The essay, The Great and Sovereign Mother Goddess by Robin Artisson, had me nodding my head on many occasions. One specific point that I agreed upon was made with the statement:

"India makes a good place to look for traditions of Goddess Worship..."

Absolutely. Here we have a surviving tradition of the Goddess. It is however not found in its original form and has still been subjected, in part, to the "savage suppression" spoken of in the later part of the statement.


Another good point from the essay:

"Despite the very politically motivated over-simplifications that have been worked into the field of Goddess studies by radical feminists..."

I couldn't agree more. The Goddess is an equal opportunity mother. She doesn't love her female children more than her male ones or vice versa. Many aspects of her mysteries can be seen through the female body, but that does not automatically exalt women over men. It is about equality and respect and nothing more. I refuse to allow my religion to be a fading movement which serves someone else's political agendas.


"I do not believe in the so-called 'triple goddess' of modern mainstream neo-paganism."

"...I do not believe in the wiccan 'triple goddess'."

Robin feels strongly enough about the above statement to say it twice. It just so happens that it is probably the one point that I had the most conflict with. Within the essay itself are the following words.

"Alongside this virginal, pure and boundless condition..."

"...She has been approached as Earth Mother... and as a Goddess of the Underworld or a Fate-Weaver."

In the above statements the Goddess is demonstrated as being triplicate as in Maiden, Mother, and Crone which Robin says is a "modern construct" despite the "great religious truth that many of the Goddesses [he] worship[s] historically appear in triple form."

"...I do believe in the Goddess of Sovereignty, and in her triple force of power."

I'm confused. So I call the Goddess Maiden, Mother, Crone, and All Goddess and Robin calls her the Goddess of Sovereignty who has a triple power. What is the difference? I think we're talking about the same thing here.

Is it possible that Robert Graves coined the terms Maiden, Mother, Crone because it was a common way of seeing the Goddess: youthful, motherly, and aging? He didn't make up the myths of the Goddess which demonstrate these triplicate aspects. He simply classified her aspects into simple English. I'm not even sure Graves can take all the credit for it actually. These ideas have been around for millennia. It seems unlikely that one man could put into words what has always been. Or perhaps for him it was a moment of intuition and remembrance of the Great Goddess of ancient times. Either way, does it really matter? It appears that we believe in the same thing, but call it two (kind of) different things.

So, this leaves the Triple Goddess as a historical manifestation seen through the eyes of the myth writers and readers - the interpreters of the worship of our Ancient Mother. The Goddess in triplicate is not a new concept, nor is it solely a Wiccan one.

I admire Robin's writing ability and thoughtful approach. I hope to be given the opportunity to have conversations and debate with him in the future.

Labels: Goddess, Misc. Commentary, Modern Paganism