Sound of Trumpet
2006-04-05 09:52:28 UTC
Star Trip: the weird and relentless creep of paganism into the
Stand Firm ^ | 4/04/2006 | Greg Griffith
Posted on 04/04/2006 6:07:30 PM PDT by sionnsar
It seems almost quaint now, but almost two years ago there was a
gathering of pagans in Michigan that shocked Epicopalians with seminars
such as "Sex & Spells: Gender and Political Activism in the Witchen
Community." It was sponsored by Oasis, the California-based pro-gay
activist group devoted to advancing the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and
trans-gendered agenda in the Episcopal Church.
Then there was the much-publicized dust-up over William Melnyk, the
Episcopal priest in the Diocese of Pennsylvania, who was asked to
resign his post as rector after it became clear he was moonlighting as
a Druid priest, alternately going by the names "Oakwyse" and "Bran."
Now, thanks to some research by commenter Liz at TitusOneNine, it turns
out that Maury Johnston, author of Gays Under Grace: A Gay Christian's
Response to Homosexuality and the recent widely-publicized essay
"Facing the Spectre of Schism", is also known as "Shadwynn" and belongs
to a Wiccan order called "Keepers of the Cauldron." The coven is
described as being in the "grail quest tradition," based on the
Arthurian legends and featuring a strong Eucharistic theme. Mr.
Johnston claims to have "married" nine couples in his 18 years a Wiccan
priest, and his other writings only underscore his bizarre notions of
how to "blend" Christianity and Wicca.
Mr. Johnston's essay "Facing the Spectre of Schism" was also reprinted
with much enthusiasm in this post at "Father Jake Stops The World" and
on - surprise - the Oasis blog. Father Jake posted another Johnston
These are not the only examples of Episcopal priests and prominent lay
activists on the left dabbling in - and in some cases, immersing
themselves in - polytheism, paganism, and witchcraft. They are simply
some of the more well-known examples.
Many of us have taken solace in humor whenever we read of Episcopal
clerics and prominent lay activists heavily involved in paganism, but
it has not been without the knolwedge that there is a sinister core to
these peoples' alternative beliefs. Many pagans and Wiccans insist that
they don't worship the devil, and that's true as far as it goes, but
it's small comfort to those Christians who have put their spiritual
trust in those who, at best, profess contradictory beliefs and, at
worst, are willing to serve up a potion of part Christianity, part
Wicca to unsuspecting seekers.
But now it is time for us and for revisionist Episcopalians to have a
serious discussion about the matter of paganism in the Episcopal left.
It has become increasingly difficult to shrug off events like
Michigan's seminar, and people like William Melnyk and Maury Johnston,
as fringe cases, not when the likes of Louie Crew and Father Jake - two
of the Episcopal left's most visible activists - see fit to rely on Mr.
Johnston's words to make their case that ECUSA should open its doors as
widely as possible, to welcome in God only knows what.
It is time for Episcopalians everywhere - especially those in the
"middle" who may just now be waking up to the crisis in their church -
to know that there are more than a few pagans among the left, and that
they are uniformly in support of the gay/lesbian/transgender agenda.
There is much overlap between pagan views of sexuality, and the LGBT
agenda; and while it's incorrect to assume that one who supports the
LGBT agenda also supports paganism, it should give reasonable
Episcopalians serious pause when they ponder why it is that the
opposite is true - that it's safe to assume that if someone supports
paganism, he also supports the LGBT cause in the Episcopal Church.
It is time for the Episcopal left to admit it has pagans in its midst,
and to admit that this is a problem it needs to address.
It is time for Louie Crew, Father Jake, Oasis, and the clergy of the
Church of the Holy Comforter to tell us what they think of Mr.
Johnston's 18-year association with Wicca - and as a priest, no less...
not just a curious bystander.
Is this the first they have heard about Mr. Johnston's life as a Wiccan
priest? If so, may we assume that they will take this opportunity to
disavow themselves of Mr. Johnston's practice of Wicca, and to begin
seriously to confront the influence of paganism among their fellow
If this is not the first they've heard of it, what may we assume about
their failure to mention it? Was it mere oversight? A calculated
omission? Or is it tacit approval?