by Gary Cantrell
©2001 by Gary Cantrell. Published by Llewellyn Worldwide.
ISBN 1-56718-112-0. 312 pages
Note:
While some of the quotations are moderately extensive, I feel it is necessary for them to be so in order to properly address them, lest I be accused of not representing the author's opinions fully and fairly.
I believe that these quotations are still within the purview of the "fair use" provisions of copyright law.
I further assert that my rebuttals, discussion and analysis are protected under the First Amendment in that they are legitimate differences of opinion and are not defamatory in any way. Should the author or his publisher wish to discuss this with me, they are welcome to do so.
|
p.2 "I want to be very clear at the start of this book that the comments, thoughts, and opinions you will read here regarding Wiccan theology, rituals, and such are mine as I understand them based on my own experience and learning. They reflect my interpretations of how I live and practice Wicca from the perspective of my own Tradition and Path and from my own sources of information. I am by no means touting the material in this book as being something that speaks for all Wiccans. I have no intention of making that claim, nor, I believe, should any other author. When I use the words we or our in this book, I am simply referring to Wiccans in general. The use of these words is not meant to imply that a statement under discussion is accepted exactly as I have written it by all who practice Wicca." |
I'm glad of this excellently-worded disclaimer, since there are many points in this book with which I disagree vehemently, some of which are detailed below. I do find it odd, though, that he says he's not speaking for all Wiccans, and then goes on to say that when he says "we" or "our," he's referring to "Wiccans in general." It seems to me that some of his comments, including some addressed below, are rather minority positions and not really indicative of "Wiccans in general" at all. Perhaps it would have been more appropriate for him to say that he was referring to his Tradition and to those who work along similar lines? |
| p. 18 "As Wiccans, we acknowledge and worship the old gods and goddesses in a form both pleasing to Them and meaningful to us, and do so in a form that has remained essentially unchanged for thousands of years" |
Really? I'd love to see you document that. |
| p.19 "Even given the somewhat diverse definitions of Wicca, we can still make the following general statements regarding the fundamental tenets that are at the heart of the religion with some degree of certainty. The religion of Wicca, the Old Religion, is a loving and peaceful Pagan religion of nature or Earth worship. It is tied to the phases of the moon and the season of the year as defined by both lunar and solar astronomical events. It is oriented generally toward agrarian fertility celebrations and recognizes both a female goddess and a male god as equal deities. Wicca is a spiritual awakening within one's self, recognizing the interrelationship between humankind and nature. It is first and foremost a veneration of our Lord and Lady, a deep and abiding understanding of the natural order of things, and an awareness of the religious and cultural significance of our special holidays. Only after all this is Wicca concerned with spells, magick, and the arts of divination. Wicca teaches us that the Goddess and God are equal and exist together in each and everything in and on this Earth, including ourselves, so that we are part of the God and Goddess just as They are part of us. We and our deities are all linked together as part of the life force or cosmic energy that flows through all things, both animate and inanimate. The witch becomes in tune with this force, this energy, during rituals. It is the same force we tie into and manipulate for the creation of positive personal change through spells and magick." |
Good paragraphs. |
| p.22 "As time passed and life developed on myriad planets, it universally exhibited the balance and equality of male and female that is personified by the God and Goddess." |
What is the source of your data? To the best of my knowledge, no non-Terrestrial life has been documented. |
| p23 "...the Wiccan year begins on the Sabbat of Yule when the Goddess gives birth to the God." |
While I can see a case for this, many Wiccans will tell you that the year begins at Samhain, not Yule. |
| p.24 the concept of the eternal cycle of all things is at the heart of Wiccan philosophy, because it exemplifies our belief that all things must continue and that there must eventually be balance in all things. There can be no spring without winter, no rain without sun, not day without night, and no life without death. The Wheel of the Year and the Mysteries show us that all aspects of existence are cyclical and repeating, never to end, everlasting and eternal. We thus recognize the existence of a supreme creator/creatrix from which all other things that Wiccans hold sacred have sprung. We believe that everything was created by an entity we call 'the One...'" |
No, we most emphatically do not.
First of all, the conclusion in the second paragraph does not follow from the first paragraph. Second, this monotheistic notion is not universal among Wiccans. Quite the contrary, in fact. How do you have "balance in all things" if you have some über-deity that is not balanced by anything? To me, this sort of thing always smacks of people who have not been able to get past their monotheistic upbringing and cultural conditioning. The Source is not some super-deity, but the dynamic interaction between polar complements. |
| p.25 "We understand that our deities are not single individual entities." |
We "understand" nothing of the sort. The notion that "all Gods are one God and all Goddesses are one Goddess, and there is but one Initiator" doesn't refer to some über-deity, but to the dynamic interaction between Goddess and God. Again, this looks like someone not willing to move away from zir monotheistic upbringing. |
| p.27 "Wicca, like all religions, addresses the issue of life after death. Unlike at least the Christian religions, however, Wicca does not endorse the concepts of heaven or hell with the corresponding one-time reward or punishment scenario — these are strictly parts of the Christian theology. Wiccan philosophy embraces the concept of multiple reincarnations. The physical body you presently inhabit is only a shell for the intellect, the soul, or the spirit; call it what you will. The physical demise of that material entity releases the spirit back to the place we call Summerland for a time of rejuvenation, reflection, and ultimately another incarnation of the physical self. This process of reincarnation is repeated for numerous lifetimes until a development of the spirit is reached where that spirit can truly merge with the male and female balanced creator/creatrix entity. We return to the God and to the Goddess. This is one of the basic truths of the Wiccan religion." |
Here he's got part of it [reincarnation], but I'm not entirely comfortable with his concept that the ultimate goal of our lives is to return and merge with the God/desses, let alone with this "creator/creatrix entity." In fact, I find that to seem somewhat pointless: part of what is special about us is our uniqueness, and the idea of giving that up seems to render all that we do all but futile. That isn't to say that all that matters is our differences, but to dissolve all that uniqueness away again seems to render all we do futile. |
| p.35 [This is one of a list of Wiccan Traditions] "4. Dianic Developed by Margaret Murray in 1921" |
Say what? Some Dianics may base their beliefs on Murray's writings, but that's significantly different from saying Dianic Wicca was developed by Margaret Murray. To the best of my knowledge, Margaret Murray did not develop any religion. |
| The following two entries are from the chapter entitled "The Ethics of Wicca." This chapter is pretty good, and overall one that I'd recommend to any student. | |
| p.44 As an example of "harm none," we would never wish a speeding motorist on the highway to have an accident; but there is nothing wrong with asking the deities to arrange for a police officer with a radar gun to appear under the next bridge. An action or spell used against a known predator or assailant would not be designed to injure or damage that person directly; but we could cast a spell to bind the individual's own conscious thought processes so that he or she inadvertently blunders into a situation where law enforcement authorities can make an arrest. In both these examples, it would be the culprit's own stupidity that became his or her undoing. We took no action and did no work to directly injure or harm either one." |
Sorry, but this is nonsense at best. To say that the malefactor was not harmed by being arrested is absurd. The point is that these actions are not harmless, but are necessary. A major consideration in the use of magick is that one knows when to actually take the step of initiating it, and an understanding of and willingness to accept the responsibility and possible consequences. |
| p.53 "In...other religions, if some breaks a divine law, that person can either receive redress and forgiveness directly from the divinity or, more commonly, through the intercession of a priest. In most cases, the offender is simply required to acknowledge the transgression and usually do some form of penance in order to obtain complete absolution. that is all that is required. The problem is solved, and the offender is usually free to move on and probably repeat the offense, since resolving it again and again is relatively painless. This is not the case with Wicca. As witches, we are fully and sometimes painfully aware that each act we take, be it good or bad, is totally our personal responsibility. There is no "higher authority" to grant us absolution, and no rpiest to say, "Do such-and-such for your penance and all will be forgiven." no, each one of us is individually responsible for all the consequences of our actions." |
Both good and bad here, I'm afraid.
Mr. Cantrell appears not to fully understand the principles of forgiveness in Christianity [I assume it is primarily to Christianity that he refers].
Forgiveness is not achieved simply by performing the penance: penance is an outward expression of sincere regret.
The fact that many people who "sin" do seem to "sin" again despite their forgiveness would seem to indicate that their contrition is more formal than sincere.
Christian doctrine, for the most part, requires sincere regret in order to obtain forgiveness.
Mr. Cantrell is, however, right on the money when he discusses the Wiccan view of such matters. We cannot be forgiven for our transgressions if we don't do something to make it right. If we harm someone, they can certainly forgive us, but we cannot in fairness ask them to without making an effort toward making some kind of redress. Furthermore, even if we are forgiven, that doesn't absolve us from the obligation to not repeat our offense, nor from our responsibility for that offense, nor from trying to make good if that's possible. |
| p.58 Referring to the tools used in Circle. "These implements might include virtually anything used in the Sacred Circle, with the exception of a Covener's personal athame, Mirror Book, and personal Book of Shadows." The next page has a discussion of the "Mirror Book." |
I've never heard of a "Mirror Book." Not that that means anything: there's plenty I don't know. I wonder whether this is from Mr. Cantrell's Trad specifically, or if it's fairly widespread and I have simply not encountered it before. Whichever, it's a nifty term. |
| p.64 "There are generally three candles placed on the altar: a white Goddess candle, a red God candle, and an altar candle representative of the ritual or rite being performed." |
Interesting notion. |
| "The athame is generally a doubled-edged, dark-handled knife with a blade of about five or six inches in length. The blade edges are not sharpened. This is a tool used in many rites and rituals, and is not usually considered to be a weapon." | Oh, ARG!
I get very tired of this notion.
A knife is sharp. If it's dull, it's not a knife, it's a flat piece of metal. The fact that it's symbolic of certain things doesn't mean it's less important that it be sharp. If you're going to have a symbol of cutting, would you rather have a symbol of a smooth, effective cutting, or difficult tearing? A knife doesn't need to be a weapon to be sharp: any edged tool should be as sharp as possible. In my Tradition, we consider the athame to be the tool of the East, of air, of intellect. If I'm going to symbolize my intellect, my ability to divide, characterize, and analyze things, I'd want a sharp tool for that purpose. Now, I can understand someone not caring personally if hir athame was sharp or dull, but to say that it should not be sharp seems odd to say the least. Furthermore, dullness in a knife is generally a sign of neglect: is that the message we want to give? Do you buy the best fabric you can for your robe, and then keep it clean? Do you keep your altar cloth clean, or do you use an old stained sheet? I have no idea why anyone would recommend that an athame be dull. |
| p.67 From a discussion of altar tools Chalice "The chalice is a glass or metal drinking goblet and is another of those tools for which I personally have found very little application. It can be used in the initiation rite when drinking a toast to the Lord and Lady, and it can also be used as the vaginal representation in a symbolic Great Rite. Some Covens also use a single chalice in the Cake and Ale Rite, passing it around the circle after being blessed by the High Priest. However, the requirements for its use seem to be rather limited..." |
The author seems to contradict himself here. First he says he hasn't found much use for the chalice [and why only glass or metal? What's wrong with ceramic, wood, or stone?], and then immediately lists three, of which one [the Great Rite] seems pretty crucial to me. Does he not perform the Great Rite on a regular basis? |
| p.67 From a discussion of altar tools "A censor is necessary for use with either cones or powder (incense), but only some form of stick holder is needed with stick incense. Incense, censors, and incense stick holders can be purchased in virtually any store. |
OK, now these sentences have two problems that get my goat.
First, that the writer doesn't have a good enough command of the English language to know the difference between "censor" and "censer."
A censer is something in which one burns incense.
A censor is someone who controls what will be published or presented.
If your spelling isn't good, keep a dictionary next to your damn' desk, and use it.
The second thing that irks me here is that the publisher [Llewellyn] is not doing what's necessary to correct the author's errors. If the editor isn't reading the manuscript thoroughly, a proofreader should. A spell-checker is not an acceptable substitute for a proofreader, not only because it can't distinguish between "censor" and "censer," but because it can't check for any kind of grammar errors. I'm not saying this author is making errors of grammar [quite the contrary, in fact: he's quite good on that score], but over-reliance on automated tools is a bad habit and indicates a certain lackadaisical attitude on the part of the publisher. |
| p.68 "The five points of the pentagram represent the elements of spirit, earth, air, fire, and water." |
This is another thing that irks me, and I'm not going to say I'm sorry for that stance, either.
There's this growing notion that it's appropriate to add "spirit" to the list of Classical elements.
If you read writings on this as far back as ancient Greece, you do not see references to "spirit" as one of the elements.
These have never been part of the list of elements, whatever the Newage types would have you think.
Listing "spirit" also implies that spirit is not part of everything; that it's separate from air, fire, water and earth. To me, this is antithetical to the notion that spirit pervades everything. There also seems to be this idea that everything must correspond to everything else; if there are four elements and five points on the pentagram, there must be a fifth element to match to the five points of the pentagram. Why not let there be more than one set of important elements? People have been developing this idea that everything has to be directly related and correspond to everything else, no matter how one must force and twist things to make correspond, and I find that bothersome. Syncretism is all well and good, but if one has to warp something to make it fit into a particular place, perhaps one should rethink one's desire for that fit. |
| p.69 From a discussion of altar tools Wand Like the besom and sword, the wand is something I have never used. There are many written rituals that specify its use, but again I feel that this is a personal choice since the athame works equally well in place of the wand." |
Sigh. If the author has never used a wand, perhaps he should try.
There's a distinct difference in "feel," in energy, between a wand and an athame.
And if a ritual specifies a wand, perhaps one should try using a bleedin' wand.
I'm not saying an athame can't be used to cast a Circle, that it won't "work equally well," but that doesn't mean it should be used when the ritual specifies a wand.
It's a personal choice, indeed, but one probably ought to make an informed choice, and it's hard to do that if one hasn't actually researched the subject at hand.
I certainly hope that if he's at a public ritual he won't whip out his athame when the officiators ask people to bring out their wands. For many, using a wand is critical and cannot be replaced by an athame, under the principle that iron banishes enchantment. |
| p.72 "The area of your circle should first be purified with sage in order to remove any undesirable energies or forces." |
Mr. Cantrell apparently has a real "thing" for sage. While I have no objection to using sage, per se, I find it odd that one would be specifying a purely New World herbe [after Beyerl's "Master Book of Herbalism"] in a Wiccan Circle, since Wicca originated in Europe. One might, of course, make a case that if one is in America one makes a good choice to use substances with which the North American spirits and deities would be familiar, but [as Mr. Cantrell himself is fond of saying], it should be a personal choice. |
| p.96 "Imbolc is commonly recognized today by non-Pagans as Valentine's Day, with its associated romantic pursuits and the red heart that symbolizes those relationships." |
Funny, I think Valentine's Day is on February 14th, not February 2nd. I also don't think of Imbolc as being like Valentine's Day, and don't remember any Pagans making that correspondence. I think if you asked the average Pagan-on-the-street, I suspect s/he'd tell you that the holiday most like Valentine's Day is Beltaine. No? |
| p.96 "(Imbolc) is the time for new initiates to take their Craft names." |
This is an interesting notion. I don't have a particular problem with it, but does this mean that someone who was initiated at Beltaine gets to wait the better part of a year before taking a Craft name? |
| p.117 "(Full Moon) ritual should be done outside fairly soon after moonrise when the moon is in view and can shine on the worshipper, if at all possible and weather permitting. The moon shining through tree branches is perfectly acceptable, but buildings or other structures should not obscure the lunar disk." |
I like Mr. Cantrell's take on this. Too often we forget about what we're doing, forget that this ritual is about the Moon; that the Moon Herself is relevant. Living in cities, surrounded by lights and asphalt, we find it easy to have our rituals in living rooms and basements instead of bathed in the light of the Moon. |
| p.144 "Drawing Down the Moon is one of those rites that is really not applicable to the Solitary, since it requires two people ... Drawing Down the Moon is generally associated with the full moon esbat, but is certainly not limited to that time, and it can be done in conjunction with any lunar rite or ritual. It is not, however, a rite that is part of the Sabbat rituals. It is also another of those rites where working skyclad is virtually a requirement." |
I have to disagree with the author on several points here. First, while performing a full-trance-possession type Drawing Down alone is generally a Bad Idea, there are levels to such invocations, and certainly the lighter, "inspiration" and "overshadowing" versions can be performed by someone trained and experienced in such things with a fair degree of safety.
I also disagree with the notion that Drawing Down the Moon is not part of a Sabbat rite. If one looks at the Sabbats as purely solar [and hence a time at which one would perform a Drawing Down the Sun], I can see an argument being made for this. However, this restriction means that we never have the privilege of speaking with both Goddess and God at the same time. Mr. Cantrell may find that acceptable but, biased as I may be by How-We-Do-It-In-My-Trad, I don't think I do. |
| p.191 "In addition to runes, the Celts of the British Isles, most notably in Ireland between the fifth and seventh centuries A.D., also used another form of symbology called the ogham (or ogam) alphabet ... This method of writing used notches to represnt vowels and lines to represent consonants" |
I appreciate the author's recognition that the Ogham are not runes; a point all too often lost on sloppy scholars. However, I believe Ogham stones have been found in continental Europe as well as in Ireland, and I further believe the author is mistaken in his assertion that vowels are notches and consonants are straight lines. A quick perusal of any book on the Ogham would seem to indicate that all of the letters are indicated by lines, some of which cross the central stem and some of which do not. |
| p.228 "...then Governor George W. Bush ... made the now infamous statement on a nationally televised interview for ABC-TV in June of 1999, "I don't think witchcraft is a religion." |
I seem to recall this particular dippy remark having been made by Bush-the-Elder, rather than the current occupant of the White House. I could be wrong, of course, and would welcome verification either way. |
| I strongly recommend chapters eight ["The Physically Challenged Witch"] and ten ["Out of the Broom Closet"], whatever issues I may have with other parts of this book. For these two chapters alone, I'd buy this book. | |
All comments in the left-hand side of the table above are © 2001 by Gary Cantrell. Any errors of transcription are the sole responsibility of Robert Berra Jr., who will gladly correct them upon being notified.
All comments in the right-hand side are © 2002 and the sole responsibility of Robert Berra Jr.