rfunk | "The Triumph of the Moon"

I'm currently reading The Triumph of the Moon: A History of Modern Pagan Witchcraft, by Ronald Hutton. I finished chapter five last night, and so far the book is fascinating (though the small print is a bit scary at first). It's useful for getting insight into the various worldviews and structures that went into the creation of Wicca (at least Gardner's brand of it).

This sample from the end of chapter five ("Finding A High Magic") reminded me of a recent conversation with

chronarchy:

The rituals of the Golden Dawn trained initiates to invoke deities and angels, but with the object neither of presenting them with praise and pleas nor of making them do the will of the person invoking; with neither, in short, of the customary aims of religion and magic. They encouraged the practitioners to empower themselves with incantation, within a ceremonial setting, so that they came to feel themselves combining with the divine forces concerned and becoming part of them. In the last analysis it did not matter to this work whether or not the entities concerned had any actual existence as long as the magician felt as if they did at the moment of working, and achieved the transforming visions and sensations which were the object of the process.

The chapter on structure (chapter four) was also interesting, for its description of the old secret societies (the Masons and such). I don't remember knowing before that "so mote it be" came directly from Masonic ritual. This chapter is also interesting for how much of this structure (e.g. degrees) that went into the original Wiccan mixture was tossed out by the solitaries and other egalitarian movements.

Too bad there are still people around who don't accept those "later" (70s-90s) movements as valid for anybody.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

tTotM is something I really need to read. Apparently, it's very, very well researched. Of course, some of his other books have issues, but Hutton recognizes it :)

What I get from the sample is that the GD does theurgy. Is that the case?

I like people who think that Discordianism is a young movement, when really it's been around longer than most Wiccan traditions :)

What I get from the sample is that the GD does theurgy. Is that the case?

Heh. The paragraph continues (and ends) like this:

In one sense it represented a revival of the ancient art of theurgy, which had always lain on the hazy boundary between religion and magic and signified an attempt by humans to work with divinities in such a way as to wield divine powers for themselves. In another, it was distinctly modern, being one spiritual reflection of the actual experience of the peoples of the nineteenth-century Western world, as they obtained ever greater political, economic, and environmental control of the globe.

Since this ends his chapter "In Search of a High Magic", I'm assuming that in a future chapter Hutton will say that Gardner took Wicca's "High Magic" from the Golden Dawn.

I like people who think that Discordianism is a young movement, when really it's been around longer than most Wiccan traditions :)

I'd call Wicca young too; two generations is young for a religion. Or are you saying that Discordianism is older than the mid-late 60s?

By the way, the structure chapter talks a lot about how the old secret societies, starting with the Masons, went to great lengths to create a mythology tying themselves back to ancient times, hiding their relatively modern origins.

It's official, I'm psycic.

I have issues with the definition of "theurgy" in this context. I recognize immediately what modern Pagans term "theurgy", but it doesn't match the original definition.

Theurgy is a very specific process for contacting deity. It involves ascending to meet the "High God" or "Supreme God". It's a monotheistic experience. And you don't do it for power, you do it for the experience. Of course, that depends on the theurgist, I suppose.

But that's neither here nor there, I suspect.

Or are you saying that Discordianism is older than the mid-late 60s?

Sure am! 1958 (or maybe '59, apparently Mal-2 was unclear what year it actually was). :)

Discordianism is definitely young, I should clarify and say that most poeple think it originated in the 80's or 90's. Or else they've never heard of it. But generally, they tend to think of it as one of those wacky movements that's more like a fad than a religion.

great lengths to create a mythology tying themselves back to ancient times, hiding their relatively modern origins.

I'm very happy to be part of two religions that refuse to try to predate themselves.

But generally, they tend to think of it as one of those wacky movements that's more like a fad than a religion.

I think of it more as a wacky movement that's more like a religion than a fad. My favorite description of it is "Ha Ha, only serious."

Is it a joke masquerading as a religion, or a religion masquerading as a joke?

Does it matter?

"The Triumph of the Moon"

no subject

tTotM

Re: tTotM

Re: tTotM

Re: tTotM