Always the Truth

Last days, some members of the Covenant of Hekate, press me not to write about things that aren’t pleasant. According to them, when you write what happened and this isn’t a happy story, I degrade the website. When I write against other people’s beliefs, I also degrade the website. This is the opinion we will examine on that blog post.

The Crossroads Witch is based on Mythology, History and Philosophy. This is our three-ways crossroads. If we want to move to a four-ways crossroads, we will add Archaeology. With those roads united, we believe that the Goddess will appear in the center. That’s our meeting point that creates magick. Having that in mind, we cannot continue to follow or study two sciences like History and Philosophy if we aren’t lovers of the truth. After all, that’s a philosopher. There are pleasant truths and unpleasant truths. Our divine Platon used to say that the truth is the sweetest hearing (Memories of Serenos) and Polemon said that the most sweet thing is not to hear someone else to say the truth, but to say the truth yourself (Ioannes Stovaios, Anthology, On Truth 11.15) So, if there is a dilemma to write an article or not to write an article, which will present things that happened and are real, true and help others, the answer is to write that article, no matter what the cost is. To continue, Aischines in his famous speech Against Timarchos writes that “truth is so strong that rules all human thoughts” (p.107).  So, if the truth should be our main concern, there is nothing to calculate or to object, there is no dilemma, nothing against the truth should be fair. Saying the truth is necessary for justice. Euripides will agree with us saying that “the unfair speech is sick and it needs wise drugs” (Phoinisses 469).  Here we just saw a connection between truth and justice and of course the one who is saying the truth is working to that directions accordingly. After all, we cannot have justice with lies or false vows or false commitments.

For the ancient Hellenes, to always say the truth is an act that brings you closer to the divinity. Pythagoras taught that people who say the truth look like the Gods. Some years later, Plato will say the same thing and he will take it a step further in Theaitetos (176 b) by saying that fair people are close to the Gods.

In my articles and blog posts I have no interest to lie. I am a Spartan. My ancestors didn’t know how to lie. I do not make up things from my mind, neither I want to hurt people who were fair and honest with me. After all, I haven’t met them in person. Most of the things are documented, thus anyone can check their validity.

There are things that make me worry, like groups with devotees who suddenly change their direction. Members that are so heavily influenced by other members that they consider them as wise models, change their beliefs in a very short time, like they haven’t done any research to form their own beliefs. I also worry about beginners who start to know the Goddess Hekate and see if they can work with Her, and they find so many contradictions, variations, antiphasis that they don’t know what to do! I was a beginner once and I spent a lot of time to read and create filters. This process takes a lot of time, energy and money. I wish I had someone to tell me that many of the teachings we find, or ideas on the nature of the Goddess are completely irrelevant. And I had a devotee from the Covenant of Hekate, who helped me a lot in the beginning, but I did the rest of the work with Eirini and ourselves.

This website is going to provide information from our perspective, based in ancient texts. Things you can find yourself in ancient texts and modern studies. Things that have worked for us as they worked for Her devotees in the past, who were also philosophers. Many of those ideas are widely accepted from modern devotees of Hekate and we both saw that, as members of the Covenant of Hekate. Of course, there will be an organized group of people who will get offended from my articles, but at least I am trying to give knowledge for free using this website. I write from inner motivation, not to gain money. All the contributors of the website sell nothing or gain nothing. People who disagree with our perspective should understand that we are not doing any politics and we have no interest to become leaders of some kind. We have found things that are useful to us, and like Socrates did to his friends, so do we, share them.

If you read something that hurts you, please make a research. If you think that I lie about something, send me a message. I won’t bite you if you are honest. And yes, I hate actors, hypocrites, fake persons, not online, but also in my daily life. I was raised with strict principles of Laconia, thus Spartan upbringing and I liked that.

I have received messages from people I like and I consider them my friends. They tell me to stop writing the truth because people get hurt. The way I see it, writing or saying the truth is not unfair. If unfair people get hurt is because they were not fair with other people. If I say to an alcoholic that he is alcoholic, I am not saying any lies, the problem is that he is alcoholic. People die from illnesses generated by alcohol. Maybe people who don’t live in Hellas, find that very offensive, but in my country we speak freely and we are ourselves. After all, my ancestors created free speech and regimes like democracy. We can understand when someone gets angry, but we usually use the logical part of our mind and we tend to be passionate with our work. I am not sure if people abroad are like us, as I haven’t live in other countries. But it seems that language is a barrier and the way of written communication creates problems between civilizations - something that my science, computer informatics, has to solve.

People I have addressed in my article “Blocked from Hekate’s Crossroads” may feel that I mistreated them for writing about them. From their perspective, I understand that there is a good possibility to consider themselves mistreated. But, I never wrote any lie on that article. There are things that happened and things that they told me in discussions. Well, sorry, but this is the truth. I expected from my friends who are torchbearers to support me on this act of injustice, but they didn’t. In fact, I saw them change politics. I expected to stand and fight for the truth, for me. But, no, they chose friendship? Is there any friendship with people who barely know each other and they don’t even agree with each other’s views? I have a friend named Zannes. We are best friends for 17 years. If he will be unfair with someone, I will support the truth. He never thinks that I will lie to him and he never lies to me. Why should we put emotions over virtue? I mean, if we win this time, we will lose self respect.

So, apologies to people that feel that I have mistreated with my articles. This is not cancelling my appreciation to their contribution. In fact, their blogs and articles appear in the Crossroads Witch, like always. But their action on that specific time was unfair. And the problem isn’t me who writes that in a blog post, the problem is their action. What they did. Also, it’s not only me. People should know what to expect.

An example is a group of devotees which suddenly changed its route following a different tradition, not old, not ancient, but new and not aligned with the past. And this is politics, because this route is completely different from the group description. In the world of senses we live, change of mortal things is inevitable. But we can change for the best or taking a wrong direction. Usually, if the change isn’t based in honest criteria, it will lead to a dead end. We should have a map, make a study and calculate parameters before changing a different road. We cannot just change completely the direction because we need renewal. This isn’t different than a revolution without cause. The renewal we seek, should be based on knowledge, not interest, profit and promotion to a different community in order to attract members. After all, a modern group of devotees isn’t different from a group of ancient people who study theology. They all want to find methods to communicate with the Goddess, they want to present documented theories and analyze them, they want to read critiques and reviews, opinions of other devotees etc. But we are talking about people who know the things they are talking about. Like scientists who are devoted to a section or a field of study, know what there are talking about and they are serious about it. They are open to see another view, but not an irrelevant view. This isn’t too much to ask for a religious community. In fact, people who participate on that process should be protected to continue do their work, not be suspended from the community, because there are members who have not the same interest on research and study. Is it rude to ask at this point, when the criterion changed from people who base their articles on history to people who are just more in number? On what point of scientific research the criterion was quantity over quality? And I am speaking on religious beliefs here, not tomatoes and olives. I also do not understand why the majority of active members should always be pleased with the articles that a member wrote. When I read a book, I have bought it to learn. If that book presents to me things I don’t know, I research its sources and if there aren’t any, I toss it out of my bookcase. If many people have read that book and tell me that it is ok, I won’t accept their opinion, as the book isn’t documented. This has nothing to do with politeness. There is no space for bullshit here.

We are to the point that I wrote a review on that book I tossed out and they (members) decide to tell me that I am unfair. But the review is documented taking basic teachings from the book and proving its contradictions. Why people who belong to the same religious group feel offended? I would feel happiness if someone could create valid question marks on my faith. This will lead me to a research. And I have been on that situation in the Covenant of Hekate, when sometimes, members write their views and in order for me to explain my view further or to provide insight or to research their own, I bring down books, I buy more books if necessary and then more. That’s helpful for me and I think that this domino action happens to others with my articles or with the views the reader can find in them. After all, there are two basic laws of physics; firstly when I set a force on a surface, the surface sets a force back to me and secondly when I set a movement, the object will move as long as my force moves it.

Finally we got to the last paragraph. Online communications apart from the misunderstandings include fights, discussions, arguments and dialogues, which are sometimes helpful and sometimes not so helpful. In both cases, a healthy mind can take what it wants and examines it further and then return to the conversation. But, there is not a way of conducting a dialogue without knowing the rules of dialogue. For example, if I ask a question, I am just asking a question. I am not attacking personally to anyone. The person with the different opinion should respond to that question with sources. If the other side asks for my sources, I am ready to write them. Additionally, I am ready to explain not only the texts, but also the theories I invoke to the conversations. And I will wait for the other person to respond. In the meantime, if there is another question from another member, I try to respond to that one too. What I see in those dialogues are members who do not respond to the questions, thus degrading the value of the conversation. In many cases, they couldn’t respond at all or even ask their questions when we were discussing on a coffee table or formally on a conference. In some cases, they totally deny to provide any sources or even to state their spiritual background. In the worst case scenario, there are cliques that interfere in the conversation to reduce the value of the conversation. And there are cases where the administrators either don’t pay attention or they stop the conversations. These are not good conditions for a dialogue to continue and benefit all the participants as well as the readers. It takes time and patience to keep order in a group and the administrators should be objective. After all, I am asking for some preconditions to encourage dialogue based on facts or things we can trace on books. Is there another civilized way to exchange opinions, except the dialogue? The articles? Interviews and books? Anyone who has knowledge or wants to learn from a discussion he should be able to either write or read the views which are presented. Any view is open to criticism as long as this criticism isn’t done in order the one person to offend each other due to previous disagreements of the past. Everyone on a serious religious group who participates in a conversation should express his views, on things he knows or he is drawn to write. The final judgment of one’s contributions, ideas, arguments belongs to people who approach those in an honest way. Saying the truth all the time and remaining true is a projection of our true self. Even if we are bad or good, wrong or right, at least we are true, we play no games, no politics, and we seek no cliques, no groups, no one to confirm that we have done the right thing.

No votes yet

Theurgy and Philosophy are two different methods which lead to the union with God.


Follow on

Subscribe to our Newsletters

Latest Comments


Back to Top