ellen@ucla-cs.UUCP (11/08/84)
[bibbity-bobbity-boo!]
In response to Mike Huybensz's criticism of contemporary witchcraft:
On several points he is correct. However, i feel, naturally, that
his cynicism is overstated.
It is true that there are contemporary witches with made-up geneologies,
claiming to be hereditary witches. It is unfortunate that people feel
the need to justify their beliefs this way, that they think they must
be validated by historical data. But it is also a distinct possibility
that some witches today DO come from families of witches which go back
for generations.
It is also true that there is a certain amount of historical revisionism
going on. One must remember, however, that the past records of witches
were written from a rather biased point of view, that of the church. In
the middle ages, the Catholic church (the only church at the time, or at
least it wanted to be that way), having wiped out most ``heretics,''
Christians who did not feel that the Pope was the only guy with a Hot-Line
to God (obviously not the only or even chief difference, but that's
another subject altogether, and not quite in my field), was still feeling
insecure. The plague had run through Europe, wiping out the population,
from 1/3 to 1/2 in most towns. The populace was blaming whatever they
could. In many cases, of course, that Jews got it. The situation was
worse in the Western areas, and Jews (at least the ones who weren't burned
in their houses and synagogues) fled to Eastern Europe, where they
were safer, at least temporarily. Up to this time it was heresy to
believe in the existence of witches. After this time, it was heresy
NOT to believe in witches. There has been some documentation (after
the fact, naturally, since there were hardly any objective reporters
at the time, and most practitioners were not literate) of witchcraft
as remnants of earlier pre-Christian practices, which would vary from
region to region, depending on local culture.
Instead of seeing that the country folk were worshipping nature deities
and practicing fertility rites; instead of admitting that women could be
healers, using herbs and common sense, better than "surgeons," who were
all men with university degrees; and since the populace in general was
debilitated by pestilence, war, and natural catastrophes, it was not unusual
for hatred and fear to be turned on people, in this case, at least 90% women
(who better to hate women than celibate men), who did not follow a dictated
and dogmatic norm. Europe as a whole was undergoing a radical change in
social, political, and economic structures. The church felt the need to
consolidate its power. And then came the Reformation. So the murder
continued. Salem, Mass., was the last large execution. By then, perhaps
some people actually WERE worshipping the Devil. But with the types of
torture used, people would confess to anything, just to end the pain.
The estimates range from 500,000 to 9 million burned, drowned, hung, and
tortured to death, within 150 years of the plague, and over 90% of them
women. I find it impossible to see how only women were worshipping the
Devil. And, of course, probably most of those executed were not even
witches in any sense of the word (other than as a snipe at a woman of
unattractive demeanor, physical or social).
[Documentation: see Barbara Tuchman, "A Distant Mirror" for historical
background of the Middle Ages; Margaret Murray, "The Witch-cult in
Europe", Oxford University Press, (she was an anthropologist & her books
were published in the '40's, well before the current "fad")]
In many cases, what is termed "witchcraft" today IS a revival and revision
of pagan goddess-worship, since in most cases, females were worshipped
long before humankind conceived of one male god. Therefore, its roots
are far-ranging, both in time and space (meaning, on this planet, by
looking in many cultures for inspiration). Many groups, maybe even most
groups (judging by contemporary Pagan and Wiccan information, and NO, i
will not here cite all my sources. Many are private and i don't want to
open nice people up to harassment by fanatical religionists any more than
they already are) worship both male and female principles, practice healing
on both spiritual and material levels, and take an interest in ecology (this
is certainly not true of ALL groups, but that's one of the aspects i like
about pagan paths, an acceptance of the variety of possible Ways).
(Harrassment is a very real problem - with the current political-and-
religious climate, many people who follow non-mainstream paths are
being harrassed, but especially those who follow Pagan paths or are
atheists or agnostics. Personal friends of mine have received hate mail
from "Christian" organizations, fundementalists or funny-mentalists.)
As this is the case, then Mike's cynical remarks about "systematic fraud
designed to increase the wealth, stature, security, or importance of the
claimant" are blatantly false. There are certainly folks out there trying
to make a buck off of any fool who'll fall for any advertising ploy.
That's true in just about every area of human endeavour ("Madison Ave.")
i am certainly not making any money off of this. it is a SPIRITUAL path,
and does not feed anything but my psyche/soul/spirit/whatever-you-choose-
to-call-it (although, i assume from Mike's stance that he is either
a confirmed believer in a main-stream Western religion or a non-believer
in religion). The people with whom i associate are sincere, but not
dewy-eyed; they include university professors (oh, no! what is higher
education coming to?), a hospital administrator (oh, no! what is modern
health care coming to?), a political activist (oh, well, we know they're
all either dewy-eyed innocents or raving looneys), an office manager of
a large modern business (oh, no! what is capitalism coming to?),
a physicist (oh, no! what is science coming to?), etc. (and me? after
all, i'm in computer science, does that mean that i believe in a deus
ex machina?).
Sure, there are phoney occultists all over the place, have been for
centuries. (And quack doctors, and criminal politicians, and teachers only
in it to pass the time until they can find something else to do, and religious
leaders/priests/ministers/monks/whathaveyou having illicit relations with
their followers, etc.) But don't throw everybody into the same circus side-show
or materialistic, inconsiderate, greedy, selfish sub-group. The author
of the book which Mike "re-quoted" is sincere, genuine, honest, caring,
etc. i guess that makes her a dewy-eyed innocent, since these traits are
perhaps not useful or necessary for human survival, in Mike's estimation
(my cynicism here). Starhawk is definitely NOT an "individual fraud."
Neither am i. Was that a low body blow i just felt? O.k., fella, how
would ya like me to cram my knee into your chicken-in-basket? (just a
joke, just a joke, i don't believe in violence as the best solution to
problems :-).
Then, again, i agree with Mike when he says "the substance of enlightenment
lies in the process of looking, rather than in the mumbo-jumbo...".
For in the search it is to be presumed, or at least hoped, that we learn about
ourselves and how we perceive our place in life, in the world, in the cosmos,
in whatever you feel is the larger, over-riding motivator of being, whether
it is the Goddess, God, a pantheon, humankind, or Chaos.
I hope to be posting some more details soon, so that the reasons for the
current revival/revision of Paganism become clear.
Merry Part.
///|\\\
/// \\\
//{o} {o}\\
ll " ll
ll ~ ll
ll ll