With such interviewees as Arthur Scargill, Peter Tatchell and a leading member of the Freemasons, BBC 2's Open to Question - in which a young audience asks the questions - tends to be controversial. Producer Stewart Lamont admits that the programme is 'a forum for discussing...controversial ideas'. But having two witches on the programme led to it being the main subject of another BBC programme Network (17th November 1987).
According to Anna Ford, co-presenter of Network the accusation was made that the witches managed to 'bewitch their young audience, guilefully deflecting their questions and charming their way through the confrontation'. Reverand David Makepeace said that it was 'dangerous to youngsters and - whatever the Radio Times billing may have said about Hallowe'en being a harmless festival - irresponsible of the BBC'.
Unfortunately I only saw the last five to ten minutes of the original interview which was about thirty-five minutes long. I was especially interested because I have met the witches, Janet and Stewart Farrar, and have read Stewart's book "What Witches Do".
Reverand Makepeace was allowed to 'make a film' lasting three or four minutes in which he made his protest. As may be expected, his film took the Christian view that anything other than Christianity was wrong and must be dabbling with the devil. He included comments from a psychiatrist who has dealt with patients supposedly disturbed by involvement in the occult. Also interviewed was a woman who had been in a coven for ten years. She spoke of seeing a man drop dead after being cursed and of being frightened to leave the coven.
Network includes the participation of a studio audience, two members of which were in the original programme and asked the Farrars questions. The first quoted a passage from Deuteronomy in which divination and witchraft were forbidden. Stewart Farrar replied that he thought this was simply the priests at the time not wanting any competition. Makepeace accused the Farrars of neatly side-stepping the question and subsequently falsely equating biblical prophecy with occult divination, asking the viewer 'Do you know the difference?' No, Reverand, I don't. And my dictionary was no help either. Of 'divination' it said: 'insight into or discovery of unknown or future by supernatural means; skilful forecast; good guess'. (I especially like the last two!) Of 'prophecy': 'Faculty of a prophet; prophetic utterance; foretelling of future events'.
The second questioner asked the Farrars if they identify their religion today with the Canaanite worship of Baal and Ashtaroth. That they didn't, upset both the questioner and the Reverand Makepeace who seem too prejudiced to accept that any form of witchcraft can have good intentions.
Even Stewart Lamont agreed that these two questions had not been answered. But perhaps he too is prejudiced as I know that he was once - and may still be - a part-time preacher. He worked for some time in the Religious department of the BBC in Scotland. However, Lamont did defend the Farrars to some extent saying that he didn't believe they were Satanists; that they represent something that would be better described in his vocabulary as 'Druidic' religion or old pagan celtic rights, people who cast spells and really work nature magic, they worship Mother Earth and that's the kind of religion they put across, not this satanic right which substitutes the devil for god and is an upside-down version of orthodox religion.
The attacks on the Farrars were made on religious and not rational grounds. There are two types of witchcraft called white (or right-handed) and black (left-handed).
White witchcraft (or Wicca - the craft of the wise) is quite harmless, being practised by sincere people with good intentions. It has done far less harm than probably any other religion in the world. That they believe in paranormal phenomena such as tarot card reading, astrology, fortune telling, astral Eprojection, etc. is in my view Wicca's only drawback. My knowledge of white witchcraft leads me to accept that its basic beliefs of a higher being are as logical as any other religion. White witches do not worship the devil, although their 'god' is a horned god. Horns were only associated with the devil by the Christian church in the Middle Ages so that it could then say, 'Look, those heathens are worshiping a horned god, and as the devil has horns they are worshipping the devil'. A good reason to hang or burn someone no doubt.
Those who involve themselves in black witchcraft are dangerous, but not due to any supernatural 'power'. They are people prepared to do anything evil in their belief that the devil will give them power and riches.
None of this was taken into consideration in the criticism of the Farrars. It was not made clear whether the woman in Makepeace's film was involved in white or black witchcraft. If she had been in a black coven then she would have had every reason to have been frightened of its members. I doubt though that a white coven would have been intimidating to any rational person. As they also believe that an evil spell rebounds on the spell maker it is silly to suggest that it was a white coven which 'cursed' someone. (Of course I am not accepting that this happened as reported. I want more proof than someone's word.) It was somewhat amusing to hear this woman admit to belief in God's love and in the same breath accuse the Farrars of deceiving themselves in their beliefs. Her reason? That there are only two powers, one is god's and one is satan's.
It is easy to see how accused witches were persecuted in the Middle Ages by the attitude of one young member of Network's studio audience who was convinced that the Farrars 'weren't honest people, they weren't true'. How she knows the Farrars were dishonest I don't know. Could it again be prejudice?
Although a skeptic I support the appearance of white witches on "Open to Question", especially the Farrars who I like and who I believe want only to help people with their craft. A proper understaning of witchcraft is to be encouraged, for sound knowledge is not a dangerous thing. Witches' beliefs in paranormal phenomena should be dealt with scientifically in the same way as claims by other so-called psychics, and not by someone with a prejudiced opposing religious belief.
Recommended reading:
What Witches Do; Stewart Farrar, London 1971 - Good insight into the beliefs and ceremonies of a white witch. Farrar does admit to making some mistakes in this book, a commendable action.
The Encyclopedia of Witchcraft and Demonology; Rossell Hope Robbins, Newnes 1984 - A non-sensational, matter of fact history.
Also:
Eight Sabbats for Witches; Janet and Stewart Farrar, Robert Hale 1981
The Life and Times of a Modern Witch; Piatkus 1987