Officers May Be Misled About Pagans

[JerzeeGirrl]

I'd like to offer the law enforcement community a chance to read the following linked article by Kerr Cuhulain who is known to the mundane world as Detective Constable Charles A. Ennis of the Vancouver Police Department, Youth Services Unit. Ennis, a child abuse investigator for the VPD, is the author of several articles on child abuse investigation that appeared in Law & Order Magazine. Better known to the Pagan community by his Wiccan name, Kerr Cuhulain, Ennis was the first Wiccan police officer to go public about his beliefs 25 years ago. Kerr is now the spokesperson for Officers of Avalon. Kerr went on to write three books: The Law Enforcement Guide to Wicca (Horned Owl Publishing) as well as Wiccan Warrior and Full Contact Magick: A Book of Shadows for the Wiccan Warrior. (Llewellyn Publications).

Kerr is a regular columnist at The Witches' Voice website, http://www.witchvox.com. He has created a series called Witch Hunt where he details the constant misinterpretations of Paganism, Witchcraft and Wicca to the law enforcement community. His latest article is a prime example of how the peaceful pagan community is often the subject of lectures & books by people who have no idea what the religion or its practices are about:
http://www.witchvox.com/whs/kerr_apts.html

Notes from Your JerzeeGirrl Pagan & Witch:

First off, I'd like to emphasize that the motorcycle "club" called The Pagans has absolutely NO connection whatsoever to the "Pagan Religious Community" at large.

Secondly, I will emphasize that Paganism, Witchcraft, and Wicca have nothing to do with Satanism. What's the difference, you ask? Here it is in a very brief nutshell:

Paganism - the general category of people who practice a nature-based form of worship; often polytheistic but not always. Pagans do not worship Satan, Beelzebub or Lucifer as a god. Pagans believe in being responsible for your own actions and therefore do not believe that evil actions can be explained by possession or being in service to a demon. Some Pagans do believe Satan was a being that existed while other do not believe he/she existed at all and is merely a metaphor used to scare people into following Church law. Therefore, you cannot worship something if you don't even believe it existed. When you see a pentagram with a horned being or animal it IS NOT a symbol of Satan. Pagans honor goddesses in many forms and gods in many forms one of which is called The Horned One (often depicted as a male antlered animal such as a buck or elk or the god Cernunnos). Natured based communities were agricultural and their gods and goddesses were often worshipped for abundance of crops. Neo-pagans have adopted this worship as a way to connect to nature, protect the environment and give thanks to the Divine for what it has provided. The pentagram is an ancient sacred symbol that has been around for much longer than Christianity.

Witchcraft - some pagans are Witches which means that they not only worship but they also take on active roles by casting spells. A spell is nothing more than a prayer; it is the sending of energy from one person or a group and can be performed by singing, chanting, burning the spell which is written on parchment paper, dancing, and other ritual practices. Witches do not even need to be pagan. There are self-proclaimed Catholic Witches. In fact, Catholicism is the most Pagan of the major religions in its use of candle magic, incense during ritual, color correspondences to the holidays, singing, chanting and communion. These are all Pagan in origin.

Wicca - this is a particular type of neo-paganism that was created in England by Gerald Gardner in the 1950's. It was brought to America and has since spread globally. Wicca is a worship of a god and a goddess. There are rituals performed throughout the year when the seasons change and during Full & New Moons, although rituals can be done any time. Wiccans, like other pagans, can be solitary practitioners or members of a coven. A coven is a family or group of structured pagans or witches.

What happens in a ritual and in the life of Pagan? This is easier to answer by telling you what does not happen:
* Orgies - There is rarely any nudity or sexual activity. In my personal 10 years of practice, I have not encountered any. It is a personal choice for anyone to worship "skyclad" meaning without clothes.
* Slaughter - There are no actual sacrifices of living things other than plants. Witches and Pagans will use herbs, flowers, tree branches etc in their work, even the feathers or fur from animals but no witch or pagan following would harm a living creature for the purpose of ritual. This goes against the prime law of witchcraft, "An harm none, do as ye will." Sacrifice is often done metaphorically.
* Drug use - this is not condoned by the community at large though there are people in every religion who will break the law and use drugs. It is not written that one should use drugs in practicing Pagan religions or in working Witchcraft.
* Curses - Again, this breaks the commonly accepted Prime law of harming none. Neo-pagans believe that whatever they send out will return to them, some say three-fold. If you do something bad, you will have to face what you've done times the power of 3. Some pagans take this further to nine-fold. Some pagans will cast a curse or hex at the bequest of someone else believing that the karma will fall to the person who sought his/her service and not him/herself.
* Fraud - many Pagans are also in a service to the community through psychic talents: clairvoyance, clairaudience, tarot/rune/palm reading, etc. People who go to a psychic have to use their own judgement in who they are selecting as a practitioner. In the respectable psychic community is acceptable to ask for references. There is debate amongst the psychic community about whether or not fees for services should be charged; some say it is a gift of the Divine Creator that should be shared freely while others say that their time is valuable and they have every right to earn a living like everyone else.

Please take the time to get to know Kerr's writings because it will make you a better officer. You will be able to connect to your local Pagan community which may need you to protect them from fundamentalists who will often protest and attack public rituals. You will also become better by not jumping to conclusions when you are at a crime scene or an alleged crime scene with evidence of "ritualistic crime." And, PLEASE, above all - if you have a question just ask a member of the pagan community or do some research for yourself. You can even email me if you think you don't have anyone else to ask, amber@salemscorner.com.

[txinvestigator2]

Please take the time to get to know Kerr's writings because it will make you a better officer. You will be able to connect to your local Pagan community which may need you to protect them from fundamentalists who will often protest and attack public rituals. You will also become better by not jumping to conclusions when you are at a crime scene or an alleged crime scene with evidence of "ritualistic crime." And, PLEASE, above all - if you have a question just ask a member of the pagan community or do some research for yourself. You can even email me if you think you don't have anyone else to ask, amber@salemscorner.com.

Your conclusions in this paragraph are insulting. Maybe you should read a few books on modern police investigations. :rolleyes:

[JerzeeGirrl]

Considering that Kerr's article cites several references to people connected to modern police investigations and their obvious lack of knowledge on the subject of paganism, I don't see how you can be insulted. He speaks about specific people and unless you are one of them there'd be no reason for you to be insulted. My post is to communicate some basic information that is often misunderstood by the entire public, including law enforcement and especially government officials.

[Cockney Corner]

JerzeeGirrl

A mate of mine of is a Wiccan and an officer. And I wouldn't imagine one officer in a thousand (over here at least - perhaps US cops are a little better read) would be able to read your post and say honestly say "yeah I knew all that already".

[Welpe]

There is something about this forum..... :D

[JerzeeGirrl]

Thanks, guys. I don't know what it's really like in Canada or the UK on a daily basis. I know the Brits only started carry guns recently (as far as their history goes).

But over here we still have some quirky problems like grave-robbing. A NJ woman got convicted of it because she was using the bones in some sort of voodoo practice. And all during the Halloween season (mid-Sept to mid-Nov) most animal shelters won't allow anyone to adopt black cats and sometimes black dogs because every year a bunch of them are found mutilated. It's always blamed on religious subcultures.

[Cockney Corner]

Gregg (and indeed JerzeeGirl)

No, I can't say we're ankle deep in jobs involving Wiccans over here. But I know the issue has come up a few times when neighbours or passers-by have reported "suspicious activity" which turned out to be Pagans, Wiccans or what have you.

[nickg]

beware of those klingons, mayans, incas, and stonehenge worshippers too. they are all a brutal bunch!! :D :rolleyes:

[Cptwolf127]

Jerzee, you can blame Hollywood and some fundamentalists with literal interpretation of scripture for the misconception. I personally know several wicca, and have met a pagan in the past. A lot of cops have attended classes on Satanism, etc. in which clarifications are made of the differences in witchcraft, wicca, etc.

Good post in general though! Always nice to get a nag once in a while to keep us grounded.

[JerzeeGirrl]

Thanks, I was just afraid that the lecture circuit for you guys included people spouting very false information. ;)

[nickg]

Stonehenge is that way ----------------------------->

just make sure it's 18' and NOT 18". just ask spinal tap!! :D

[Deputy757]

JG,
I just want to point out a couple of things about the Christian and Catholic faith(s) that will hopefully help you to understand why people affiliated with them associate the groups you speak of with Satanism. First, you mention that (some) pagans don't accept the existence of Satan or demons and hold that people are ultimately responsible for their own actions. This is commonly depicted as Satan's greatest accomplishment, convincing people that he doesn't exist. If people don't believe in him and what he can do then they surely won't see his effect on the world. They will probably not believe in God either as it's hard to imagine one without the other. Second, you stated that pagans honor minor gods and goddesses. This certainly would fly in the face of the 1st Commandment and a case could be made that these "minor gods/goddesses" were actually manifestations of demonic spirits. I mean, would you worship an incredibly foul looking demon straight from the pit of hell or a lovely, fairhaired, poster girl of the year, looking "goddess"?
I've nothing against pagans, witches, or wicca practioners and I would certainly not begrudge them the freedom to practice their religion. However, just because they don't openly worship Satan doesn't mean he isn't reaping benefits from their activities.
Your post was very informative, and will be helpful to many LEO in my opinion!

[retired]

Originally posted by Deputy757
JG,
However, just because they don't openly worship Satan doesn't mean he isn't reaping benefits from their activities.


And there are those of us who think the concept of a Satan is pure nonsense, so this entity called Satan certainly can't reap any benefts from us since he or more likely she doesn't exist.:)

[BunnyFoo-Foo]

Originally posted by retired
And there are those of us who think the concept of a Satan is pure nonsense, so this entity called Satan certainly can't reap any benefts from us since he or more likely she doesn't exist.:)

SHE?????? Oh come on now....

[retired]

Originally posted by BunnyFoo-Foo
SHE?????? Oh come on now....

Oh Oh, I guess that was a slip of the tongue on my part.:o ;)

[BunnyFoo-Foo]

Originally posted by retired
Oh Oh, I guess that was a slip of the tongue on my part.:o ;)

Hmmmph, sounds like something Bill Clinton would say, no? ;) :p

[Deputy757]

Originally posted by retired
And there are those of us who think the concept of a Satan is pure nonsense, so this entity called Satan certainly can't reap any benefts from us since he or more likely she doesn't exist.:)
Well, someone who doesn't believe in God certainly isn't going to believe in Satan. That would just be silly! :D
But I wasn't trying to debate what people in those groups do or don't do (just to be clear). I was only pointing out why issues of "Satanism" get thrown into the mix.
Oh, and as for Satan being a she...THAT would explain a LOT!!!

[JerzeeGirrl]

Deputy,

I accept your explanation of the deceipt of Satan as your belief and what you've been told. That's fine. We are all entitled. I was raised and confirmed Lutheran. My mom is a church secretary and I'm the only pagan in the lot. I, however don't agree with you. Not all gods and goddesses are attractive and appealing. Do a search on Kali, the Babylonian Goddesses of Destruction for example or perhaps South American gods which are pretty darn scary and you'll see.

And as for Satan being a "she"... angels are not defined in our gender roles; they either had both or none and it doesn't surprise me that men once again want to continue to blame women for all of their problems and destruction. It's been what, over a thousand years since a woman was to blame for a war? And I believe that men outnumber women in the criminal population. No I'm not surprised someone would say "she" or that Mr. Gibson cast a supermodel in the role. Weak men feel they need to blame someone for their mistakes like their mother. A man of character would have the ability to admit he f'ed up and help find a solution.

As for "minor" deities, many of them are now your Saints so the Church couldn't have been that against them.

(I hope this didn't sound too much like a soapbox, if so I didn't mean it that way).

[retired]

Originally posted by JerzeeGirrl
Deputy,

I accept your explanation of the deceipt of Satan as your belief and what you've been told. That's fine. We are all entitled. I was raised and confirmed Lutheran. My mom is a church secretary and I'm the only pagan in the lot. I, however don't agree with you. Not all gods and goddesses are attractive and appealing. Do a search on Kali, the Babylonian Goddesses of Destruction for example or perhaps South American gods which are pretty darn scary and you'll see.

And as for Satan being a "she"... angels are not defined in our gender roles; they either had both or none and it doesn't surprise me that men once again want to continue to blame women for all of their problems and destruction. It's been what, over a thousand years since a woman was to blame for a war? And I believe that men outnumber women in the criminal population. No I'm not surprised someone would say "she" or that Mr. Gibson cast a supermodel in the role. Weak men feel they need to blame someone for their mistakes like their mother. A man of character would have the ability to admit he f'ed up and help find a solution.

As for "minor" deities, many of them are now your Saints so the Church couldn't have been that against them.

(I hope this didn't sound too much like a soapbox, if so I didn't mean it that way).

If one reads the Christian bible, one can find numerous passages where God advocates killing people for very minor infractions.

[nickg]

Originally posted by retired
And there are those of us who think the concept of a Satan is pure nonsense, so this entity called Satan certainly can't reap any benefts from us since he or more likely she doesn't exist.:)

"oh satan, thy daughter's name is Hilary" :D :D :D

[JerzeeGirrl]

I know that. What does that have to do with my post?

JG

[retired]

Originally posted by JerzeeGirrl
I know that. What does that have to do with my post?

JG

My comment about Satan being a she was made in jest, I assumed you were aware of that.

[JerzeeGirrl]

nick, good one!
retired, sometimes it's just hard to tell tone in email. ;) I just didn't understand why you quoted my post in particular when you commented on the God that punishes for minor infractions.

[Deputy757]

Originally posted by JerzeeGirrl
Not all gods and goddesses are attractive and appealing. Do a search on Kali, the Babylonian Goddesses of Destruction for example or perhaps South American gods which are pretty darn scary and you'll see.
Yes, I know this but my point was that when most wiccans or "good witches" or "white magic" practitioners speak of the gods or goddesses that they worship, they like to point out that they are benevolent and kind spirits, not evil ones.

And as for Satan being a "she"... angels are not defined in our gender roles; they either had both or none
True, angels are not sexual beings and seem to have the ability to appear as whatever they want (i.e. a burning bush).

and it doesn't surprise me that men once again want to continue to blame women for all of their problems and destruction. It's been what, over a thousand years since a woman was to blame for a war?
Well, some people have the opinion that Margaret Thatcher used the Falklands as a crutch with which to get reelected. True, the Argentines technically invaded, but the UN and Sec State Haig were working on getting them to leave peacefully. And let's not forget little ole Indira Ghandi who, though she didn't start a war with another country, almost brought her own country to the brink of civil war when she declared a state of emergency (just before she was to be arrested) and quashed just about every form of freedom there was in India at that time. There are probably more femme fatales but I'm too tired to look!

Weak men feel they need to blame someone for their mistakes like their mother. A man of character would have the ability to admit he f'ed up and help find a solution.
Lighten up. I was kidding about the Satan being a she thing too! :P

As for "minor" deities, many of them are now your Saints so the Church couldn't have been that against them.
Not my church! One of the reasons I left Catholicism was because they worshipped just about everyone (though they have a pretty good party line why it's ok to pray to ordinary people :rolleyes: )

[JerzeeGirrl]

I figured you were kidding but there are people out there that would be serious (like Mel Gibson who I still like despite his latest).

Somehow I knew Thatcher would be brought up. :rolleyes:

[Deputy757]

Originally posted by JerzeeGirrl
I figured you were kidding but there are people out there that would be serious (like Mel Gibson who I still like despite his latest).
You brought Mel up before. What are you talking about?

[JerzeeGirrl]

The Passion of the Christ where he cast an Italian supermodel in the role of Satan.

[Cockney Corner]

Deputy 757

"True, the Argentines technically invaded, but the UN and Sec State Haig were working on getting them to leave peacefully."

Sorry to get off the thread, but it was a "technical" invasion huh?. An armed invasion of a foreign country, exactly none of whose inhabitants wanted them there and who didn't even speak the same language. What's a real invasion? And as for the idea that the UN would have sorted it all out in the end, well don't make me laugh.

[nickg]

Originally posted by JerzeeGirrl
The Passion of the Christ where he cast an Italian supermodel in the role of Satan.

who would you rather have had him cast, sandra berhnard!!?? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[retired]

Originally posted by nickg
who would you rather have had him cast, sandra berhnard!!?? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

How about George Bush?

[Deputy757]

Originally posted by Cockney Corner
Deputy 757

"True, the Argentines technically invaded, but the UN and Sec State Haig were working on getting them to leave peacefully."

Sorry to get off the thread, but it was a "technical" invasion huh?. An armed invasion of a foreign country, exactly none of whose inhabitants wanted them there and who didn't even speak the same language. What's a real invasion? And as for the idea that the UN would have sorted it all out in the end, well don't make me laugh.
Like you, I don't want to hijack the thread, but to be fair, the "ownership" of the Falklands had been disputed by the Argentinian gov't for a long time. Who is right or wrong is definitely a question I'm not willing to tackle. Plus, the point was about Thatcher and whether she would have employed the same tactics to resolve the conflict if it had not been an election year.
As for the UN, you are preaching to the choir. I've worked for it and know first hand why it has never been able to prevent any war that occurred since it's inception. But everyone should keep that in mind when they rant about why Bush couldn't have let the UN handle the situation in Iraq!

[Cockney Corner]

Again, sorry, sorry about this. Just got to get it off my chest.

Deputy

The 1982 Falklands War wasn't actually in an election year - over here the governing party gets to choose the year (well, technically The Queen but HM is obligated to accept their request to hold one). Thatcher could have held out until 1984 had she wished. But I take your point. However, you had to see the opposition she was up against at the time to realise how good her chances were anyway, and in any case the economy was recovering from the late 70's/early 80's slump over here.

As regards Argentina's claim to the Falklands. Argentina never owned the Falklands. The Empire of Spain claimed a large chunk of the world, including the South Atlantic, from the 15th century on the basis that the Pope said they could have it. There was a brief Spanish settlement of the Islands but this was voluntarily abandoned in the early 19th century. Argentina's claim is based on the suggestion that they have inherited Spain's rights over the Islands and that the Islands are off their coast (well, 400 miles off their coast but what's that between friends).

On that basis Mexico has a really good claim to the south-east of the US (they used to own it, it's just over the Rio Grande and lots of the people who live there are Hispanic/Latino). I'm sure if Mexico suddenly occupied say, Los Angeles, the US would be perfectly happy to wait for the UK to sort it all out on your behalf. Instead the then Mrs Thatcher made the decision that she would rather not have thousands of Brits living under a fascist military regime which had murdered tens of thousands of its own people. And it was damned risky. If something had gone wrong (bearing in mind, our supply lines were much longer, our equipment pretty comparable and the landing force was actually out-numbered by the dug-in Argentinian occupiers) Thatcher would have been for the chop.

Any road - just my er, two cents,

[retdetsgt]

Originally posted by retired
If one reads the Christian bible, one can find numerous passages where God advocates killing people for very minor infractions.

Christian bible? In the Old Testament, yes there's a lot of that, but the New Testament is the Christian bible. The harshest thing there is the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew.

[Styx]

Originally posted by JerzeeGirrl
The Passion of the Christ where he cast an Italian supermodel in the role of Satan.

Really? I just thought it was a very frail looking man with high cheek bones. Whats her name?

[JerzeeGirrl]

Her name is Rosalinda Celentano (like the raviolis).

Images:
http://celeb.b24.it/gallery/Italian_Girls/Rosalinda_Celentano/Rosalinda_Celentano003.JPG

http://www.informagiovani.com/team/imcomp/rc01.jpg

http://www.filmup.com/personaggi/rosalindacelentano/

[Styx]

Well, what do you know.....thanks for the reply. Personally, if she was the best one for the job, I dont think it should matter that she was a woman. She has that Euro look with those great eyes and even though she is petite, her features are not as delicate as some female models and she can play either gender. More money for her.

She played the role well.....not because she is a woman, mind you. ELizabeth whats her name was played by a woman in Bedazzeled, but wasnt really a woman at all. I think the theatre/film portrayal of Satan represents the weaknesses of the person Satan is trying to decieve. Perhaps Gibson used a woman to portray Satan because Jesus was a man after all and women are known to be able to talk men into anything with their charm. A women would have an better chance at talking a man into saving himself rather than sacrificing himself for the rest of the world. Then again, Mel Gibson is an odd one, maybe he just did it for the shock value......many women throughout History have caused the downfall of empires, etc....maybe he was taking that route.
Dont know; its too early and I need coffee.

[JerzeeGirrl]

Actually, you're pretty much on the mark. I saw an interview with Mel and he said that in his opinion Satan would be the type of character that is extremely beautiful in appearance. He said he added a masculine voice as an effect. I think that was to give viewers the obvious notion that what you see on the outside is not what there is on the inside. (I haven't seen it so I can't be sure).

[Styx]

Originally posted by JerzeeGirrl
Actually, you're pretty much on the mark. I saw an interview with Mel and he said that in his opinion Satan would be the type of character that is extremely beautiful in appearance. He said he added a masculine voice as an effect. I think that was to give viewers the obvious notion that what you see on the outside is not what there is on the inside. (I haven't seen it so I can't be sure).

Satan was pretty creepy in the movie; not in a demonic sort of way (well, in some scenes). Had a slithering snake-like quality to him/her....whatever. How appropriate. It was a bit snake-like with a tone of seduction sprinkled in; very theatrical.
I think you would like the movie...you are open minded and would probably pick up on many things that I didnt. Go see it and tell me what you think.....

[steelcityk9cop]

I can think of a few hundred outlaw motorcycleists who would not like this thread. :p

[Styx]

Originally posted by steelcityk9cop
I can think of a few hundred outlaw motorcycleists who would not like this thread. :p

Why?

[JerzeeGirrl]

Originally posted by steelcityk9cop
I can think of a few hundred outlaw motorcycleists who would not like this thread. :p

I have to explain sometimes that I'm not one of those pagans. They took the name. It was a way of life for millenia before. I can only assume it was to counter the "Hell's Angels" which sounds like it came from Judeo-Christian theology to conjure up scary images. Correct me if I'm mistaken.

[Styx]

Originally posted by JerzeeGirrl
I have to explain sometimes that I'm not one of those pagans. They took the name. It was a way of life for millenia before. I can only assume it was to counter the "Hell's Angels" which sounds like it came from Judeo-Christian theology to conjure up scary images. Correct me if I'm mistaken.

I dont know so much about scary as powerful. I believe Hells Angels originally were a flight squadron in WWI and WWII. I thibnk the WWII vets went on to form the first MC...I think. But they had high standards for membership and any evolution to what it is today is just what happens with time.
You have sparked interest in this tired brain of mine; perhaps I will look around when I have time.