the negative. There are some people still living today who absolutely despise Alex and have few or even no fond memories of him whatsoever. Someone once told me that Alex was the kind of man who hated to work and so chose a life that was materially precarious when all he had to do was keep a regular job, and that would have made his life and the lives of those he supported more stable.

So, Alex Sanders was something of a gold brick. He was also reputed to be a great storyteller (another way of saying "liar") and had to be the focus of attention at all times. He invited the press and even the police to his very public gatherings in order to garner as much publicity as possible. That’s hardly the kind of stellar image that one would consider either heroic or worthy of emulation. Even so, Alex was a trailblazer and started his own tradition. He was an avid experimenter and tried to mix all sorts of different occult disciplines together into a workable whole. His tradition invited many different and divergent people together under one large tradition. Many of the first gay and lesbian witches that I met years ago were Alexandrian, and this was also true of the first African American and handicapped members. Alexandrian Witchcraft was the “big tent” tradition, and this was before other traditions appeared that catered to specific social collectives, such as the Dianic tradition. Perhaps we can turn a blind eye to his various flaws and bad behavior if we focus instead on what he contributed to the pagan and witchcraft movements. The world needed Alex Sanders, warts, obnoxious behavior and all.

What then is a hero? How do we define what a hero is in our culture today? Is Superman or Mighty Mouse good examples of the iconic hero? What about the antiheroes that are found in Marvel comics? Are they to be considered heroes as well? I found myself pondering the definition of a hero, but then I remembered that a good place to find that definition clearly established would be reading what the author Joseph Campbell had to say about it. Joseph Campbell says, “A hero is someone who has given his or her life to something bigger than one’s self.” Well, that seems simple enough, but does that fit the heroism of being a spiritual founder? Additionally, Joseph Campbell says that a hero brings back a “boon” to his community. Basically, Mr. Campbell is referring to the hero’s journey, and the object of that journey is to return something back from the underworld into the world of light. The hero also manifests a steadfast virtue in what they have contributed to their community, despite all of their flaws. According to Campbell, heroes are indeed flawed because they are so human. They are, in word, us. A cartoon hero on the other hand often lacks the kind of humanity necessary as the foundation of being a hero. Despite being flawed, the hero becomes a role model that inspires the rest of us to be better than we thought we could be. A hero is also inspired by an “inner calling.”

I believe that if we take what Joseph Campbell has defined regarding a hero, we can easily apply that definition to individuals such as Alex Sanders, Crowley, and Mathers - not to mention Gardner and many others. As heroes we would expect them to be terribly flawed on the one hand, but also inspiring and the bringer of a profound new way of thinking or practicing occultism on the other. All of these founders had that in common with each other, and all of them were egregiously flawed. To accept their gifts while repudiating their characters or disparaging them could be construed as being highly ungenerous, if not cynically and selfishly motivated. We all owe these founders a certain amount of respect and consideration because we have accepted their gifts and use them in our work; since to behave otherwise is to show oneself as greedy, power-hungry and soulless. I am not advocating that we turn a blind eye to the flaws and imperfections that were so highly on display by these founders, but instead we should really focus on the gifts that they bestowed us. All I am saying is that you can appreciate the history without having to assassinate the character of those trailblazers who came before us. After all is said and done, their gifts were certainly important to us occultists.

Because I’m an Alexandrian witch, then Alex Sanders is one of my spiritual ancestors. Since I also work the Golden Dawn system of magick, at least in part, then MacGregor Mathers would be considered one of my spiritual ancestors. I have to also include Alister Crowley as one of my spiritual ancestors because I have benefitted greatly from reading his work and I was also a member of the O.T.O. Gerald Gardner would be yet another spiritual ancestor in my witchcraft and magical lineage. There are probably many others as well, but that’s the group of ancestors that I’m willing to talk about. So, these four individuals who are founders of their respective traditions make up part of the overall lineage that I have followed as both a witch and a ritual magician. As representatives of the various streams that make up the current of spirituality and magick that I follow, I believe it is important to venerate the memory of these individuals because as magical heroes they have given the world great gifts, and I happen to use those gifts.

We, as ritual magicians, do not stand alone or in isolation. Our practices, whether or not we have been inventive and creative, have come down to us from the work of many other hands across the centuries. This is the whole basis to the perennial philosophy, and while we may add a greater or lesser share to this knowledge, we have received what our spiritual ancestors have passed on to us. Therefore, lineages are important and represent the combined streams that seamlessly joined together to formulate the work and practice of each initiated ritual magician. Our lineages are not exclusive to those founders whose tradition we were initiated into, since each and everyone of us has borrowed extensively from other sources. We are, in a word, a melange or mixture of many different traditions and strains.

To give respect and veneration to the founders of our tradition and practices, we receive from them empowerment, since this opens and establishes the connection between us and them. While this might function as an egregore of a tradition, it is not limited to that vehicle, but could represent the single contribution of some brilliant luminary in the past. Therefore, to use the gifts of our spiritual and magical founders is to be empowered by them. And if we are to retain a certain amount of grace and positive intent in our practices it is important for us to not only acknowledge them, but also to venerate them. This means not just respecting them and their gifts, but also giving them offerings and periodic acknowledgment. This is a Pagan thing to do, to honor our ancestors, both those that are genetic as well as those who represent the lineage of traditions and ideas that we follow. We act this way to retain a certain amount of honor for ourselves and for our work. Just as we give offerings to our genetic ancestors in order to function as modern pagans, we should also give offerings to our spiritual ancestors as well. We do this despite their history and notoriety as flawed human beings who had many failings and even engaged in disreputable activities. This is not white washing or wishful thinking, or even a terrible naïveté; it is a pagan way of honoring those who came before us. It is also how we honor the gifts that they courageously sought and achieved for our benefit.

Now, when we consider everything that I have written up to this point, you can see the ideas that I am promoting and even celebrating as a witch, ritual magician, initiate and adept. I believe that being faithful to the founder and the trailblazer of one’s spiritual lineage is an important part of being an adept. It is not naïve nor foolish to venerate one’s spiritual ancestors, just as it isn’t foolish or naïve to venerate one’s genetic ancestors. It is part of being a pagan and a magician, and so in this context to behave and comport oneself in this manner is honorable and generous. After all, wouldn’t I want people to behave in a respectful fashion to me after I have gone to great lengths to give them the lore that I have labored upon for so many years? Do I want people to disparage me for my all too human failings and personal flaws while at the same time greedily using my ideas and writings for their personal betterment? I believe that that is the real issue regarding the honoring and veneration of spiritual ancestors. How would you like to be treated disparagingly by posterity in the future when you are unable to defend yourself, and even worse, when those same people are still using your ideas and rituals?

While it is so trendy and cool to be cynical, disparaging and cleverly negative to anyone who is a founder or trailblazer, or even someone who could be considered a magical hero, I think that it is despicable and deplorable behavior which only serves to define someone who is actually bankrupt of any original ideas and morally a scoundrel. This might sound like harsh criticism, but I see it as a powerful antidote to the popular sentiment of iconoclastic thinking that seems to be the trend in postmodern occultism today. I stand against that kind of thinking, which I suppose makes me something of counter force in popular thought. Then again, I think that I have good reason for acting and believing as I do because I have found that the popular consensus contradicts both good Pagan theology as well as good magical practice.

Frater Barrabbas

When Meeting A Remarkable Person

Nick Farrell recently threw down the gauntlet and challenged the supposed secret chiefs to communicate with him and prove, once and for all, their existence - or else, something, something. He then spent a month building up his expectations that a high adept must be something of a superman or quasi avatar, a half-human and half god-like being. He compared such a being with the Theosophical Mahatmas, which are very nearly godlike transcendent individuals. Most of us just expected the challenge to come and go without anything or anyone materializing. Certainly, if I were an enlightened being, why would I bother with someone as apparently flawed and arrogant as Mr. Farrell?

However, much to everyone’s surprise, someone did answer Nick’s call to meet with a representative of the secret chiefs. Even so, the meeting was with just another (well dressed) human being but with quite an amazing occult pedigree. That climactic ending to the month-long challenge was something of a shocker for me, but Nick’s response to this fascinating situation could be summed up with the words, “Meh, thanks, but no thanks.” He was sorely disappointed that the erstwhile master was a flesh and blood human being who seemed to be no more amazing or special than himself, or at least at first impression. Anyway, you can find Nick’s blog article here, and read it for yourself.

Here a few juicy tidbits from Mr. Farrell’s post.

“He was exactly what you would expect from a secret chief.  Well, dressed, calm, urbane, and clearly well off.  He managed to look younger than he was. He told me he was a Corsican of aristocratic pedigree.

We met in a coffee shop close to St Peter’s so that my wife, Paola, who works in the area,  could act as a translator so that he would be more comfortable talking.

He was extremely interesting having been connected with lots of magical orders and alchemical groups that I had never heard of.  In one breath he was in something called the Osiris Order, the next it was Grand Orient and Scottish Rite freemasonry and the Italian strain of Misraim and Myriam.  There were lots of great French alchemists named, his greatest love appeared to be Alchemy and he threw a lot of alchemical words into the conversation which I totally failed to understand.”

All of this is quite interesting, in fact, and does seem to be very likely. Nick is describing someone who might very well be a high adept, or at least connected to high adepts. If I were attending this kind of meeting, I would be quite interested in knowing more. I would certainly be cautious but open, at any rate.

Since Mr. Farrell has not since written that his experience was just a hoax to titillate his allies and throw off his critics, I think that we can assume that he was sincere in what he reported. I will give him the benefit of the doubt, although there are many reasons to doubt his “truthiness” regarding secret chiefs. Nick wrote the whole thing off as an encounter with an occult trickster or confidence man. He was especially appalled when the man told him that membership to his organization and access to secret alchemical lore would cost him money. If what Nick wrote was accurate, then there seemed to be more behind the encounter than just an interview with some confidence man. I was intrigued by what Mr. Farrell experienced, but he was disappointed, and it would seem that he had no intention of advancing this curious occult contact any further. 

Instead of being open minded and having an inquiring mind, Nick was, in fact, dismissive and even a bit put out. This individual was obviously not a “secret chief” of Nick’s specific line of the Golden Dawn and didn’t know the secret password and sign associated with his inner order, or for that matter, much about the Golden Dawn itself. He also didn’t appear in a blaze of majestic light accompanied by the sounds of heavenly trumpets, nor was he heralded by an angelic choir. It was actually a rather banal and humdrum experience in a commercial coffee shop. It was, in fact, a kind of meeting that people have every day of the week. Nick’s secret chief challenge appeared to be answered, but not by someone or something with the “right stuff.” Maybe Mr. Farrell was protecting himself from being swindled or made a fool of, or perhaps he was just too cynical or jaded to be able to discern a real encounter with someone who might have been remarkable.

One of the individuals who commented on that article seemed to have a lot more insight into some of the things that this individual talked about. In fact, it is likely that Alex Sumner may have revealed some very interesting clues about Italian and continental occultism in regards to this supposed secret chief - you can find his article here. We who lack an expertise to converse and read in foreign languages like Italian, French and German will not have access to the occult knowledge-base that is to be found on the European continent. We will be narrowly confined to what is available in the English speaking world, and it is likely there is rich source of magic and occultism in Europe, not to mention organizations and adepts, that lie behind the barrier of language. So, it would seem that Nick Farrell got his wish and his challenge was met with a counter challenge, but he wasn’t interested in investigating it further, and therefore, probably missed an opportunity to meet and connect with some remarkable men and women.

  

Previously, I have written about what I call (self-made) remarkable men and women within the occult world, and I believe that these are the true high adepts, or at least they are individuals who can inspire and point one to the next important stage of their path towards the Great Work. You can find that article here. I have also defined what it is to be an adept or a high adept, since these levels of spiritual and magical achievement are not beyond my ability to rationally discuss. Such exalted individuals are, in fact, human beings, just like us, flawed and imperfect, but with a greater knowledge and levels of experience than us. Certainly, these kinds of individuals and their obscure treasuries of lore are all around us, and from time to time, we might have a chance to stumble upon them. Or, if we persevere, we might become a remarkable man or woman ourselves, inspiring others with our work and knowledge. Such are the possibilities and potentials for growth and spiritual evolution that exist as opportunities arrayed before us, all we need to do is to engage them and determine their validity.

What I believe happened to Nick Farrell was that he met one of these incredible remarkable men, or at least, a representative of one of them. He had a true and rare encounter with someone who might have been an important link in his spiritual and magical process. This individual might also have been a complete fraud and a crook, but only a careful examination would have revealed that fact. To pass up a potential opportunity with one of these amazing individuals and their organization is, in my opinion, the height of folly. The door leading to great spiritual and magical opportunity opens but rarely in the life of an occultist, and when it does, it behooves one to investigate it fully so that he or she might validate the individuals and the group behind it.

Yet it would seem that Nick is stuck in his own small bubble of Golden Dawn reconstructed lore when there are possible living traditions within his grasp. He decries those who jump from magical organization to organization, not admitting that sometimes one has to look elsewhere in order to faithfully follow one’s spiritual and magical path. Nick’s supposed secret chief required some kind of money for the teachings that he had to share and impart, and this is not really too unusual. I have found that rubes and outsiders often devalue something that is given for free, and as far as promising wealth, well there are quite a number of interpretations of what that would be in terms of outcomes. 

Nick said that this supposed secret chief didn’t ask him any questions or try to determine Nick’s level of knowledge. Perhaps his erstwhile master was testing Nick throughout this process and trying to determine how serious he was about mastering a whole new occult perspective and system of lore. It might also be true that he was also trying to fraudulently bilk money from Nick. However, since Mr. Farrell was unwilling to even attempt to validate this potential master and teacher, we will never know whether or not he was authentic.

This brings me to my point in writing up this article. If by some chance you might meet a remarkable man or woman, how can you tell if they are legitimate? How can you know an authentic master from one that is a fake? How do you comport yourself to ensure your own personal safety and the safety of your fortune from potentially fraudulent teachers? There are some basic common sense measures that one can take to validate a remarkable person and determine their authenticity without being dismissive, cynical, and obnoxious on one hand, or being a credulous fool and a complete sucker on the other hand. I have previously written an article about magical teachers and paying for occult knowledge. You can find it here.

One very important consideration is to enter into a trial period in order to determine if what is being presented by a teacher is legitimate or relevant. If it takes a large sum of money to even get into the door, then the supposed lore is probably suspect and the teacher is likely a fraud. An honest high adept would allow a potential student to test his or her lore, or at the very least to give something to the student so that he or she can form an opinion before committing to a large expenditure in terms of resources and time.

Remarkable men and women can be opinionated, irascible, and even at times, harsh, but they are, as a rule, fair and even handed. The knowledge that they possess is authentic, and it doesn’t take too much time or effort to prove that. My advice would be to behave respectfully and ask lots of questions. Allow the potential teacher to ask questions as well. It is important for mutual trust to be fully engaged before the period of training can begin, and once that trust is established, it should be a clue that the student believes in the validity of the teacher. However, it might take a while before that mutual trust is established, and that should be perfectly acceptable to all parties. The teacher, if he or she is legitimate, shouldn’t have to rush the student into making any kind of decision.

A true mentor is patient, understanding and sensitive to the needs of his or her charge. Anything that is rushed or purposely made obscure by the potential teacher should set off the student’s alarm bells. An important consideration is that teachers, like students, are just human beings with human failings. You should never expect your teacher to be perfect or even to practice what they teach at all times. However, there is no excuse for a teacher behaving in an exploitative manner, and all teacher-student relationships should be open ended. When a teacher becomes irrelevant, then the student should respectfully but firmly end the relationship. This is also true if the relationship becomes abusive to any degree.

I believe that if the student uses the above common sense approach to dealing with a remarkable man or woman who could potentially become a valuable teacher, then what they will receive will be quite amazing and remarkable. When we have a meeting with a remarkable man or woman, then we should seek to validate them and the lore that they desire to impart to us. Not taking advantage of such a situation, in my opinion, is not only foolish, but it is highly self-limiting.

Frater Barrabbas

Summer Time and Various Thoughts

July has now arrived, and we have entered what is known up here as full summer. I am often amazed at how fast the earth recovers from its wintry sleep and manifests into a full blown green soaked fertile landscape. It was a mere ten days that our world went from the browns and greys of post winter into the verdant landscape that now confronts my eyes. The nearly instantaneous transformation is almost like magic. Nature has now become mild and verdant, and it is a time to rejoice and engage in summer type activities. How unfortunate that the very beginning of this time I was still afflicted by the after-effects of my serious bronchitis infection. I saw nature transform, but I was not able to engage in much outdoor activity. The garden was neglected and so was every other feature of our outdoor world attached to the land that I supposedly own and maintain.

After several weeks I can now say that my cough is nearly gone. I occasionally cough from time to time, but I am not afflicted by the breathlessness that impacted my ability to even have a lengthy conversation for the past month. I hope to make for lost time the days and weeks ahead, since the warm summer days are in short supply up here in the great Midwestern tundra.

Needless to say, despite my chronic cough, I was able to perform well enough to participate in a digitally captured interview with Eric Koetting. I have found him to be quite brilliant and creative within his own magical path and established tradition, which I might add, is quite different from my own, but with many points in common. Both Eric and myself are more or less self-made men in regards to our occult knowledge and evocation practices. I will speak more about this in a future article, since I am planning to review two of his books.

If you are interesting in viewing this interview, you will have to sign up for Koetting’s “Interviews with a Magus,” and it does cost $19.97 monthly, with the first month free. However, the collection of interviews that Mr. Koetting has assembled is quite impressive and I believe that the money being charged for this service is well worth it. I have listened to this interview and I have found it to be quite interesting and engaging, representing a distillation of what I have learned and experienced over the last 40 years. Eric is also quite erudite and insightful himself, and his additions and comments in the interview are also very revealing and interesting. So, if you are interested in this interview (and the others that are contained therein), you can find the portal for signing up here.

To quote Mr. Koetting from his advertising for the “Interviews with a Magus:”

“To help aspiring magicians get access to these advanced rituals, unprecedented success stories, and cutting edge theories, I decided to start up my ‘Interviews With A Magus’ interview series. It's my way to showcase and debut all these innovative and controversial breakthoughs, many of which directly challenge the status quo of the occult.”

Secret Chiefs and Occult Spies

There has been quite a blow up recently in the blogosphere between David Griffin and his organization, and that of his GD opponents, with Nick Farrell as the apparent spokesperson for that faction. Nick Farrell threw down the gauntlet by declaring that if the “Secret Chiefs” truly exist, that they present themselves to him personally and prove, once and for all, that they are the defacto third order of the Golden Dawn. I don’t know whether to laugh at the absurdity of Nick’s demands or to feel sorry for his utter lack of subtlety and tact. Remarkable men and women are rare and often obscure, but they don’t come when we demand their presence. If someone demanded my presence in an unwarranted manner, I can tell you quite concisely how I would respond. I’d tell them to "piss off," that is, if I even bothered to respond at all.

Conversely, David Griffin has shown (here) that Nick Farrell has been engaged in a secret mission to rewrite Golden Dawn history in the Wikkipedia article for the history of that order, based, of course, on his recent self-published pulp books about Mathers. I have reviewed his poorly written and researched tomes in this blog, but it doesn’t really surprise me that he is attempting to rewrite the publicly online history concerning the order. What does surprise me is his rather highhanded failed attempts to coerce the editors of Wikkipedia into following his propaganda. They have rescinded his edits, but he has continued to reapply them, sort of like the endless argument between indifferent children. (Ain’t so, ‘tis too.) He is also using a laughably silly logon called “Magus007" to pursue this revisionist activity, much to the chagrin of the editors who know that his sources are highly suspect.

So, Nick Farrell wants to slyly pretend that he is an occult version of the fictitious spy, 007, a.k.a., James Bond. He also wants the secret chiefs to reveal themselves to him according to his deadline and prove that their bonafide as the head of the GD and A+O is valid and authentic. I wonder what kind of fantasy world Mr. Farrell lives in? He seems more egotistical and fantasy based than what he has accused Mathers of being in his books. Maybe Nick Farrell is the real “King Over the Water” and that we can dismiss him and his silly capers as being nothing more than the hijinks of a fatuous and immature clown. Maybe someday he will either write something uniquely interesting in a book or reveal a good practical technique on his blog - I would welcome such activity. However, I leave his current ranting and bloviating to the judgment of his ultimate Golden Dawn peers and future posterity, since I believe that initiates in the decades ahead will either judge him to be the incompetent hatchet man for an odious cabal or they’ll not remember him at all. 

One of the points that I have made in previous articles in this blog is that there have been, are and always will be remarkable men and women in the western occult tradition. Mostly these individuals are singular, insular and rare; and those who gain a certain notoriety are shown to be both remarkable and also, I might add, flawed. All human beings are flawed and imperfect, but then again to expect perfection from human nature is not only erroneous but it seems to defy the whole purpose of nature. Secret chiefs are not supermen, immortals, Arhats or avatars - they are human beings subject to the laws of nature like everyone else. They might have insights that allow them a greater degree of vitality, longevity or spiritual wisdom than the average person, or they might even be bereft of all benefits except their own unique virtues and abilities. 

Nature is not perfect, ergo, human beings are not perfect. However, if a small group of unknown remarkable men came together to form a group, and their occult background was Masonic and Rosicrucian, and they kept that group going for a couple of centuries, adding new members and losing others to the scourge of time, would that not be a good representation of the vaunted third order? It would just be a group of remarkable men who had achieved self-mastery in their lifetime, and that would also mean that they, as individuals and a group, weren’t perfect. (This also means that they wouldn’t be immortal nor have Godlike powers.) What this signifies is that you can be a master and also be vulnerable to the same vices and frailties as all human beings.

Additionally, something that gets lost in these never ending arguments about secret chiefs is that it’s important to separate an individual’s spiritual and magical process from the actual social phenomenon of meeting a remarkable man or woman. Often, our spiritual and magical process psychically informs us when we are about to meet someone very important or discover a crucial piece of our individual puzzle. We can talk about dreams, astral presences, intuitions or profound omens; but these are always events experienced when immersed in our process.

When our spiritual and magical process merges with an actual physical meeting with someone quite remarkable, then the encounter is colored by a profound sense of a life-altering significance. We could easily conflate the omens and astral encounters with the real meeting because all of these events are experienced through our own personal spiritual and magical process. That is how I believe Mathers saw and experienced his encounters with the secret chiefs, and we today have to realize that all of this was perceived and experienced by him through the process of his long spiritual and magical journey. We can either accept it or deny it, but it doesn’t change the fact that it was one of the most authentic things (as well as mysterious) that Mathers underwent in his occult career.

The irony is that in order to actively use the lore of the Golden Dawn and profess to be a magician operating under that tradition, one would expect that individual to also accept and believe that Mathers had some kind of profound occult contact which allowed him to develop this unique system of magick. Even if you dismiss the entire history of the GD order (and its leaders) and just practice the rituals (i.e., do the work), you are in effect validating those remarkable men and women who developed this lore, particularly Mathers. As far as I can see, there’s really no way around this conundrum if you consider yourself to be a magician of the Golden Dawn tradition. This is why I find it so strange that Mr. Farrell has spent so much of his time and resources trying to prove that Mathers was some kind of failed lunatic. I would equate this effort with someone attempting to pull up the rug that they are simultaneously standing upon; an act of sheer stupidity and self-inflicted injury.

Anyway, I am certain that this sad and idiotic travesty will continue to embroil the GD community for many years to come. It reminds me of something that I learned long ago when I was an adolescent boy. When you are growing up, there’s always some kid who has the best and most expensive toys. He’s that fair-haired kid that the teachers love and the other kids despise. You can either hate him for his good fortune or you can coddle up to him to see if you can get a chance to play with those exceptional toys. A third path is to just admire him for his good fortune and to note that despite being blessed with favor and fortune, he is also generous and kind to everyone, at least at first. Continued hostility can also shape and change a person, making them guarded and even a bit suspicious.

I think that David Griffin is that fair-haired boy of good fortune, and we can either love him or despise him for what he has achieved. I chose to reserve judgment until I had a chance to meet him, and after meeting him, I realized that he was a good egg. If only others would be so open minded and not condemn someone that they don’t even know.  However, in the age of the internet, it’s just too easy to use the protected insulation of the remote blog article or email to castigate someone who you imagine that you hate, and all without much consequence. Additionally, it is hard to properly impart humor, sarcasm or lampooning into one’s writing and not have it taken wrongly by some readers.

This is why I react dispassionately to things that I read on the internet. I might criticize what someone has written or be aghast at how they are behaving, but I try not to engage in ad hominem attacks. It’s too easy to respond emotionally to what someone has written and much harder to respond dispassionately. This is why I feel that the impersonal quality of the internet is a poor place to judge what someone is really like. I might not agree with what someone has written, but I have to use caution in order to not personally criticize them for their seemingly bad behavior. What this means is that I could easily have a beer or a glass of wine with Nick Farrell in a public social setting without feeling the compunction of tossing my drink into his face. I might ask him why he acts like an arrogant boor on the internet, but I will at least give him the benefit of the doubt, at first. However, once I meet someone in the flesh, then I can adequately judge as to whether I personally like them or not. And, I might add, I have the right to my own opinions, just like everyone else.

Anyway, there seems to be a real cold war between the two factions of the Golden Dawn, and it is apparent that the side opposed to David Griffin is actively and stealthily attempting to steal away initiates and whole groups, not to mention convince everyone that they are the only legitimate branch of the GD. I find that kind of behavior despicable and it doesn’t make me feel inclined to either listen to their diatribes or engage in a dialog with them. In fact, they don’t even seem to be behaving like adepts at all. If only that faction would just leave the HOGD and the A+O organizations alone and allow them to prosper or fail by their own merits. I guess that would be asking for too much, which I find quite sad and tragic.

I think that only time will be show which faction represents the true and authentic version of the Golden Dawn. Will it be the one that emphasizes an exoteric and reconstructed version, or the one that is an active esoteric tradition with a legitimate connection to a third order and who is revealing ever new and startling occult practices and lore? Someday, that answer will be known, but I have my suspicions as to which one it will be.

Frater Barrabbas

Another Plug for the Self-Directed and Self-Initiated

Recently, Nick Farrell has written up an article on his blog (Playing At Magic) complaining about New Age seekers who eschew traditional occult organizations and attempt to master the art of magick by dabbling with it. Of course, to embellish his arguments he has created an inept straw man analogous to Goethe’s Sorcerer’s Apprentice to target his complaints - a person so naive and foolish as to be nothing short of a cartoon. You can find his article here, but still, I feel it’s important to respond to what he wrote, since I am indeed self-taught, self-directed, and therefore, self-initiated. While I don’t believe that his article in anyway describes who I am and what I have done over the previous decades, I find that by behaving as an elitist he is missing a very important point about how things are changing in the world of magick and the occult. Mr. Farrell is on the downward path to becoming a dinosaur, an irrelevant anachronism simply because the math doesn't favor his opinions or his vaunted initiatory pedigree.

Those who are members of Golden Dawn temples or initiates in one of the many occult organizations that seek to promote the traditions of ritual or ceremonial magick are the blessed and lucky few, while the rest of us have had to make due with what we can. The amount of written material on the subject of magick which can be found on the internet and in books is already quite voluminous, and it is quickly growing even as I write this article. There is a vast body of information available to anyone who is either curious or who desires to engage in the magician’s avocation. The number of available temples and organizations is still quite small, and I might add, fairly exclusive.

What this means is that the probability of someone acquiring their knowledge and experience of magick by reading and experimenting is much more likely to occur, in other words, by being a dabbler. As time goes on this disparity will only continue to grow until the population of initiate members of these exclusive groups and organizations will be tiny compared to the population of self-taught and self-initiated magicians. Such a course of self-determination and directed learning even has a fancy label - it is called heutagogy.

So, it would seem that the future of ritual and ceremonial magick belongs to the masses of dabblers and dilettantes rather than to the so-called properly initiated members of occult organizations and formal traditions. Similar to what has happened to the formal traditions of Witchcraft over the last few decades, vastly more individuals are seeking to engage with paganism and witchcraft without either joining a coven or getting initiated into a tradition. Eventually, such formal traditions will be something of a fading anachronism, and I believe that newer and more dynamic sodalities will take their place. The same thing will happen to magical lodges and traditions unless they open up and place themselves in the midst of the wave of change that is enveloping the practice of ritual and ceremonial magick as well.

There are a lot of self-trained magicians out there in the world today, and in fact, most of the magicians that I know, even including those who belong to occult organizations are mostly self-taught and self-directed. This is because competent magicians have achieved their results due to their own personal efforts, discipline, experimentation and individual accomplishments. I have also met individuals who were spoon-fed and supposedly trained by some lodge or another and who were actually quite incompetent. What makes someone a good magician has a lot to do with individual initiative, inspiration, and steadfast application of a foundational discipline. There is no guarantee that a Golden Dawn or Thelemic magician will be competent just because he or she received extensive training. This is why I feel that such exclusive organizations are on the brink of being buried in a deluge of dabblers and dilettantes unless they, too, change with the times.

When we consider that William Gray, one of the great occult and magical luminaries of the recent past, was completely self-taught, self-directed and self-initiated, it poses the argument that perhaps magical orders, temples and traditions are not as important as the various members of these groups seem to believe. I wrote an article a while back celebrating those steadfast and stalwart individuals who have blazed the trail of self-made magicians and occult masters, and you can find it here. While Mr. Gray was a unique individual in his time, he represented a new path and possibility to many who didn't have recourse to a traditional lodge. Now, many decades later, there are many who are following this insular path. I suspect that the path that Mr. Gray forged will soon become the major way of mastering magick, if that event has not already come to pass.

Some have said that I am, as a model of the self-taught and self-initiated, not a good representative of this population because I did receive an initiation into a witchcraft tradition. I have also received other initiations in other organizations as well, but the system of magick that I use and have promoted through the Order of the Gnostic Star is mostly my own. Whatever claims I can make about what I have achieved over the last forty years is due to my own work and initiative. No one taught me how to work magick - I learned it from books and mostly from a lot of experimentation. I may have taken this work to its logical conclusion over many decades of time, but I don’t believe that such as what I have accomplished has made me unique or different from the mass of other seekers and dabblers.

In fact, the whole premise of the Order’s method of teaching and initiating is based on the continuous process of transformative ordeals. A student is given the rituals and lore, and then challenged to use them to achieve a given end, the details of such a working are to be determined by discovery and personal insight. Once the ordeal is complete, then the members of the temple confer an initiatory elevation as a kind of collective recognition, but the work has already been done. This is indeed a form of self-initiation, but it is one that is quite effective and proven over time.

I also think that it’s disingenuous to compare self-direction and self-initiation in occult, spiritual and magical studies to that of an engineering, medical or other professional occupation. While it might be optimal to actually have access to an occult and magical college, it isn’t a requirement for a practicing magician. Plenty of competent and capable magicians exist who have not had that kind of training or instruction. There isn’t a board exam for ritual or ceremonial magicians nor do such individuals require any kind of licensing. The evaluation of magical, spiritual or occult competency is actually quite subjective, and like any art form, it requires a certain consensus of peers. Also, getting a group of magicians to agree on anything might be a bit of a stretch, too.

What is required for anyone to master the art of magick is nothing short of a practical and rational approach to mastering anything. It requires persistence, experimentation, constant research and sometimes leaving no stone unturned in the pursuit of operational knowledge. Thus, sane and rational experimentation, building a loosely defined peer group and developing a consistent and continuous spiritual and magical discipline is the real key to a mastery of magic. This is true regardless of whether or not the magician received training within an organization. Learning to be creative and "thinking outside of the box" are techniques that can't really be taught to anyone. They must be individually mastered and thereby incorporate certain innate talents. Not everyone who is persistent will produce remarkable results, but they will produce some kind of results none-the-less.

Few Golden Dawn organizations appear to be doing anything about the fact that people are acquiring first class publically available information and engaging in a certain amount of dabbling. Many seem to be condescending towards the masses of the uninitiated and act more less as entitled elitists, an attitude that will guarantee a relative future morbidity. What is needed is some kind of outreach, since the population of the self-taught far exceeds the population of the traditional initiates. I look at what Jason Miller is doing with his online classes as representing the cutting edge in disseminating a practical knowledge of magick. David Griffin and his organizations of the HOGD and the A+O have put together an outreach program called the “Thousand Points of Light” which can somewhat mitigate the lack of resident temples available to aspiring initiates. My magical order is taking this approach as well with the affiliate member program.  

While I applaud the outreach that some organizations are undergoing for those many thousand points of light, there must always be a place at the table for the self-made magician as well, and in fact, they will soon be far more numerous than a thousand points of light; more like a sky brightly illuminated with a myriad of stars. The best thing that can be done for these so-called dabblers (I prefer to call them experimenters) is to make more foundational lore available to them either through published materials or online articles.

I believe that I have and continue to engage in both of these efforts, and so do many other groups and organizations. However, publishing books and making information available online will only increase the supposed problem. What we all have to realistically do is to make the information and contacts available and let nature take its course to sort out the truly determined from the curious and half-hearted dilettante. In time those who are gifted or just passionate in their pursuit will float to the top of the wave, and they will justifiably demand to be given a certain amount of respect. We can already see some of those individuals now, writing blogs and even publishing books. As a member of their loose sodality, I salute them.

After considering these important points we can now examine the claims and complaints written by Nick Farrell in his article. I find his arrogance, hubris, and condescending attitude to the self-taught and self-directed to be quite obnoxious. It is, in word, the smirking, sneering face of the entitled pedigreed snob whining and complaining about the unwashed masses. Yet I have found much of Nick Farrell's writings to be quite lacking in accuracy and insight, all despite his supposed training and guidance by the hands of superior adepts. It makes his arguments hollow and irrelevant. Even so, his vaunted place in the corridors of the occult elite is a precarious and even delusional imposture, one that we will proceed to quickly ignore and forget.

Frater Barrabbas

Veneration of Ancestors - A Pagan Theme

Pagans from all time periods have engaged in a practice that is called ancestor veneration, where one’s departed forebears are given a certain reverential respect and honor due to their linear importance to one’s own birth and residence within the continuity of a family organization. I think that this is a very natural and basic human sentiment, perhaps somewhat displaced in modern times, but still important. I also believe that it is particularly important to modern pagans, as well as magicians who work with spirits.

In the U.S., there is a decided bias against this sort of belief and practice, and there is a habit of diminishing one’s forebears and putting them into a perspective that everyone who lived and existed in the prior age are inferior to everyone who lives and exists today. We are so devoted to progress that we have learned to belittle and dismiss the efforts and achievements of those who have come before us. This mind-set has unfortunately affected people’s attitudes towards their ancestors. It has also forced our culture to be divorced and cut-off from the people who made our lives and our very existence possible. I find this lack of respect and veneration for one’s ancestors to be not only problematic, but it also has the potential of making a practicing magician a lot poorer and much more isolated. Allow me to explain why I believe this to be true.

Several years ago, I had the same attitude towards my ancestors that everyone else of my generation had. We had a complete disregard for anyone in our past who was from the “older generation,” starting with our parents. Since I, like all of my contemporaries, had experienced a decided generational schism when growing up, we amplified this fissure by dismissing and devaluing everything associated with my father’s as well as my grandparents generations, and we even dismissed those unknown individuals who came before them. I guess we believed that we were the Crown of Creation and that everyone who had lived before us was deemed irrelevant. This was the kind of inherent snobbery held by those of us in the “Boomer” generation, and I suspect that this attitude has been continued in the later generations.

Some years later my sister got heavily involved with genealogy and she performed some extensive research and even interviewed some of the remaining family members who remembered events and individuals in our family’s past. I found all of this somewhat interesting, but because I was the only member of my family who had a strong proclivity for occultism and magick, I felt that I was unique and had little in common with any of my forebears. I read her reports with a certain detached interest, but I felt that it wasn’t really relevant to my life in the present world.

This sentiment continued for some time until I underwent a reformation in regards to my pagan beliefs. A few of my most respected pagan friends then gave me some constructive criticism and informed me that it was natural for pagans to have a certain veneration and reverence for their ancestors, regardless of what they might have been like when alive. I have also encountered individuals engaged in the African Religious Traditions who told me that the most important spirits in any kind of root-work or invocation regimen were one’s ancestors. Without them, a magician had no allies nor anyone to guide or vouch for them. In other words, without the ancestors, a magician was alone and without spiritual allies.

I pondered all of these various ideas and came to realize that they were all correct, and this completely changed my opinion and attitude towards my living family and its resident ancestors. I don’t have to either engage with these spirits or seek specific guidance from them, but I do need to at least keep the “spirit door” open for them, and to honor and respect them in turn. In doing this, I have encountered some vague but intriguing notions that I am not the only one in my family line who has had an interest or an ability with magick and occultism. I can’t exactly determine who they were or from which genetic family line or time period they once lived, but I feel them and I sense that they are very much behind the scenes when I perform various magical or liturgical rites. My own mother, who is recently departed, seemed to show her ghostly presence to me whenever I perform the Mass of the Great Goddess, and of course, our recently departed furry friend, the cat Stars, is very much actively participating in the work of the grove where he is buried.

All of these elements have come together and forged within me a very different attitude and perspective in regards to my ancestors. I now have a special sacred place in my library where I have placed all of the pictures that I have of my linear ancestors. They occupy a place of honor and learning within my occult and spiritual work. Certainly, a number of these ancestors would have objected to my occult practices if they were alive (and in fact a few of them did), but now that they are dead, it would seem that I have realized a greater acceptance from them. I have acquired an attitude of honor and reverence for these important individuals regardless of what kind of person they actually were when alive. It would seem that the transition of death gives a person a certain amount of restitution and rehabilitation. Whether they were scoundrels or irascible tyrants during life, death has a way of mitigating all of their faults so that they become worthy of honor and remembrance simply because they were ancestors. Perhaps this is one of the greater mysteries of death, although still being alive, I am unable to confirm this as a fact.

Another thing that I learned is that we have both physical ancestors and we also have spiritual or magical ancestors. We have our actual genetic forebears, and we also have individuals whose traditions we have been initiated into or whose beliefs and practices we borrowed and incorporated into our own spiritual and magical work. Eastern mystical traditions as well as some western venerate their founders and include them in their prayers and spiritual practices. Catholics have their saints arrayed in great abundance, but western occultists have founders and trail blazers who could also receive the same degree of veneration, honor or respect.

We who work with these traditions believe that those individuals whom we venerate are not dead, mute or lost to time, but instead they have a manner of existence that continues beyond death. These spiritual ancestors, as I call them, have become part of the egregore of the spiritual system that they helped to found. Because so many people believe, think or talk about them, and even pray to them, thereby building up their legendary mythic persona, they have become far more powerful and important in death than they ever were in life. As occultists we can choose to either engage with these spiritual ancestors or we can ignore them, but I believe that we ignore them at our own cost. Spiritual personalities that are part of a tradition’s egregore are quite important, and I believe that one must engage with these various individuals in order to fully engage with that tradition. In my opinion, to omit them or somehow denigrate them is to greatly impoverish the holistic experience of that tradition.

Imagine how poor Catholic magic would be without the power of the Saints and the Archangels. The founder of Christianity, Jesus Christ himself, is so pivotal to Christianity that it would seem to be totally absurd to omit him from any kind of Christian service or religious celebration. Yet it is no more absurd to omit the founder or trailblazer of any given occult tradition from one’s considerations and practices. So it is for this reason that I accept and believe that I must give a certain degree of respect, honor and even veneration to those individuals who laid the occult foundation for me to follow many decades later.  

This brings me to the point of my article, and that is the answer as to why I supposedly venerate certain individuals who I believe are critically important to me, and therefore, are my personal spiritual ancestors. One of my friends recently said that he doesn’t believe in putting anyone on a pedestal, which I guess means that he doesn’t subscribe to venerating ancestors, whether genetic or spiritual. I believe that everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, but I think that taking this attitude makes any magician a lot poorer and less able to be spiritually guided and assisted. Perhaps this does occur whether one has this attitude or not, but I have found in my own work that engaging in the proper attitude of honor, respect and veneration makes it much more likely that I will be fully conscious of any positive encounter with my ancestors, and in fact, I highly welcome it. 

Some have obliquely criticized me that venerating such individuals as S. L. MacGregor Mathers, Aleister Crowley, Gerald B. Gardner or even Alex Sanders is ridiculous. These individuals were just ordinary men who lived and died in the last century, and they were as likely to be highly flawed as well as particularly gifted. Of course this criticism can apply to nearly everyone, since we are all flawed and imperfect who are also mortal. In the eyes of my critics I must be some kind of naive fool or a complete sucker to venerate such individuals as these (or for that matter, to venerate anyone). 

Even so, we live in a nation and a world that venerates its past leaders, ingenious creators, inventors and military heroes. Our public areas are filled with statues, busts and commemorative edifices. We have millions of acres of graveyards carefully tended with the past dead, so it would seem that a respect and reverence for our forebears is part of our culture, whether we admit it or not. So, with all of this in mind, I can hardly be perceived as a naive fool because I venerate my spiritual and magickal forebears. In fact, I believe that I am doing what only comes natural to a modern pagan and a member of my culture.

As I have said, founders usually become spiritual attributes associated with the tradition that they established. In this manner, Mathers, Crowley, Gardner and Sanders are alive in some fashion, existing within the ever growing and waning power and prestige of the traditions that they founded. Regardless of whether someone like Nick Farrell or Pat Zelewski excoriates and denigrates the history of someone like MacGregor Mathers, it would seem that he continues to have a powerful presence within the rituals and methodologies that he originally wrote and passed on to his followers. Not only do I find this lack of respect and honor on their parts toward Mathers to be offensive, it would seem to be a very un-pagan thing to do as well. 

Since I have established above that it is proper and a good pagan practice to venerate, honor and respect one’s physical and spiritual ancestors, then I and others who have taken the teachings and practices from the Golden Dawn should naturally have this same kind of attitude to the founder of that tradition. In fact, I would say that anyone who is an initiate in the Golden Dawn should have a particular veneration and respect for Mathers if they are going to be actively engaged with that tradition. In my opinion, to denigrate and devalue Mathers is to do violence to the egregore of the Golden Dawn. Such a person is not only guilty of a kind of attempted spiritual patricide, but they would seem to have stepped fully out of the egregore altogether, and could no longer be considered as actively engaged with that tradition in any kind of magical or spiritual manner.

Finally, do we judge someone who lived either decades or centuries ago by the scant information that exists about them, or do we judge them by their contribution to our world? Certainly Beethoven was a highly flawed individual who few either liked or loved when he was alive; but it was his transcendent music that made him a venerated and respected composer. Do we consider someone foolish who has a bust of Beethoven in their home? Of course not, since his music was so extraordinary in that time, and it is still performed and listened to today. The same thing could be said of Shakespeare or any other great author, poet, or literary master.

In our post-modern world, many westerners have become iconoclasts and have rejected the relevance of their forebears, despite the fact that we owe our cultural heritage and our lives to many individuals who lived in the past. Their efforts have enriched our world today, so giving them their due seems hardly foolish or reprehensible. I think that have made my point, and I believe that now you might understand why I have said certain things in my previous articles about my spiritual ancestors.

Zalewski’s Critique of My Review for “King Over the Water”

One other thing that I would like to mention before I end this rather long article is that Pat Zalewski has recently criticized me for my review of Nick Farrell’s book, “King Over the Water.” I would like to quickly respond to a few of his points, since it does fit into the overall topic of this article. In his response to me, Pat made the following point:

“It was interesting to read a review of King over the Water, which has recently popped up. The author cited Sword of Wisdom as a good Mathers biography and essentially admonished Nick for his analysis of Mathers. Now most of us know that Sword of Wisdom was an informative book, but was essentially a whitewash of Mathers and depicted him as a hero throughout. Now Nick does not need me to defend his work as he is quite capable of doing it himself. What I am commenting on here is how people (like the reviewer) have an idealized mental construct of Mathers and don't want that view shattered with some facts getting in the way, as did the author of Sword of Wisdom. The review was a defence [sic] of the mental image of Mathers and what he should have been like, not like he was. He apparently cannot differentiate the work Mathers did from the character. Howe lays it out [on the] table as to what Mathers was. Though Howe's work is dated, the new material on Mathers that has come to light since Howe, is more peripheral than core.”

Of course, anyone who read my review would note that my problem with Nick Farrell’s book is that it is filled with conjecture, innuendo and talking points; but it has very little actual historical research in it. The lack of citations and the sparse bibliography alone demonstrate that this work is very poorly researched. Farrell has created a supposed psychological profile of Mathers, even when there is so little supporting facts to make such an effort possible.

If Mr. Farrell was such a good historian, then why did he fail to notice that there was another Mathers family in Bedford (possibly related), and that the student who supposedly went to the local grammar school was actually not the same person as MacGregor Mathers, since the birth month in the school registry was in March instead of January? This little fact was explored in the “Sword of Wisdom,” representing one of the many irregularities found in attempting to reconstruct Mathers’ personal history. In short, we don’t really know if Mathers attended that school or not. Maybe he was home schooled. So little is known about his childhood, and also, so much is a mystery about him even as an adult that much of what do know could be considered speculation. With such little information it would be impossible to make a coherent history of Mathers, or even attempt to build up a psychological profile.

Mr. Farrell’s book is more fiction and political talking points than it is factual, and if Mr. Zalewksi thinks that Farrell has presented a factual historical analysis of Mathers, then I wonder how he can make such a statement without perjuring himself. It would seem, as I have pointed out in my review, that Farrell has a hidden agenda for writing two books that disparage and denigrate Mathers. I don’t believe that Mathers was a perfect human being, but I do believe that he deserves honor and respect from us who have used his work to augment our own. It is his work that is being judged, not his person, because so much time has passed that no one is able to build a detailed factual history of him.

Pat continues with the following comment:  

“The reviewer was clearly out of his depth, going by some of the contrasts given. What Nick did in his book was to try and get rid of the fantasized Mathers and let the real one stand up. Now not everyone will agree with all of Nick's comments, but at least he tried to separate fact from fantasy which is a lot more than the reviewer did.”

Well “Golly Gee Wilikers,” I must be out of my depth because I believe that the contribution that Mathers has made to western occultism and the practice of magick is extremely important. If I think that Mathers was important, then I must be either delusional or just plain stupid!

I regret to inform Mr. Zalewski that I am equally as capable of making this kind of judgement as he is, and as a magical practitioner of nearly 40 years, I think that I am not at all out of my depth! I believe that Pat’s condescending attitude towards me is really quite obnoxious, and I feel that I can completely reject it as a bit of character assassination. Nick created a fictionalized cartoon character of Mathers in his book, whereas I judge Mathers based solely on his work. That’s hardly attempting to separate fact from fantasy, and I think that my opinion and attitude towards Mathers is much more realistic. I believe that we can argue about what Mathers was really like for the next century, but it doesn’t change the fact that his work was critically important to many magical practitioners today. The historical Mathers can never really be known because so little information has survived, but his work lives on, and for this we can happily venerate and honor him, just as we do with Beethoven or Mozart, regardless of what they were really like as individuals.

Pat goes to say that he does admire what Mathers produced for the Golden Dawn, albeit simply because he follows those practices and teachings, but he doesn’t enshrine him. In reality, he and Farrell do nothing but disparage and denigrate Mathers, so it hardly seems that there is much truth or sincerity in regards to their supposed “admiration.” I think that it’s obvious that Pat and Nick are really engaged in a serious bit of historical revisionism simply because they want to elevate the Stella Matutina (which is their own lineage) over the A+O; it’s all really as simple as that. 

Anyway, I think that I have made my point, and I believe that my readers will now understand what I mean when I say that I venerate certain spiritual ancestors. In my opinion, taking this attitude towards one’s spiritual and magickal forebears (as well as one’s genetic ancestors) is a testament to a practitioner’s sense of honor, worth and continuity. You don’t have to follow my way of doing things in regards to the ancestors, but if you are a modern pagan, then I think that omitting them from your religious and magical considerations might be a serious mistake.

Frater Barrabbas