Showing posts with label Alexandrian Witchcraft. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alexandrian Witchcraft. Show all posts

Saturday, August 1, 2026

Alexandrian Witchcraft Tradition - Is it a Tradition?

 

I read an article written by Maxine Sanders that was passed on by some Alexandrian Witches in a FaceBook comment. In that article, Maxine seemed to be decrying those who have used the traditional Godhead names and words of power with a certain impunity and a lack of deference to the traditional lore given to them. While I do not approve of people abusing what they have received from their teachers and sponsors in a traditional religious practice, what she said also made me wonder to myself what could possibly be sacred about a tradition that was mostly invented by Gardener and later, Alex Sanders? If it was all invented, contrived and cobbled together by a handful of people where only individual gnosis could be considered as original contributions, then what is actually being abused? If a student goes off on their own path and makes use of what they have been taught and mixes it with other material found in other non-traditional or uncanonical sources, then is that not their own business?

Alexandrians initiate third degree witches to be autonomous, and there is no process where any initiatory degree can be recalled or nullified. Gardnerians, on the other hand, can recall or nullify an initiation through their initiating High Priestess, since even after a Gardnerian Witch is initiated to third degree they are not autonomous. Everyone is held accountable to their upstream lineage elders, but this is not so with Alexandrians. That means that an Alexandrian initiate is only accountable to themselves and possibly, to the community at large, but nothing can be done to unmake an initiate. I know this fact from personal experience, yet overall, we are made to realize that mistakes can be made in choosing individuals for elevation who later turn out to be bad actors in their communities. 

People can be banned from covens or community gatherings, but they can still function as High Priestesses or High Priests whether local community covens and groups like it or not. That also means that an Alexandrian Third degree initiate can also determine what their tradition looks like, what they would practice as liturgical or magical ceremonies and operations, and there is no one who has the authority to countermand them or punish them if they do bad things, thereby making them accountable. That kind of authority doesn’t exist, so if someone invents new things in their version of Alexandrian Witchcraft, or appears to abuse their teachings, then even Maxine Sanders cannot really do anything about it. It is what it is, and autonomy means that an initiate can comport themselves however they see fit. Can we as a community criticize their behavior? Yes, indeed, although it will be a kind of toothless criticism unless a large majority agree, and even then there is nothing to disenfranchise an autonomous third degree initiate.

Then there is the issue that what is taught by a High Priestess or High Priest in an Alexandrian coven is somehow sacred. It was always the case back in the days when I was a witchling that the coven and traditional lore had a provenance that made it sacred and magically powerful. We were told that Witchcraft was the old religion and that various elements of that tradition were passed down from witches going back to antiquity. Of course, that was determined to be an urban myth that accurate historical research showed through the writings of academics and initiated practitioners. Gardner invented the rituals of Wicca and plagiarized many sources, including Crowley’s Gnostic Mass and the Masonic initiations for Entered Apprentice and Fellow Craft. All of the Deity names and words of power were taken from various sources or just invented. Some of the best liturgical rites were penned by Doreen Valiente, and we owe her a great debt of gratitude. 

So, since nothing actually has an ancient provenance and it was invented at some point in the last 75 years or so, is it truly sacred? Oath bound material is given in trust between teacher and student, but it is not sacred because it is only confidential to that specific traditional line. Since the various Books of Shadows have been either published or exist online, there doesn’t seem to be any secrets except those related to an individual’s personal gnosis and to the confidentiality of the members of a coven and what goes on in that group. That is, as far as I am concerned, the extent of oath-bound boundaries and what they should actually cover. Coven histories, membership, covenstead Deities and group developed rites and ceremonies should be covered by an oath of secrecy, or better yet, of confidentiality. Everything else is already known about the various traditions of Witchcraft by the writings of practitioners and folk religion academics. I have maintained in my various articles that the true mysteries of modern Witchcraft and Paganism are what the many individuals experience first hand in their encounters with nature and spirit. 

This brings me, of course, to my own case. I took what my teachers gave me, adding it to my own personal system of magic and developed, over the years, an advanced system of magic. I did this without any permission from my teachers, and seemingly without any thought to keeping the traditional practices intact in my work. I am guilty as charged as to having no awe or even appreciation for the traditional teachings. This is because my quest was not to either preserve or promote the teachings that I had been given, but to continue its development and evolve it to highest extent possible to me. I still have the traditional teachings kept separate and intact, although they are, for all practical purposes, been replaced with the more advanced lore that I developed. That includes the seasonal Sabbats and the Esbats and all liturgical as well as magical operations. In my current practice, there is nothing of the traditional lore that I had received so many decades ago.

I also have organized and published this lore that I have developed, and my task is to eventually publish it all. That makes me the consummate oath-breaker, although since what I have developed is my personal system and so far removed from what I received when I was freshly initiated as to not be covered by any oath that I made when undergoing my training and initiation. Still, what Maxine said in her article would identify me as one of those individuals who have used the traditional lore as a stepping stone to gain greater glory while supposedly denigrating the tradition that I was given in sacred trust by no longer using it. However, I have a simple excuse that makes what I have done acceptable, perhaps even admirable. That is the fact that this advanced lore which I have developed and published was an obligation I assumed years ago, even before I was initiated, to my personal Goddess who urged and inspired me to greater complexity and who directed me to share what I had developed with others similar to myself. So, I can say that I am an oath-breaker, sort of, and that I have blithely passed beyond my traditional lore, and I am a published author, simply because my Goddess obliged me to do these things. In other words, the Goddess made me do it!


Frater Barrabas   

Friday, September 11, 2015

Gardnerian Snark Exposed

Snarky the Snark

Let me start by saying that I am a Witch initiated in the Alexandria tradition. I belong to a group of traditions that have received their foundational praxis from Old Gerry himself, whether through a direct lineage or one that is somewhat circuitous, but no less valid. There are a few fractious sectarians and traditionalists out in the public who think that their particular lineage is better than all of the rest, and sometimes the perpetrators of that conceit just happen to be Gardnerians. For some reason being a member of the BTW brings with it a certain amount of obnoxious conceit, and I have never liked nor agreed with that attitude.

Don’t get me wrong, most of the BTW Witches that I have met are neither conceited nor sectarian in their approach to other Witches or the public at large. Many of these Witches are Gardnerians, and I personally know quite a number of them. However, I have always felt that we are Witches first and foremost, and how we got there is not particularly important.

It’s for this reason that I wouldn’t turn my nose up at anyone who was self-initiated, solitary or completely outside of the BTW venue. There are many paths in the greater religious tradition of Witchcraft, and if adherents remain faithful to their own path over a number of years and seek to learn and experience everything within their power to learn and experience, then I have no problem with them calling themselves Witches. They are sisters and brothers to me because they have practiced Witchcraft long enough so that it isn’t just a superficial fad or a kick.

In my opinion, all followers of this path have to undergo a period of solid practical engagement in order to really consider themselves to be credibly and reliably a Witch. Still, everyone has to start somewhere, and even when there is a local coven of witches open to new members that you might be able to join there is no guarantee that such an affiliation will automatically make you a Witch. The only verifiable way to be a Witch is to practice that faith and craft for a number of years, especially outside of the covenstead if you happen to belong to one. It takes time and a lot of effort to become a Witch, but then so do a lot of other things in life.

What gets under my skin are those who think that their tradition is superior, and that other Witches from other paths and traditions are considered to be just second-class Witches or worse. That kind of “snark” deserves a good kick in the teeth from those who are faithfully practicing their craft whatever their tradition, experiential duration or the nature of their path. I have decided to particularly punt the choppers of one rather blatant and obnoxious writer of an article that recently appeared on the “Gardnerians” blog. You can find that article here. Make certain that you look over the comments as well.

The title of this article is “Belief Does Not Equal Initiation,” which I think is actually quite an accurate statement. However, an initiation is not necessarily one that is given to a member of a coven by the covenstead. There is such a thing as “transformative initiation” that I hold to be more authentic and powerful. So, as I stated previously, it takes time to learn to be a Witch, and in fact, if one takes the approach of learning everything (even if it is at first from books) and then experiencing everything possible, it is very likely that such an ardent student will experience a personal transformative initiation, whether that occurs through the endowment from authorized coven leaders or whether it happens as a part of one’s personal and individual path. What we can’t do is to judge others who are not part of our various traditions by the same measure that we would judge ourselves or our lineage members.

Self-initiation, if it is accompanied at some point by a transformative initiation, is more legitimate (in my opinion) than if someone receives an initiation that has no more dramatic effect than any other mundane social encounter. Believe me when I say that I have met a few individuals with impressive initiatory pedigrees who have had all of the spiritual depth, sensitivity and magical ability of a common potato. An impressive lineage does not equal a powerful and capable Witch, in fact it sometime almost seems to be the opposite. So, belief by itself may not make you a Witch, but then again neither does a supposed proper initiation performed by an experienced coven. It’s really up to the individual to make any kind of initiation a profound and permanent change.

My experience over the decades has shown me that the first initiation degree of my Witchcraft tradition is quite provisional, and that a number of first degree initiates decide at some point to quit their faith, some sooner and some, later. Those who have a real fire in their belly progress to the next degree and take upon themselves a true dedication for the Craft. However, I have known second and even third degree Witches who quit practicing or engaging in their faith after several years. Perhaps the real test is if someone is still practicing after 20 years or more from the time of their initiation. For some reason, individuals who are self-initiated or who are not part of the standard BTW three initiation type tradition seem to have more solidity and steadfastness, perhaps because nothing is given to them and everything they possess was achieved through consistent study and practice.

This brings me back to the snarky article in the Gardnerians blog. I don’t know who wrote this screed or how much experience or knowledge they have, but from the tone and informative content of the article I will have to say that the individual is not particularly knowledgeable about their subject, despite the fact that he or she is an initiate. One the earliest quotes from this article, which caused me to nearly spew my coffee on the video screen, was this particularly juicy statement.

“The sad thing is that these are usually the same people that don’t know that there is one Book of Shadows that is used in Wicca (in forms that vary slightly from coven to coven, dependent on whether you’re a Gardnerian or a Gardnerian-lite, aka Alexandrian, and where you are).”

The comment “one Book of Shadows” has the tone and meaning that it is a holy book where there can only be one, true and authorized version. We have to ask ourselves, is this somehow the “King James” version of the Book of Shadows? Oddly, I get the feeling that the Book of Shadows is being passed off as “sacred writ” when it is only a repository of rituals. Witches are not people of the book! We have no sacred written texts. The mysteries of life and death experienced through nature are our sacred works. The authentic Book of Shadows of the BTW tradition is a spell book that is quite brief, rudimentary, and it is missing quite a lot of information that one would ordinarily find in a book representing the whole praxis of a tradition. Also, it is a fact that the Book of Shadows varies considerably from tradition to tradition (or even from covenstead to convenstead) particularly since it often contains the crib notes, ritual variations and other ancillary rites that a long-practicing coven would need in order to function.

I also found the comment that the Alexandrian tradition of Witchcraft is “Gardnerian Lite” to be quite ridiculous. It’s an obvious sectarian insult that deserves to be called out as such by anyone who happens not to be a Gardnerian. Since many Gardnerians these days seem to be a lot less inclined to work hard-core forms of ritual magick (such as spirit evocations), I might be so bold as to call the Gardnerian tradition “Alexandrian-lite,” but to do so would be just as foolishly inaccurate. If someone is fully engaged with Witchcraft, whatever their tradition, they are not a lightweight compared to anyone else, even if they don't have a so-called prestigious lineage and pedigree.

So, I think that my readers will recognize the droll snarky snark for what it is, and be able to dismiss what this author has said as sectarian, inflammatory and also quite wrong. I have already made my point that being a Gardnerian, Alexandrian, or some other vaunted traditionalist doesn’t automatically confer on one any kind of authenticity.

At the end of this article, the author of this screed declares their final rant against the multitude of non-traditional, solitary and self-initiated (or unwashed non-Gardnerian) Witches, attempting to put them in their place, somewhere far below the august elite of properly prepared and solidly initiated BTW Witches. You can see the quote chosen here, including the all-capital letters that emphasize the shouted message to all who might deem to read it. Unfortunately, that shouted exclamation couldn’t be more wrong!

“Even though spellwork and magic are all about visualization and fiercely reinforcing your visualization with energy and intent [which, I might add, is very narrow definition of magic], THERE IS NO SPELL THAT MAGICALLY INITIATES YOU ALL BY YOURSELF IN YOUR HEAD OR YOUR MOM’S BASEMENT WHILE EVERYONE ELSE IS AT CHURCH. To be initiated, you must be put through the Wiccan initiation rite present in the Book of Shadows.” 

What constituted a Witch in antiquity was that she had in her possession a familiar spirit. The rule of thumb was that if a Witch didn’t have a familiar spirit then they probably weren’t much of a Witch. Books from antiquity (such as the PGM) abound with various rituals and techniques to acquire a familiar spirit, which would basically represent the fact that indeed Witches could be made by their own hand employing the art of magic. I believe that this is even more true in the post-modern era. A person, whether by accident or by deliberation, can trigger within themselves a transformative initiation, and that will make them an initiated Witch, if that is their spiritual and magical path. It also doesn’t matter where this event occurs, and yes, it could even occur in someone’s basement. 

To be an initiate doesn’t mean that you have to be initiated by a coven using the one and true Book of Shadows’ rite of initiation. So, the author of this article just “jumped the shark” to show us that he or she really doesn’t understand what the word “initiation” means or that the power of magic alone can confer an initiation on someone employing it. This is rather surprising to me because of the supposed face of Gardnerian legitimacy that the author presents to the public.

It is my hope that this Gardnerian author gets a good scourging and a passionate biting lecture by his or her elder. What we don’t need in our diverse community is someone representing a faction of Witchcraft and then spouting falsehoods and sanctimonious venom at the other traditions. It isn’t cute, comical nor even informed. It is just another form of bigotry, which is something that we should have a lot less of, particularly from our own co-religionists.

Frater Barrabbas

New Rule #2: If you are going to rant at the public about a particular issue then try to use proper spelling, punctuation, syntax and avoid using all-caps. It’s also a good idea to be certain that what you are ranting about is unequivocally true. Nothing says “stupid” so profoundly as saying something dumb or misspelled while writing it in all-caps.

Monday, September 30, 2013

Further Thoughts About Witchcraft


For many years now I have been a lineage head and an elder of my specific branch and line of Alexandrian witchcraft. This role has given me quite a bit of latitude in developing and establishing a set of witchcraft lore that I felt was true to spirit of what my old coven had been attempting to forge all those years ago when I was under the leadership of Christopher and Alexandria, our coven leaders. Of course, as the story goes, these two individuals left witchcraft and paganism to become leaders of an ersatz fundamentalism and to pen a notorious book (“Wicca: Satan’s Little White Lie” by Bill Schnoebelen), which left me as the defacto head of that initiatic line. Some have commented that such a schism would (or should) have nullified my line altogether, and others have said that what I have as a tradition is of questionable value, considering what my teachers later achieved.

As a result, my line has the dubious distinction of being not only considered fraudulent, but all my practices and opinions are also said to be spurious and automatically disqualified. I have certainly annoyed some individuals with my overly liberal viewpoints and my belief that witchcraft has a long period of change and development ahead of it before it can become a truly deep and profound spiritual path. Those who seek a comfortable orthodoxy and stasis within witchcraft are actually doing that tradition far more harm than good. Thus I am perceived as a gad-fly to traditionalists, or worse, as a borderline apostate.  

However, I have always made the point that we shouldn’t be isolated practitioners and that we should receive, from time to time, some kind of peer review from others who are qualified to make a proper judgement of our work. This kind of objective examination should apply to everything that a witch or pagan believes or does in their practice and within their spiritual discipline. I have found such a one to examine my work as a witch and a lineage holder, and perhaps this opinion, which I intend to share with my readers, will at least silence the pundits who think that I have produced a variant of Alexandrian witchcraft that is spurious, deviant and invalid.

Over the years I had assembled, refined and produced a written document containing not only my biography, but also the specific additions and refinements I found necessary to run a well established coven and lineage. This document is extremely confidential, and I only share it with individuals who are part of my line, which until recently, has been those women and men (via an acting High Priestess) who were initiated into my line. I am proud of what I have been able to assemble, and all of the rituals included have been used and refined over many years. I can’t discuss any of the contents of this document, but if someone were to judge my work and my line, this document would be the source for that examination.

Recently, I have been in communication with an individual who would be considered the actual head of my overall lineage, although he is no longer practicing the craft. I shared my lineage document with him and requested his opinion and input about what I had established as my particular line and its associated practices. I got his permission to share with my readers his judgement on my work, although he has asked to remain anonymous and wished to be referred to by his old craft name “Summanus.” Here is what he had to say about my lineage document.

“I very much enjoyed your account, especially the way in which you’ve fleshed out the bare bones of the original Alexandrian BoS - that has always needed to be done. The very paucity of the initial material (‘is this all there is?’) naturally spurred a great many initiates wanting something more than initiations and short seasonal rites to try their hand at extended development - Alex included - which generally had regrettable results, as they usually left the original Wiccan spirit behind and flew off into ever more complex and idiosyncratic fantasies.

You have done an admirable job of keeping to the script and reinforcing the tropes that attracted people to Wicca in the first place, while offering what appears to be a far more multifaceted ritual system for those initiates that desire that sort of thing. I also found your occult life trajectory interesting and familiar as well - the fixed reality of nearly everyone’s esoteric career are the occurrence of internecine disputes, group founding and dissolution (coagula and solve?), disappointment and re-energizing, but many drop out.. without achieving what you have done - congratulations!”

Summanus 08/08/2013

As you can see by the above comments, my lineage document and work has been validated by someone who has the knowledge, objectivity, and experience to properly judge me. Hopefully, his comments will put to rest any opinions, whether within my line or outside of it, that I have somehow egregiously deviated from the foundation of my tradition. While I have built up an entire system of magic from that foundation, my Book of Shadows and my lineage document are what I pass on to others who initiate into my line. I have faithfully kept all of this material properly accounted for and distinguished from the basic Alexandrian tradition and the elements that were added to it. That is all that I am expected to do, and that knowledge is passed on to those who I choose to initiate (or those who are initiated by High Priestesses in my line). What I don’t do, nor do I advocate for others to do, is to just stop there and merely perform the same rites and the same workings year in and year out. I have a foundational tradition, but what I normally do is well above and beyond it, even though it is the point of origin for everything that I do today.

Wicca vs. Witchcraft

This brings me to my second topic as I think about witchcraft, and that is the troubling split between the craft part of witchcraft and Wicca as a pagan based religion. Witchcraft is a tradition consisting of techniques and methods of working magic as well as an immersion within the modern revival of paganism. Some might link up the magical practices of bush-craft or cunning craft with that of modern witchcraft, and they wouldn’t be wrong to do so. What saddens me is to encounter those who are adherents of Wicca who eschew any form of magic. I was taught that in order to be a witch you had to practice witchcraft, and that meant that you had to know and practice magic. To me, Wicca is just a variety of witchcraft, yet without the practice of magic, it becomes something of a milk-toast or watered down version of a harmless neopagan religion. If you consider yourself a witch, then you need to know and practice witchcraft magic - it’s as simple as that. 

As you might know from what I have written in the past, I believe that a witch is someone who is both an adherent of modern paganism (Wicca) and also a knowledgeable practitioner of ritual magick. I am not talking about ceremonial magick, of course, although that could be part of what one might know or even practice. I am talking about both high and low magic that is based on the foundation of modern paganism and the crafty part of witchcraft. Low magic is aptly represented these days by hoodoo, which I find acceptable as long as the more obvious Christian elements are removed or better yet, replaced with pagan deities. Earthy witchcraft practitioners would include the Gods in their magical workings, even though some forms of Hoodoo don’t involve any religious elements at all, or do so in a very oblique manner. Followers of Wicca have the dispensation to produce charged items and certain sacraments, and these can be powerfully employed in a very effective form of low magic.

Gardner, in his fictional work, “High Magic’s Aid” gives the witch the all important role and function of being the wielder of a consecrated blade, and it is to be assumed from that story that witches could consecrate other items as well to be used in a high magic working. We can assume that opinion is what Gardner held regarding Wicca and high magic. Grimoires from the Renaissance and later periods directed the magician to get his vestments and tools consecrated by an ordained priest, but of course, such an individual would hardly engage in performing such a dubious without asking a lot of questions. A witch, on the other hand (if we use this logic) would have no such qualms, being herself a practitioner of low or earth-based magic. According to the logic presented by Gardner, a witch would be in the perfect position to master high magic as well as perform low magic.

Now, when I differentiate between low and high magic, I make no condescending judgement upon what I define as low or earth-based magic while behaving like a snob and elevating what I call high magic. If a witch is not disposed toward high magic and doesn’t want to engage in conjurations or walking the “other” world, then that is quite acceptable and completely within the domain of what I call witchcraft. Obviously, high magic is a special calling, requiring a certain proclivity for complexity and a more intensive regimen and discipline. Even so, a witch who is an exclusive practitioner of low magic should be able to perform various types of elemental magic (not to be confused with the four elemental creatures) as well as generating a planetary or Deity-blessed talisman. Modern witches should know how to perform these two operations and also how to create and employ sigils. These types of magic are fairly simple and fundamental to any magical practice, high or low. Yet I am amazed at how many adherents of witchcraft don’t know how to perform these tasks, or even worse, feel that such forms of magic are somehow harmful or bad.    

As I have said, if you call yourself a witch, then you should be able to formulate and practice magic as your form of “witchcraft.” Otherwise, you are just a harmless neopagan trying very hard (and failing) to be acceptable to your Christian neighbors. There are a lot of materials available for any witch who aspires to be proficient with witchcraft, and in fact you can find many of those techniques discussed on this blog at various times in the past.

My particular proclivity is to help witches master a form of high ritual magick that is based on the way that they learned to perform magic when going through their initial training. The system of ritual magick that I developed is particularly relevant to either witchcraft or magical forms of neopaganism. The two books that I have written on ritual magick represent a specific system that uses the witchcraft magic circle as its base, and therefore performs all of the operations using a technique of immersion. This means that the witch is not shielded from the various conjurations that he or she might perform because everything that is done is accomplished within the magic circle. What is outside of the circle is part of the mundane or profane world, and yet what is within the circle is part of the domain of spirits, ancestors and deities. All that protects a witch performing these kinds of workings is her own special and individual alignment to her personal Godhead, to which she has assumed and internalized as part of the basic regimen of magical preparation. She performs this work as a temporary representative of the Goddess, and so whatever spirits she evokes will comply with her desires and perceive her as a greater authority over them - and for that moment, so she is.

I have written a number of articles in the past that talk about this methodology, and I would like renew my readers acquaintance with them so that my perspective regarding high ritual magick is made abundantly clear. As witches we are the receivers of the legacy of sorcery and forms of conjuration and necromancy. We are the walkers between worlds, and so we should also be the mediators of Gods, spirits and ancestors. To start off this review of my past articles, let us first examine the difference between ceremonial magic (Golden Dawn) and witchcraft high magic, and you can find that article here. Then we should examine how I define immersion when I talk about witches performing high magic, and you can find that article here. Then I have a couple of articles that examine the basic theories of magic, particularly the energy theory of magic, which is most apt for witchcraft high magical workings, and you can find those two articles here and here. I would also like to share my thoughts about practical magic in an article here, and then examine the nature of pagan deity, here. These articles were written back in 2009 and many of my readers will probably have missed out on the useful material that they contain, since looking for them can be a frustrating hit or miss process.

This is a theme that I am pursuing in my present series of articles, so you should stay aware of my newest postings. I also regret that I haven’t been posting as frequently as I have done in the past, but I have been grappling with my regular job and trying (successfully, so far) to reinvent myself, and I have also been having issues with sleeping again. I will probably have to go to a sleep clinic in the near future to resolve this malady, since it has become obvious to me that getting a good night’s sleep is valuable for having the focus and energy to do lots of other things. Hopefully, I will be able to resolve this problem soon.

Enjoy the review articles and hopefully I will  have more interesting things to share with you in the future.

Frater Barrabbas

Saturday, March 9, 2013

Early Days in BTW Witchcraft - Innovation or Conservation?


Recently, I wrote a blog article that examined whether or not I am relevant, and I looked at how things had changed over the decades, and that in my opinion, traditional witchcraft within the Gardnerian lineages had changed from being innovative to ultra conservative. Someone who goes by the moniker of “MP” somewhat disagreed with what I said, and also pointed out that innovation for the sake of innovation is no more commendable than mindless preservation and rote mimicry.

I would have to agree with some of what MP said, but since I was a witch in the early 1970's, and I was also aware of what was going on in the very late 1960's, I recall a different kind of activity than what MP said regarding the BTW propensity for conservation. As an Alexandrian, I represent a very different kind of witch from the rank and file Gardnerians, especially the American branch, which has it own peculiarities. Here is the article and MP’s comment.

MP wrote in the comments section:

Also, the emphasis has changed from experimentation to the conservative preservation of the core practices and beliefs.

“A number of BTW people I know, who date back to the 70s, as you do, I believe, would disagree that this is a change ... their point is that they have always been focused on orthopraxy, and retention of core practices, and ALSO noting where additions have been made to their praxis, and where it diverges from core.”

When lineages, pedigrees, lineage vouches and staunch, mindless preservation of the lore become far more important than modification, revision and experimentation, then I think that religious conservatism has become the preeminent force in that tradition.

“Again, they would tell you that preservation of the lore, though not mindless preservation, knowing who taught you, and who you taught, are not changes - that they were always there, and that, yes, they are conservative - in that they are conserving, like conservationists, their craft so that it might continue on.

Innovation for the sake of innovation is no more commendable than mindless preservation and rote mimicry.”

Perhaps one of the greatest examples of what was going on during the late sixties in the Witchcraft arena can be summed up by watching a video that has recently been made available. It is called “Legend of the Witches” and I wrote up an article some months ago that examined that film in detail - you can find it here. Needless to say, what the film shows is that Alexander Sanders and his coven at that time were very experimental in their approach to discovering what witchcraft was.

They were not alone, since quite a number of witches were doing the same thing. The reason is very simple, the amount of actual preserved lore in Witchcraft was quite small and for the most part, inadequate for any kind of in-depth practice. The Book of Shadows was not much more than an outline of many of the liturgical rituals (basic coven rites, the Esbat, initiations and the eight Sabbats), but it lacked any kind of theology or specifically, magical rites. Not every tradition used or followed the witches’ law, also known as the “Ardanes,” so there wasn’t really much depth to the basic Book of Shadows.

Typically, a practicing witch had to research and re-write many of the rituals, including writing in the specific coven-based or tradition-based variations. An initiated witch had her Book of Shadows and some lineage specific lore, but the rest of her practice was culled from many different sources. Becoming a witch wasn’t the end but literally the beginning of a master research effort, and that also consisted of a lot of experimentation. If the witchcraft tradition had been a complete and comprehensive system of religion and magic, then very few individuals would have had any need to incorporate other sources. In fact, it was quite incomplete, and in my opinion, it still is. This is one of the reasons why some witches have referred to themselves as being the “people of the library” instead of the “people of the book,” like their Christian and Jewish counterparts.  

I can remember that one thing that characterized my coven experience is that we had to research and build up our own Sabbat rites from the skeleton structures found in the Book of Shadows. We discovered a rich source of lore in British and European Folk traditions, and in many cases, had to write our own Sabbat songs, food recipes, and even music and dances - all of this was missing from the Book of Shadows. We also discovered that the full moons were characterized by the seasons as well as by astrology, and this moon lore was collected and became the foundation for the Esbat. In the BoSh there is no distinction of the different seasonal full moons, there’s just the outline for an Esbat rite, including the various Charges of the Goddess, some of which had been added by Doreen Valiente but seldom credited to her.

When it came down to magical workings, there was also very little in the way of techniques and recipes. Many Gardnerians and Alexandrians embraced the book Aradia, Gospel of the Witches and the Mabinogian, not to mention many other sources, like the Key of Solomon, as representations of additional lore. To master the techniques of meditation and contemplation, we used Eastern techniques, since there wasn’t any traditional techniques elucidated in the Book of Shadows, other than dancing the circle dance. In fact, there wasn’t any directions for assuming a basic trance, but there was a rite used to gain altered states through binding and scourging - although few were a fan of that working.

I could easily point out many other important elements that were missing from either the BoSh or the lineage based lore. During the sixties and seventies, we few members of the BTW were inventing the various traditions that are now being assiduously conserved. I should state that I know all of this first hand and that it is true, because I was there during that time. I lived through it, so I should know what things were like back then.

In the many years that I have been a witch who also practices high magick, I have extended my knowledge and lore of liturgical withcraft to include many different and diverse rituals and practices that were never a part of my original teachings. In fact, I have used the foundation of witchcraft to build what I consider to be a hybrid system of high magick, which is completely harmonious to witchcraft practices and beliefs. I could never have gotten this far with my work if I had been more interested in preserving and perfecting merely what I had been given by my elders. This is especially true since my elders had invented quite a lot of their lore as well, and while I dutifully noted all of this down, I also ceaselessly engaged in researching, building and developing my own new lore. This process continues unabated to this day, and I can say that I am within a decade or so of building a comprehensive system of witchcraft-based high magick. I also believe that this was one of Gardner’s objectives, and he seems to allude to it in his fictional work “High Magic’s Aid.” In that book, ceremonial magic is mixed with pagan witchcraft to produce a methodology that is greater than both traditions. I took that as my guide, and I have proceeded on that pathway ever since.

So, to respond to MP’s statement that conservation was happening at the very beginning of the craft, I believe that this is quite misleading. While it is true that we had to copy our BoSh exactly as the master copy owned by the High Priestess and Priest and we had to learn the basic liturgical lore in order to be elevated to the priesthood ourselves, we understood that we also had begun a spiritual and magical journey that was unprecedented - what we received and learned was just the beginning. We all felt that we were under a powerful obligation to expand our knowledge and add many more pages to our BoSh and lineage lore. Our purpose was to rediscover antique witchcraft and paganism in our own practices, and I believe that process is still mutating and evolving today. For those who believe that their lore is perfected and complete and that the only task that they should and must engage in is to preserve their lore in it’s purest expression, I can only shake my head at their obvious hubris and narrow-mindedness.

Modern Witchcraft is a very young and new religion, and as Ronald Hutton has stated in regards to British Witchcraft, there isn’t likely to be any vestiges of the Old Religion to be found in the historical records. What we have today was cobbled together from various sources a mere sixty years ago. Therefore, we must invent, create, and experiment in order to forge a full and complete tradition. Until that day comes, preservation is nothing more than an historical exercise. It has its value, but the work of creating a fuller and more complete tradition is much more important in my opinion. If the work is halted for any reason or any excuse, then the tradition will begin to die and that death will happen all the more rapidly since Wicca is still in the process of growing and becoming a mature religious tradition.

Now if that seems to be invention and innovation for the mere sake of doing something new and different, then so be it! It is what was done in the sixties and seventies, and there is now more than enough reason to continue this process of development. It is also the unwritten rule that I have followed all of these years, much to my profit and self-mastery.

Frater Barrabbas

Saturday, July 28, 2012

Advanced Alexandrian Witchcraft - A Wiccan Golden Dawn


I have recently wrote an article stating my opinion that Alex Sanders was a modern day Pagan Magus. I demonstrated, by carefully examining an old documentary, that he was clearly engaged in an experimental approach to witchcraft and magick. He was employing both modern and traditional elements in the crafting his variation of Wicca, but the traditional elements were not part of an ancient pagan tradition. That tradition was taken from a Gardnerian Book of Shadows, but also included the Key of Solomon and the Lemegeton, and it has been shown that most of the Book of Shadows was derived from other various sources (almost all of them modern and accessible to Gerald B. Gardner).

In many ways, Alex was following the footsteps of Old Gerald himself, by incorporating the whole corpus of western occultism into forging a new tradition. What many may not realize is that Alex Sanders did have a goal and a vision for his work, and that he was deliberately attempting to forge a new tradition of pagan religion and magick. He was only partially successful, since he lacked the ability to write and communicate his ideas to a larger audience. Still, as an initiate of the Alexandrian tradition of witchcraft, I was made aware of certain rumors and ideas that had supposedly filtered down from Alex himself, although I have never been able to verify or prove that to be true.

I would like to use this forum to discuss some of those things that I heard, and I believe that I can do this without breaking any of my initiatic oaths, since what was communicated to me was not part of the actual corpus of traditional rites or specific identifying myths and Godnames. I feel that I can discuss something that I had found momentous, even if it didn’t really amount to much more than innuendo and speculation. Still. I found all of that speculation to be quite fascinating and inspiring.

Alexandrians are actually Gardnerians with an additional emphasis on ritual and ceremonial magick, which I believe is what Gardner would have called “High Magic.” Most of the Book of Shadows, its liturgies and other materials, are nearly identical for both Gardnerians and Alexandrians. Some poetic versions of specific liturgical rites are missing, and so is the “Ardanes”, or the Laws of Witchcraft. Both traditions practice their rites skyclad, perform the Great Rite and the Draw, and celebrate a communion rite of cakes and wine. Aradia, the Gospel of the Witches is considered one of a few important sacred books, and the outer court Godhead names of Diana and Aradia are considered important.

It would also appear, if one were to really examine the works of Gerald B. Gardner, that the proclivity for high magic was actually established first by him, even though many Gardnerians in the present time don’t consider it to be important. In many ways the curious tradition of witchcraft as set down by Gardner seems to be more a variant of Italian Stregharia than a proper form of British Witchcraft. Sacral nudity and an emphasis on the Great Rite would seem to be particular to Gardnerian and Alexandrian witchcraft, but they don’t seem to be as important to other British based traditions of Witchcraft which don’t follow Gardner’s foundational praxis. I have often wondered about this stark difference, and I suspect that there might be more to the coincidental similarities between Strega and Gardnerian Witchcraft than one might think.

Even so, where Alexandrian and Gardnerian traditions depart from each other is the obvious incorporation of the Golden Dawn corpus of the Adeptus Minor. It would seem that some of the Alexandrians were required to learn and master the Golden Dawn magical rituals, although this is no longer emphasized. I know that this was required of me in order to receive my second degree initiation, and it may have an important part of the tradition back in the 1970's. I had to take and either perfectly memorize or rewrite variations of the six most basic rituals taught in the four elemental degrees of the Golden Dawn, and particularly, the rituals taught in the beginning Adept grade. I have discussed these six rituals previously, but let me list them here again so that my readers will fully understand what I am talking about.

1. Lesser Banishing and Invoking Ritual of the Pentagram
2. Qabalistic Cross
3. Middle Pillar
4. Superior Pentagram Ritual
5. Lesser and Superior Hexagram Ritual
6. Rose Cross Ritual

What we were taught is how these rituals were to be deployed, but they were often practiced as a distinct corpus from the battery of rituals found in the Book of Shadows. In other words, in order to employ the above rituals in the work of elemental and planetary magic, an Alexandrian witch would have to either omit the basic circle consecration rite, or employ a variation of the Opening and Closing of the Watchtower ritual. It would seem in retrospect that the Golden Dawn ritual of the Watchtower was used by Gerald Gardner to formulate the circle consecration rite, although that rite, as found in the Book of Shadows, is a poor facsimile of the more rigorous and in-depth Golden Dawn Watchtower ritual.

In the recent past, I have had a few experts in the Golden Dawn tradition note the imperfections and erroneous assumptions to be found in the Wiccan circle consecration rite. Despite these imperfections, the ritual appears to work as it was originally conceived. Instead of being used to fashion a domain of warding and protection, it seems to operate as a way of establishing a circle boundary between the sacred inner world of the Gods and the profane outer world of humanity. This is quite a different purpose than what is promoted in the Golden Dawn Watchtower rite, and for some odd reason it seems more in accordance with the ancient pagan practices of establishing and keeping a marked boundary between the sacred ground of the temple precincts and the rest of country.

As I have also stated previously, because of the way that the Wiccan circle consecration rite was written (as opposed to the Golden Dawn Watchtower rite), the focus of the magick performed within the charged circle produced by that rite is one of immersion. Unlike the pristine environment of the Golden Dawn Watchtower rite, the Wiccan circle consecration rite has no boundaries or protections against anything that is invoked or evoked within that magick circle complex. The only thing protecting the erstwhile Witch is the obligatory godhead assumption that he or she performs before engaging in the practical work as a part of the individual repertoire of pagan ritual magick.

Because the foundation of Witchcraft magick is so different than what is practiced in western ceremonial magick, I was forced into radically rewriting the above Golden Dawn rituals so that they formed a completely seamless and related system of magick. I have known other practitioners who have either adjusted or differentiated their Wiccan magical foundation in order to practice Golden Dawn magick. Yet for whatever reason, I didn’t ever go through that process, so I never really mastered the Golden Dawn system of magick as it is presented in books and practiced in various Golden Dawn groups. For this reason, I went in a completely different direction, and chose to mutate the basic Golden Dawn rites into a formulation that was amendable to a corpus of Witchcraft magick.

However, the most important device that I incorporated into my newly devised system of magick was the Rose Ankh. If the Rose Cross is the preeminent symbol of the Golden Dawn, then the Rose Ankh would be its polarized opposite. Since I was in the habit of working with polarities as the essential foundation of my magick, then each ritual structure and device would have its equal opposite. Thus, to the Cone of Power (reconfigured into the Pyramid of Power) would be the Spiral Vortex; the Western Gateway of the Underworld would be polarized by the Eastern Gateway of Ascension; the Pentagram would have as its opposite, the Septagram; and the Rose Cross would have the Rose Ankh as its opposite. In each of these situations, a device or a ritual structure could use an obverse and inverted version of itself, such as an inverted pentagram or an inverted Rose Ankh (defined as a special symbol analogous to the regal orb surmounted by a cross). All of these opposites and inversions represent a magical toolkit that uses polarity as its greatest expression of power, and of course, ecstasy is the achievement when polarities are joined together (in emulation of the One).

My first exposure to the Rose Ankh was while I was going through the grades of Alexandrian witchcraft. What I was told by my teachers (and thereby taken with a grain of salt) was that Alex Sanders had as his ultimate goal to produce a system of magick that was analogous to the Golden Dawn. In fact it would have been a Wiccan Golden Dawn whose emphasis would have been on the feminine archetype and the Great Goddess. I was even given a copy of a special Rose Ankh device, which was a close analogue to the Golden Dawn Rose Cross device, when I achieved the third degree. While I am unable to share any of the specifics of that Rose Ankh device, the creative impetus for this new formulation obviously went along with Alex Sander’s vision of a re-established Pagan and Wiccan Golden Dawn. Of course, I found that by drawing the device of the Rose Ankh in the air, it produced a powerful magnetic energy, which is the opposite of what the drawn Rose Cross would produce. Adding the ritual structure of the spiral vortex to the placement of five Rose Ankh devices produces what I have called an invoking vortex, which is a powerful magnetic energy container that can strongly attract and hold spirits within it.

Another interesting bit of speculation has to do with that mysterious initiation rite in Alexandrian Witchcraft known as the Fourth Degree. While most of the Gardnerian based traditions of Witchcraft have only three degrees (the first two were loosely modeled on the Masonic initiations for Entered Apprentice and Fellow Craft, and the third was more an honorific), the Alexandrians promoted the possibility of a fourth degree. There is plenty of speculation about the nature of this initiation, and I have even found where a few individuals on the internet have said that the Garnderian tradition used the 4th degree initiation of the O.T.O. for expanding its degree system, and the Alexandrians used the Adeptus Minor initiation of the Golden Dawn. I have found no precedence for this speculation in any of my own personal Alexandrian lore, but I can at least say that there is a skeleton rite for this initiation in the Alexandrian Book of Shadows, which might also be found in some versions of the Gardnerian Book of Shadows. That skeleton rite has only a basic structure and the mysteries that might have been presented within it are completely omitted, as if to say that they were too sacred to even put in a secret book of spells and liturgy.

Since the Gardnerian system of initiation has only two ordeals and the Great Rite is an honorific, then it would seem that the systems of initiation as found in Masonry, the Golden Dawn and the O.T.O., which have at least three ordeals, are neither contiguous nor comparable to the initiation of Traditional Witchcraft. Yet the outdoor initiation ordeal of the Four Elements which seems to be a specialized trope used by Alex Sanders and his group might be a clue to an ordeal that incorporated the four elemental degrees into the tradition of Witchcraft. This might have been used to prepare an initiate (and not a novice) for the vaunted higher degrees believed to be practiced or conceptualized in the Alexandrian tradition of Witchcraft. As you can see, there are some compelling clues that point to a ceremonial magickal initiatory system in the Alexandrian tradition, but there appears to be little in the way of any hard evidence or actual rites being passed down the various lines (as far as I know).       

In many ways these clues represent a potential system and methodology, but in the end, the Alexandrian tradition over time dropped the emphasis on high magick and became fairly analogous to the Gardnerian tradition. There was even a certain amount of sharing and reconstituting of the traditional lore between both traditions, and many of the new holders of the Alexandrian traditional lines of initiation began to act as conservative preservers of their tradition, and that means that they had become inimical to any kind of change in their lore, supposedly just like their Gardnerian sisters and brothers.

During the last decade there has been a powerful movement of establishing the legitimacy of the various initiatory lineages, and that each and every third degree initiate had to have a proper vouch of some kind in order to be considered a legitimate witch. This obsession with legitimacy is actually quite new to the Alexandrian tradition, and in fact it has completely replaced the fascination and zeal that the tradition once had for experimentation and the discovering of new occult frontiers. I have found this change to be quite disappointing, since unlike some of my fellow practitioners who survived into the 21st century, I took the hints of a merged system of Witchcraft and Pagan Ritual Magick quite seriously. In fact, where Alex Sanders appears to have never realized his ideal of a Wiccan Golden Dawn, and he went on to explore other areas altogether different, I continued to pursue this ideal and I have realized it in the system and methodology of ritual magick that I employ today.

Although what I have developed and produced is decidedly unlike the Golden Dawn in its various rituals, practices and beliefs, I have instead produced a specific system and tradition of magick that has taken many of these rites and practices and brought them into the context of the foundation of traditional Witchcraft. In the rites and ordeals of the Order of the Gnostic Star, you will find that the basic system of Witchcraft magic has been vastly extended and advanced into a system of high magick that has a seamless continuity from the most basic system of Witchcraft and Pagan magick. So it would seem that where Alex Sander’s dream was never realized by himself, in fact it was realized in the system of magick that I have given birth to over the many decades since. I could, therefore, claim to have developed and established a Wiccan Golden Dawn, but I think that I will instead call it by what it has actually become, which is a system of Wiccan and Pagan ritual magick as opposed to ceremonial magick.

Frater Barrabbas

Saturday, July 7, 2012

Alex Sanders - A Pagan Magus


Recently, I ordered a copy of what had once been a rare British film that had been produced and released in 1969. That film was a documentary with the curious title of “Legend of the Witches,” which was produced by an obscure British film company (Border Films Ltd.) and written and directed by Malcolm Leigh. The modern witches depicted in this hour and a half black and white documentary were from the primary coven run by Alex and Maxine Sanders. While it’s not unusual today to find video of witches on U-Tube, at that time it would have been quite astonishing for a practicing witch coven to allow a film crew to document actual witchcraft practices. However, considering the fact that Alex Sanders already had a notorious reputation as something of a gratuitous public promoter of witchcraft, such a revealing film is somewhat less amazing than it might seem. In fact, you could say that Alex Sanders was one of the original “Glam Witches” of the 1960's.

While there were a few other witches who had become publically known at that time (such as Sibyl Leek, Lady Sheba or Louise Hubner), an actual filming of witches practicing their craft would have been completely unthinkable. Witches were sworn to secrecy, and their rites, along with their Book of Shadows, were held as an inviolable oath-bound lore known only to initiates. Yet here was Alex Sanders allowing a crew of outsiders to film his workings! It should not be too surprising that Alex was disparaged from the beginning when he started to open up to the British press and perform public ceremonies. Alex seemed to love the notoriety that such actions gained for him, and that included the bad press as well as the vilification he received from the largely British Gardnerian Witchcraft community. He was perceived by other witches as a public exhibitionist, thief and possible oath-breaker, and they quickly decided to dispute his right to be considered a legitimate member of their community. It’s likely that Patricia Crowther and some other British Gardnerian witches began their program against Alex after he had gone too far with his public religious immodesty. Unlike today, in the late 60's there were very few traditions and covens for individuals to engage with, and in the U.S., there were only a few Gardnerian covens overall, and these were located on the East Coast. (Of course, there was also the Feri tradition fully formed by that time on the West coast.)

The tenor of this documentary reminded me of some excruciatingly boring and pedantic elementary school film about nature, the kind that nearly everyone has been subjected to at some point. The exception was that this film had plenty of strange oddities, weird music, psychedelic effects and nude bodies to make it quite provocative and alluring. The subject matter and the title were both highly sensational at the time, so it would have been a notorious film had it been widely released. Now it’s a relic of a very important period in the evolution of practical witchcraft, where the specific Alexandrian form of the Craft was being developed in what appears to be a highly creative and fluid environment.

When witchcraft was being pursued and promoted back in the 1950's and 60's, there was little actual historically verified lore. Most of what was practiced as witchcraft was derived from other sources (and this practice has continued into the present times). For Alex Sanders and his coven, this meant assembling a wide spectrum of various traditional practices and mixing them with very modern affectations to produce a purely experimental methodology. In other words, he was attempting to see what worked and what didn’t work, developing the former and discarding the latter. In this way, Alex Sanders and his coven were engaging in a task that is analogous to what I have presented here in this blog. As the leader of this group, one could correctly claim that Alex Sanders was functioning as a Pagan Magus, and his experiments and discoveries became the basis of a whole new tradition of witchcraft.

It would seem that Alex wasn’t interested in just modestly performing the various sparse rituals as would have been found in the Gardnerian Book of Shadows, but instead he sought to fill out and spice up his tradition with whatever stimulated his very creative imagination. This film truly captures Alex and his coven in the middle of that creative process and it is fascinating to observe this phenomenon as it was happening, although captured on film. Alex didn’t just throw together a bunch of outlier ceremonies to titillate the gratuitous public hunger for occult voyeurism. He actually and sincerely presented himself and his coven engaged in their religious and magical work as a true representation of what they believed and did in those days. What we have in this film is a valuable time capsule, a kind of snapshot of modern witchcraft in the process of evolving and mutating into the many traditions and variations that exist today. Others would later go through this very process of developing and determining their spiritual lore and personal praxis, and from that would occur the many lineages of the Witchcraft movement. (I, myself, have and continue to go through this very same process.)

The movie starts out discussing the myth of Diana, the Moon Goddess, and Lucifer, the Sun God, who became the dual-theological pair known by various names today. It is a rendition of the creation myth that passes as common (and even public) lore today, but then it was obscure and little known. This creation myth was given an excellent backdrop in the film, consisting of a natural setting somewhere in the coastal area of England, with the full moon illuminating a lovely forest setting. The movie promotes the idea that witchcraft is a natural religion founded on the belief that nature itself is the source of all that is sacred, which is life itself. While the movie talks about the Goddess and God pair named as Diana and Lucifer, the actual names that I received through my Alexandrian initiation were quite different, and perhaps here is where the public was given outer-court names instead of the actual names used within the covenstead. The use of the name Lucifer is understandable and perhaps it even has some traditional weight, but it has become something of a embarrassment for witches today, so it is seldom used now.

Here we see the coven consecrating a circle in an outdoor grove with a central fire. All are nude except the High Priestess and High Priest. While Maxine was wearing a filmy bit of wrap-around sarong that left little to the imagination, Alex was wearing a full robe and cincture, looking something like a hooded monk. Alex often said that he wore a robe to distinguish himself as the coven’s priest, and if it weren’t for the fact that there are some pictures of him skyclad (like everyone else), one might think that he was squeamish about being nude in front of others. The purpose for this gathering is quickly explained, for it is an initiation circle. 

A young man, whose name is given as Michael, is led and coaxed blindfolded through a difficult terrain to demonstrate his worthiness to become a witch. He has to pass bravely through the four elements depicted as a series of ordeals. The first is water, where he crosses a stream and then has his head briefly dunked into the flowing water by his guide. He has to pass difficult terrain and to literally at times, feel his way through the obstacles. He has to jump down from a short outcropping of rock and trust that he will land safely (air), he passes through a cave and overcomes his fear of being lost or entombed (earth), and finally, he crosses what seems like a wall of flame (torches) to safely enter the coven circle, only to be subjected to the point of a ceremonial sword. With a kiss, he is brought into the circle, bound by cords and then presented to the four directions. He is charged and consecrated, then the blindfold is removed and he is presented the craft tools. As the light of dawn begins to wax, the witches (with their bare feet) smother the fire with dirt and obliterate any signs of their work.

Then the film presents the history of witchcraft, which is based on what craft leaders believed at that time. As yet, there was no Ronald Hutton or Philip Heselton, so the history of the craft took on a rather mythic and overly glorified revisionism. The history of magical practices and beliefs may have had a direct line extending from pagan antiquity to the present, but as far as any evidence of a religious movement, little has been found to support this belief, at least in the UK. Still, what was presented as a history of witchcraft was based more on the lurid fear and prosecution of diabolism, particularly as it occurred during the years of the reformation.

Witchcraft PR, beginning with Gardner himself, had pretty much accepted the theories and explanations put forth by Margarete Murray, but these have been more or less rejected by present-day historians. Even so, it is likely that some of Murray’s theories may turn out to be correct in regards to the cunning folk and their origins. The basic tropes of the burning times, the overlaying of Christian beliefs and practices upon a pagan foundation, and the association of a religious witchcraft with Robin Hood and maid Marian, William the Conqueror, Joan of Arc, and the origins of the Knights of the Garter are the basic staples of this history. This presentation is unfortunately now more fancy than fact, but still, other future developments might shift things in a somewhat different direction.


Another interesting vignette in the film is where Alex and his coven form, charge and give life to a fithfath, or poppet. The movie segues from the terrible burning times to the supposed fact that witches had the knowledge and power to strike back at their persecutors. Here we see the modern coven performing the various steps of creating a fithfath out of bees wax for the purported use of projecting a death spell. Whatever the real reason for creating the fithfath, it is obviously being used to harm someone instead of heal, which would have been untypical of a later Alexandrian coven. This gathering is indoors, conducted within a built up temple complex used for both ceremonial and witchcraft magick. There is a witchcraft circle (drawn from ceremonial themes) as well as a goetic triangle, and each are used for some aspect of the working. Each step of the process of creating this fithfath is carefully depicted, almost as if it were to be used in a scholastic test later on.

The fithfath is hollowed out with a long nail from the head down through spine and then on to the two legs. Then bits of metals, herbs and semen are inserted into the aperture, and finally it is sealed up. What follows is the performance of a sympathetic birthing process, where the High Priestess lies within the circle in a pose that is known as the pentagram form. She holds in her teeth a charged cord, which is placed down her body and wrapped around the fithfath that is set between her legs, like an umbilical cord. The High Priest wraps the other end of the cord around his waist, and he then lays upon the High Priestess in a simulacrum of the Great Rite. Once the combined powers of these two celebrants is fully realized within the fithfath, it is believed to have been given life, much as the first human pair were given birth by the Goddess and the God. Once this is done, the fithfath is ritually drowned by the person who is acting as the link for the actual victim, thereby setting up the potential for an actual drowning of the victim. The killing of the fithfath is done in a special basin held over the goetic triangle, as if to somehow utilize its demonic association.

A startling scene change then presents to the viewer, in graphic detail, all of the strange and lurid contents of the Boscastle, Cornwall, Museum of Witchcraft, owned and operated by Cecil Williams (now deceased). What is focused on in this film vignette are a series of gruesome images of the tools and fetishes that were obviously used to inflict pain, sickness and death on various unknown victims. This trope is pursued relentlessly, including the repeated word “hate” as each article in the black magic collection is perused. I don’t know why this theme was pushed, except perhaps to justify the use of black magic by witches. Little is discussed about the justification required for such work, and it is more likely that these articles were produced by either supposedly good Christians or employed cunning folk rather than witches.

What these scenes appear to promote is that modern witchcraft (like its older ancestor) was not above working this kind of magic when it was called for. That witches could do good as well as harm if they so desired. This is completely contrary to what Gerald B. Gardner publically stated as well as what he told his initiates. It would seem that Alex was helping to promote the idea that witchcraft had no moral foundation, and that the practice of supposedly “white” magic went hand and hand with the practice of “black” magic. Witches were therefore to be perceived as individuals who determined their own fate, and could, if provoked, do harm to others as part of their craft. You can see that this particular perspective is quite different than what is popularly spoken of today as the tenets of the religion of Wicca. In Alex’s version of witchcraft, there was no Wiccan Rede, and this is likely to be more an accurate portrayal of real witchcraft than what passes for a white-washed rendition of the Craft today.

This leads the viewer to the next scene, which is where Alex and his coven supposedly perform a Black Mass. We see a darkened indoor temple with a witchcraft circle in the center, but there is an altar set before a large forward leaning crucifix on the far end. Alex Sanders is fully clothed in what appears to be opulent church vestments. He is assisted by an acolyte properly dressed in choir robes and a surplice. Alex goes through the movements of performing a mass, invoking the Christ on the cross as Lucifer, and presenting incense, lustral water and the entwined flowers of the lily and the rose. Then he is assisted in removing the outer covering of his vestments, leaving him dressed in his under-robe, called an alb.

Maxine is sitting off to one side of the temple, scantily clad, but then she is brought before Alex, who helps her to sit on the altar, giving her salutatious kisses and helping her to disrobe, while she reclines fully upon the altar. A “scarlet” woman brings a chalice of wine and a host, and the consecration is performed upon the naked body of the High Priestess as Diana, representing the consort of the Dying God, Lucifer. The chalice of wine is placed between her legs, and the host is blessed and kissed by both the Priest and Priestess. Then Alex, as the celebrant, takes his athame and pierces the host, and then he dips it into chalice of wine. He then takes the host, still pierced by the athame, and tosses both into the center of the witches circle, to be followed by the entwined lily and rose. He then assisted Maxine to rise and leave the altar, taking her in hand to the witches circle where they both sit. They are joined in the circle by the scarlet woman, now completely nude, who brings the chalice of consecrated wine. The two women help to divest Alex of his alb and then they share in the wine and host. We are told they are then to perform the Great Rite as a threesome, but of course, the scene ends before that act can be consummated.

Mixing the rites of the Mass with the works of magic and witchcraft is not a new theme in today’s world, and it is interesting that Alex experimented with this kind of magick. While I would not necessarily call it a Black Mass because the sacraments or tools aren’t actually desecrated, such a supposed parody of a holy rite would by itself be offensive to many. Witches today might wonder at why such a ritual was performed in the first place, and then, captured on film. Some might consider that it was done to merely to scandalize the public, and that it wasn’t an actual exploratory working.

Still, this rite was performed more than once by Alex, and there are even some colored photos of him dressed with these very same robes. Was there something of key importance that made Alex overlay his witchcraft practices upon a Christian ritual? Did he make this concoction of creeds part of his particular witchcraft tradition? I can’t answer these questions, but I can state that such mixed workings were not uncommon in the early Alexandrian tradition. I can also say that I myself not only engaged in this kind of magick, but that I even managed to receive both an ordination and a consecration in the Old Catholic church. What I would do differently than the depiction of this rite would be to omit the large Crucifix before the altar. I would also omit tossing the host and athame into the circle, and of course, I would avoid the mental overlay of witchcraft upon the Christian symbols and practices. To Alex, there was no difference between Christianity and its holy symbols, and the symbology of Witchcraft as he understood it. However, I and many other Witches and Pagans do make a distinction between our faith, and the faith of other creeds. I respect other religions, so I would ensure that what I did was quite distinct from what others might do using an analogous liturgy.

Alex was doing something that he thought was important and relevant in his time, but it is also relevant in our present time. This is because I, too, make use of reworked and rewritten pagan versions of the Mass liturgy that are specifically performed for magical uses and ritual empowerment. I would suspect that Alex was experimenting with the same kind of ritual working, done for a similar purpose. When I did my experimenting many years ago, there was already a precedent for this kind of work, but it is likely that Alex was something of a pioneer when he did it. There are a number of things that I can’t talk about in regards to this kind of working, but I have determined for myself that it is a valid use and employment of the Mass rite.

The final scene in this documentary concerns itself with the affects of both sound and light on the mind. There are implications that altered states of consciousness, as produced by modern devices and methods, were something that modern witches made use of as a part of their regimen of tools and techniques. In the movie we see a science lab with various tools that produce unusual optical effects, such as the whirling spiral or the strobe light. Perhaps a bit too much time is spent viewing this whirling spiral (I found myself looking away from it), as if to put the viewer into some kind of trance state. Then we see another glimpse of the witch coven putting out the fire in the outdoor grove with their feet, and seemingly not being burned by this act. This seems to indicate that witches perform their rites in some kind of trance state that allows them to deal with the elements and not be hurt by them.

Then the scene shifts again, and we are once more in the indoor Witch temple, and this time the object of the working is to place a person in a deep trance so that he might peer into the future, a form of active divination called skrying. In a dimly lit temple, a whirling spiral image is projected on one wall. We are told that this operation will be employing a combination of old and new techniques, thereby incorporating ancient witchcraft with modern technology to accomplish the desired end. I would also consider that such a mixture of old and new techniques is a prominent feature of the post modern age. Such a mixed regimen represents the creative foundation of what a Pagan Magus would incorporate in the modern world.

The skrying subject, in this case a robed male witch who is sitting in a cloth circle, is subjected to the hypnotic powers of the whirling spiral and an intermittent strobe light. He is assisted to disrobe, his arms and ankles bound with cords, and then he kneels in front of a simple altar. We see that lying before this altar is an elaborately painted octagram floor piece, and upon it, a pulsating strobe light. The skryer is lightly scourged with a whip while kneeling, and then the chief celebrant, dressed in a robe and with the head of a goat, assists the skryer by completely wrapping him up in the cloth circle. He then unwraps him after a brief period. The skryer is then helped to move forward to the altar, where he makes an obeisance to the God Lucifer. He is given a drink from the chalice, and then helped to stare deeply into the strobe light as all of the candle lights are extinguished. Only the strobe light is intermittently pulsating its bright beam of light and all else is completely dark. 

Then suddenly a sun mirror is revealed, with a brilliant light reflecting off of its surface, dazzling ones eyes with its light. At that moment in the film, the scene melts into the image of the dawning sun appearing through clouds and overlooking the sea. It is the same coastal area shown in previous scenes, with a naked man standing on a rock before the surging tide. We are told by the narrator that the path of Witchcraft is completely beyond all life and death, as if the vision instilled by the skryer has been revealed to be this pristine image of the dawning light, greeted by the naked worshiper.

While this final rite was likely staged, since not enough time was taken at each step to ensure that the trance effects were wholly realized, it did demonstrate the technique used to produce a profound trance state where a clairvoyant vision might be received. The process of trance induction used a combination of light and music to aid the skryer in acquiring that state, and so too, did the disrobing, binding, scourging, cloaking and uncloaking. One might assume that there was more in the chalice than wine, but that remained unstated. A true skrying effort would have taken at least an hour or two to complete, but as this was a short documentary, and the last scene, it was merely a demonstration of what might have actually been done. The fake looking goat head mask that Alex was wearing seems almost ludicrous today, but perhaps it represented that he was operating under a godhead assumption, adding the power of the Deity to the overall working.

This entire documentary showed that the Witchcraft practiced in 1969 was highly experimental and creatively motivated. Modern and traditional methods were seamlessly incorporated to produce the most effective results. Lore and liturgy were appropriated from other traditions, but the essence of what was done was still within the pure spirit of the original creed of modern pagan witchcraft. Since the lore of this tradition was sparse and likely from questionable sources, replacement lore was developed and used to fill out that tradition so that it had a more complete and comprehensive praxis. This is not any different than what others later did with their original but sparse traditions, particularly those that evolved into the many forms of modern Paganism and Witchcraft today. Gaps in the lore and supposedly lost methodologies required the incorporation of new perspectives, regardless of their source.

The final result was a wholly new system and praxis, incorporating both traditional and new elements. While this documentary is quite dated and obviously promoting myths and self-serving beliefs instead of historically verified facts, the resultant creativity was neither compromised nor made spurious by this association. By viewing the film, we get to see Alex engaging in a very creative approach to his beliefs and practices. He was not yet an Alexandrian witch, but he had already broken away from those who represented the witchcraft orthodoxy of the time. Alex Sanders was in the process of creating a new tradition and praxis by merely allowing his creative imagination to have the opportunity to freely associate ideas, to experiment and explore new ground.

Perhaps the most interesting thing about this obscure documentary is that it shows us all how to be a Pagan Magus, by showing the experiments and exploits of one of the better known pagan magi of our time. Alex Sanders passed away in 1988, but he left behind him a considerable legacy, even though he never wrote or published any of his thoughts, beliefs or practices. Instead, he used the media to document what he was doing, and he left it to his followers to write his biography and to present to us his legacy. While it might be true that Alex didn’t have the gift of being a writer, he did manage to leave behind, through the writings of others, his many different perspectives and beliefs. There is also an entire tradition of witchcraft called the Alexandrian, which Alex left behind, although it wasn’t either his purpose or desire to create a new tradition. Alex and Maxine called themselves witches with no other descriptive adjective, and it was only their later followers who distinguished themselves as Alexandrians, in honor of both Alex and Maxine. 

-

We can see echos of their work throughout the decades following the time of this film, and in fact, in the 1984 documentary, “The Occult Experience” produced by Nevill Drury, we can see the same initiation of the four elements being enacted in the segment on Janet and Stewart Farrar. An older Alex Sanders performed a godhead assumption in that film, briefly becoming the embodiment of an Aztec Fire God. He also accidently started his breech clout on fire with a candle torch that he was brandishing, but he deftly put it out with his other hand, all without missing a beat. 

Alex was still experimenting with his creed and extending his knowledge into domains that most witches would never have even dreamed of entering, even to the very last years of his life. It’s for this reason that I venerate his memory and consider Alex Sanders as a true Pagan Magus. I have been conducting my practice of witchcraft and ritual magic in the same creative and mutable manner that he did years ago, whether I realized it or not. Perhaps, I am seeking one day to be known as a Pagan Magus, just as he was so many years ago.

Frater Barrabbas 

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Definitions of Religion - Legitimacy vs. Authenticity



My previous article brought up some interesting side issues that caught me quite by surprise in regards to the question of Strega lineages, something which I had to beg forbearance from my readers, since I know very little about that particular topic. Still, I often find these discussions and arguments fairly useless, since they often confuse and conflate two very different processes that are active in religion, and that is the difference between legitimacy and authenticity. While these issues have less of an impact in larger community religions, such as Christianity, they are quite hotly contested in the much smaller religious communities of witchcraft and paganism.

First of all, lets look at the definition of these two terms, starting with the dictionary definitions and then look at them in regards to sociological and psychological definitions. We also need to keep in mind that there are two very dissimilar viewpoints characterizing religion, that of exoteric or public religion and that of esoteric or occultic religion. Depending on a person’s or group’s perspective, the terms of legitimacy or authenticity can have a far greater weight and importance.

If we look at the dictionary definition for the word “legitimate,” we will find amongst the expected definitions the term “lawful” and “conforming to accepted rules, standards, etc.” Since we are not talking about a legitimate birth, we won’t go into the definitions that are concerned with how one was born, although sometimes the terms associated with legitimate and illegitimate in regards to birth do get conflated when discussing religious organizations. This is why some groups may be referred to as legitimate or illegitimate, where the proper term would be sanctioned or unsanctioned in regards to rules and protocols - a concern specific to spiritual and religious legitimacy. 

The dictionary definition of the word “authentic” gives the associated terms “genuine” and  “real,” which I believe are important for our discussion. Interestingly, the word “authenticate” has the associated phrases “to make valid, to verify, to prove to be genuine.” It would seem that authentic would represent a religious system where genuine and real experiences are held in high esteem as opposed to lawful decorum or conforming to doctrines, practices or rules. So it would seem that the word authentic is concerned with inner experiences and legitimacy is concerned with outer practices and established rules.

These two terms, when used to define a religious group or organization reveal the fact that they refer to different and opposed dimensions. Legitimacy defines a horizontal dimension that represents social integration, cohesion, group identity and order (rules, doctrine, practices). Authenticity defines a vertical dimension that is more focused on the individual and upon personal transformation and transcendence. Just this simple differentiation of terms reveals two very starkly different approaches to religion. One is exoteric, socially integrative and is concerned with communication and accessibility, and the other is esoteric, insular, and is concerned with mysteries, paradoxes and methods of inducing ecstasy. The former is engaged with translation, the later, with transformation. As you can see, these two dynamics in religion have contrary goals and directions, and confusing them can make communication between adherents of the same faith nearly impossible.   


To further clarify this discussion, I want to present a distillation of some of Ken Wilber’s perspectives and ideas on this issue. It was while I was reading and studying some of his ideas about religion that I had an experience that changed the way I look at religion in general, and more specifically, people’s engagement in their own chosen religion. After reading and digesting what Ken Wilber has wrote on this topic, it was almost as if a light turned on in my mind. I finally realized how easy it was for individuals and groups in witchcraft and paganism to get into passionate disputes with each other, forcing schisms and breaking up groups and spiritual families. I discovered that it often came down to whether one chose to follow the path of religious legitimacy or religious authenticity. The recent schism in the Faery/Feri tradition would seem to represent this particular distinction and how it can push individuals to follow one path or the other. They are not mutually exclusive, and in fact many have found a religious path that incorporates a certain degree of both, but they do represent diametrically opposing directions, and one can’t fully and wholly engage in one without diminishing or nullifying the other.

Let me continue with my discussion about my studies and what I discovered. Ken Wilber has written a book entitled “A Sociable God” (Shambhala Publications, 2005) to help define religion and religious phenomena using the latest theories in both the social sciences, as well his own theories regarding Integral Psychology. I have found this work to be extremely important and ground breaking, since it reduces down to a simple set of definitions what is a very complex multi-disciplined set of theories which contradict each other and are hotly debated between scholars of the same or different disciplines. Ken Wilber has offered this simplified and systematic approach, thus unifying the different perspectives and eliminating contentious points of view. I might also add that these opposing views have done more to confuse the various issues about the nature of religion than clarify them.

The greatest problem in defining religion is that it is many things to many people. There is, as yet, no single uniform perspective embodying all religious viewpoints, or at least none that would make any sense. This is precisely the point that Mr. Wilber made in his work. I will present Wilber’s ideas distilled from his book in the paragraphs below for the sake of efficiency and brevity. I also wish to present this information in manner that cuts to the core of the issues surrounding religion, assisting us to succinctly understand the spiritual and religious beliefs involving witchcraft, paganism and magick.

In his book (see chapter 5, pages 98 -102), Ken Wilber presents seven distinct perspectives based on a general  definition of religion, using a combination of the various social and psychological theories. He identifies seven basic areas, and includes two more that help to determine the depth and breadth of any one single creed (vertical and horizontal dimensions). We will cover each of these in the order that Wilber presented them in his book. Keep in mind that some previous theorists have written whole books on just one of these seven perspectives.

1. Religion is a non-rational engagement. By labeling it non-rational, religion is therefore defined as belonging to or originating out of a dimension that is “other” to reason and rationality. This would indicate that the nature of Spirit, of which religion is principally concerned about, is something that can’t be either quantified or even qualified, thus making it wholly transcendental and paradoxical.

2. Religion is an extremely meaningful or integrative engagement. This definition perceives religion as being an entirely social phenomenon that brings people together, teaching them to resolve their differences and live peacefully for the common good of all. Therefore, religion is concerned with making collective meaning and searching for collective truths that further the integrity and stability of the communal organization.

3. Religion is an immortality project, which is created to deal with the insecurities associated with the ephemeral quality of human life. This theory defines religion as a powerful social belief system that bolsters the confidence of the individual member, giving one a sense of being an elite participant in the collective destiny of the group. This has the effect of assisting individuals to cope with catastrophic loss and death (as well as the potential for such) by causing them to focus instead on the guarantee of a spiritual afterlife.

4. Religion is a mechanism for evolutionary growth through conscious transformation and spiritual evolution, so that by applying oneself to its discipline, one can fully apprehend the spiritual dimension of the self. As Wilber so adroitly put it: “[E]volution and history is a process of increasing self-realization, or the overcoming of alienation via the return of spirit to spirit as spirit.” This whole process represents the drive for transcendent self-realization and personal transformation.

5. Religion represents a social phenomenon of collective psychotic fixations and is therefore, inherently regressive, pre-personal and pre-rational. Wilber says that this perspective has a negative opinion about religion: “[R]eligion is childish illusion, magic, myth.” This perspective represents the typical attitude of empirical science and academia towards religion in general, and is a major part of the creeds of social secularism and atheism. Sigmund Freud held this opinion about religion, and so did Karl Marx and many others.

6. Religion is an exoteric social institution, and its mysteries and paradoxes are understood through the periodic and continual practice of liturgy and the study of sacred scriptures, shared by all members of a specific doctrine or creed. Religion is a public organization where everything is determined and explained in great detail, and nothing is left to chance or self-determination. Exoteric religion consists of the basic and fundamental principles of any religious organization. As Wilber has said in his book: It is a “form of belief system used to invoke or support faith,..preparatory to [an] esoteric experience and adaption..”

7. Religion is esoteric and occultic, and its mysteries and paradoxes are obscured and buried deep within the core belief system that everyone else takes for granted. These mysteries are typically not realized by the general adherent, but requires a deeper and inner exposure to that spiritual system, often acquired through the agency of a teacher and an individualized spiritual practice. The goal of esoteric religion is the obtainment of mystical experiences and a direct realization of spirit in all manifestation.

After having written down these seven different perspectives on the nature of religion, Wilber then examines the horizontal and vertical dimensions of the scope of religion, which brings us to the polarization of the two terms, legitimacy and authenticity. Notice the contrast between translation and transformation, which particularly characterize the breadth and depth of a particular religious practice.

8. Religion is only legitimate when it validates the particular “translation” or perspective established by a given doctrine or creed, usually providing its members positive reinforcements (“good mana”), and helping them to avoid social taboos (“bad mana”). This confers upon individuals a powerful emotional and social sense of being a member of a spiritual community, thereby providing personal meaningfulness, group destiny, and eschatological symbols of immortality.

Legitimacy in religion represents a horizontal dimension to qualifying a religion, and it incorporates the above definitions 2, 3 and 6. Legitimacy is concerned with the smoothness of translation (that it is readily understandable and rational) and the integrity of its social values.

9. Religion is authentic when it validates the particular “transformation” or deeper inner experience of a spiritual system. An authentic religion cuts through doctrine and dogma, giving its adherents the tools and methodologies to achieve a direct experience with the core of that religious system, and is less concerned with the outer trappings and the exegesis of liturgy and sacred scriptures.

Authenticity in religion represents a vertical dimension to qualifying a religion, and it incorporates the definitions 1, 4 and 7. Authenticity is concerned with the degree of personal transformative power and intensity associated with religious experiences, and the internal realization of truths that are paradoxical and irrational. Authenticity challenges individual spiritual seekers, forcing them to move beyond belief and faith, so as to directly experience the spiritual dimension.

So you can see from the above discussion that legitimacy and authenticity are two very different dimensions that will produce, when used exclusively, two very different religious organizations. However, most religions in the world are actually a hybrid of both of these dimensions, although as I have said, a religious group will tend to emphasize one over the other. This is also true when examining the different groups and organizations of witchcraft and paganism. Some of these groups emphasize social integration and communication, others emphasize personal transformation and occultic practices. You can see that when individuals of a greater organization who don’t agree on which emphasis should be used attempt to communicate with each other, they will not only fail to agree, but that they will not usually be able to understand the other person’s perspective. Arguments that involve legitimacy pitted against authenticity will almost always fail unless someone has the enlightened perspective that both approaches are correct, and that there is no one true way.

This also leads us to consider the nature of legitimacy within religious organizations. It would seem that it is a kind of social consensus, an agreement between members of the group. This agreement becomes part of the accepted doctrine, and therefore, is never questioned. For instance, Catholics believe that the Pope’s authority, vested in him from God, is legitimate because he represents an unbroken line of reverent individuals going all the way back to the apostle Peter. The Pope is, therefore, a representative of the apostle Peter, and all of the vested belief in Jesus Christ, his apostles and the doctrines and liturgy of the Church has been mystically translated into his very person. Does the Pope really represent an unbroken line going back to the apostle Peter? Historians would probably disagree with that claim, since for a period of time there were two opposing Popes. There is, additionally, the question of the personal integrity of some Popes in history, which might negate the idea of continuity. Also, the church hierarchy has always been the arbiter of the selection and crowning of the Pope; it is not something intrinsic in the individual, but an important role. Yet it is the consensus amongst faithful Catholics, from the lay person all the way up to the Curia of Cardinals, that the Pope represents an unbroken line, whether or not historians are willing to agree, or even that others outside of the faith would agree to its significance.

We can examine this logic and also apply it to some specific considerations in the British Tradition of Witchcraft (BTW) as it is perceived and practiced in the U.S. I am an Alexandrian witch, properly trained and initiated through all three degrees. I possess my Book of Shadows as it was given to me to be copied by my teachers, and I have papers, rituals and other lore that was passed down to me by my teachers. I have also initiated a score of women over the three decades of my practice. So one could say that I am unquestionably a legitimate witch of the BTW. Right? Not necessarily. Because there is some dispute as to whether Alex Sanders was properly initiated through all three degrees in the Gardnerian tradition, and given the sanction to promote his own initiatory line, some Gardnerians believe that all Alexandrians are not legitimate members of the BTW. Some have even said that Alexandrians aren’t even witches! (Of course, we won’t even get into a discussion of whether or not my teachers, who broke their oaths and became fundamentalist preachers, would be considered posthumously illegitimate, and therefore, negate my claim to legitimacy.)

I have personally experienced Gardnerians who were unwilling to allow me to circle with them or to even talk with me about any of their secrets because I am not, in their definition, a properly initiated Gardnerian witch. I am treated as an outsider, or perhaps a better term, as some kind of “spiritual bastard.” These same Gardnerians will admit that I am kind of a witch and a pagan, but not a legitimate member of their lineage. I have been shunned and treated as if I were the love child of some base relative. Yet my Book of Shadows and my core teachings are nearly identical to the same material used by Gardnerians. There are minor differences between the different initiatory lines of the BTW, and the unique lore of my line is no different in that respect than any other. Still, I am treated by some as an outsider.

Does this treatment bother me? Not in the least! I am not affected by this condescending behavior because I don’t need the consensus of the greater witchcraft community to validate the fact that I am indeed witch and a ritual magician. However, it does bother some witches, and I have known Alexandrians who have gotten themselves a Garderian pedigree in order to be more legitimate in the eyes of the greater witchcraft community. Why does this circumstance bother some and not others? The reason is the distinction in the emphasis between legitimacy and authenticity. For me, the most important perspective is to be authentically a witch. It doesn’t matter to me what the overall social consensus of the witchcraft community thinks is right or proper. What is important to me is that the magick I practice and the liturgical rites that I perform are effective and fulfilling for me as a spiritual person. Also, the most important goal that I am seeking is to unify myself with the One - to be enlightened and illuminated through transcendental transformation. I do work with my community as a teacher, spiritual elder and leader, but the focus of my practice is on the individual rather than the group. One could easily say that my emphasis is almost wholly towards being authentic rather than legitimate, and ritual magick probably has had a powerful effect in pushing me in that direction.

When I read or hear individuals arguing about their initiatory legitimacy or its lack, I understand and know why such a controversy is occurring. It is, in fact, a dispute over social consensus and membership credentials. Is it a valid discussion or argument? That depends on one's overall perspective, but from the standpoint of the tradition of witchcraft, authenticity must outweigh legitimacy. There are some very important reasons why this is so.

An individual’s claim to be a witch should never rest exclusively on the integrity of their supposed initiatory lineage. My tattered and questionable lineage is a case in point. I have also known a few individuals who had impeccable initiatory lineages, but who were also either completely incompetent or totally corrupt. I have also known individuals who had no exoteric initiation in any kind of reputable organization, but who were probably some of the most powerful witches I have ever encountered. Having a pedigree is no guarantee that one is a competent and capable witch, in fact sometimes it would even seem to guarantee a certain degree of fallibility and hubris. As I have stated previously, initiation is not the same thing as transcendental transformation, but for someone who seeks to emphasize authenticity over legitimacy, it becomes critically important that both occur simultaneously.

In my humble opinion, a witch should be first and foremost measured by his or her ability to function as a witch. A proper initiation and the reception of the lore of a particular line may confer legitimacy, but can’t guarantee that one is even truly a witch. What this means is that a witch is a witch because they practice witchcraft and worship the old gods. Does this negate traditions, lineages and families of witchcraft? No, it doesn’t negate them, but it also doesn’t make them a requirement for being a witch, either.

When someone comes to me and says that they are a witch, then I have the right to test them in a magick circle. If they pass that test, then I must respect that they are indeed a witch. Do I break my oaths and share the lore that was handed down to me by my teachers? Of course not! But I will also not exclude them from circling or practicing magick with me. This also means that all of the lore that I know and possess that is not covered by my initiatory oath is available for sharing with that person. Not only that, but I will believe them if they tell me that they are a witch, and I will consider them a sister or a brother - perhaps of a different line than my own, but still kindred seekers on the path of magick and mystery. Eventually, perhaps the distinction of lineages, traditions and families will melt away in the practice of witchcraft, thus we will all be of one overall greater tradition, and we will also be individual seekers after the same goals. I look forward to that time, where authenticity will rule and legitimacy will be considered a quaint affectation.

Frater Barrabbas