This is a question that has been born on another site to which I am a member and it goes as follows.

Can unitiated witches call themselvs Wiccan?

The debate seems to follow that only initiated witches can use the term Wiccan to describe themselvs in public.

While I personally can understand that view I was wondering what members in here will make of it. For me being a wiccan is just a phase on my path, if I use the word it doesnt mean I am better or worse than anyone else it's just a handy label.

So what do we think?

Blessed Be

Moonwolf

I would be interested to know your attitude, as an initiate yourself, to someone who obviously is not an initiate calling themselves Wiccan -- I do hope you are kind to them.

I know of a least one person who asks young innocents what their path is in the hope they say Wiccan, so he can make himself look good by exposing their lack of knowledge.

Why should it matter a dingo's kidney to non-initiates what other non-initiates call themselves. The only persons who should give a damn are the 'true' Wiccans, and, if they are concerned, as they are outvoted on this subject by about a million to one and are never - ever going to regain control of the use of the W word, isn't it about time they got themselves a new title, or revert back to simply being know as The Wica ?

dav

It depends on your definition of Wiccan.

The original lineaged paths all trace their roots back to Gardner (in some way or other), and they require members to be initiated into their covens as was Gardner's original intention. As they have to work hard for this initiation and the grades that follow they feel that using the title 'Wiccan' without the work is a little naughty

However many non lineaged paths sprung up in response to books published (largely in the US but also in the Mother Country) detailing the secrets of Wicca and avowing that you can self initiate. Now many of these self initiated Wiccans will think that all it takes is to dab themselves with blessed oil and say they are initiated and thats all it takes to be a Wiccan. And who can blame them as thats more or less what the book says. Some will realise that Wicca is more than this and may go on to become members of lineaged covens or even credible Wiccans without that step. However every Charmed fan who thinks they are a Wiccan by simply reading a book and swapping love spells makes the gap between lineaged Wiccans and credible spontaneous Wiccans wider

So it all depends really on what sort of Wiccan you are and where you use the title.

Many differentiate between the 2 by using capital W for proper lineaged Wiccans and little w for book learnt wiccans, however this doesn't translate well to speech so others use British Tradition for the lineaged sort and American Tradition for the self initiated type.

Now as far as I'm concerned you can call yourself what you like as long as you are honest and true to your faith.

K

For me it's only a name, My line can be traced back to GBG via Alex n Maxine my line is fierclly proud of it's heritage and my HP defends the use of the term wicca quite vigerously, For me I really dont mind what people call themselvs (to thine own self be true) I think that a lot of the holier than thou bit that goes on within wiccan circles is missing the point, we are a fertility based loving religion, that has claws as well, we shouldn't feel the need to slap everyone down just because they use a name that we dont agree that they have earned the right to use.

We all start down our paths from different points so as long as your not claiming to be something your not, wether your initiated or not is a moot point.

I think that programs like charmed should be viewed for what they are, entertainment pure and simple, it was only a few years ago when Cadfael was on TV pushing the xcian views in an entertainment format now it's a wiccan/pagan turn on the small screen. We all have our time in the limlight and it to will pass.

I have met a few x covenors who all express the feeling that the politics is why they left they joined a coven for witchcraft and wicca not bitchcraft and bicker, which seems a common thread from either of the main lines of modern wicca.

Just my views.

Blessed Be

Moonwolf

I'm not an initiate and have no interest in becoming one. So maybe I should keep my nose out however it does wind me up when people assume a title that has to be worked for and you have to be initiated to claim it. It cheapens the work that the 'proper' Wiccans put in in learning their craft and it cheapens the value of initiation. I wouldn't have any problem if it was not a title that is to be earned.

Calling yourself a Wiccan when by definition you are not is dishonest to my way of thinking.

ditto

I also agree with Cosmic fool..

I am an initiated Wiccan, and actually have an added title since I am a member of clergy. So my actual title in and amongst others of my trad. is Rev. Nina du Preez. This is my actual name, and I use it when corrosponding with others of same trad. But ...

When on other sites where there are people of mixed faith's I simply call myself Wiccan, as I follow a Wiccan trad.

My only hangup is with wannabes...much like the ones which Cosmic mentions.

Hello Ameniatha

I know this is off topic but I was wondering how you find British Wicca compared to South African - it it the same or are there differences? I'm just wondering because American Wicca is different to British and so maybe each nationality puts their own stamp on it and style of practise?

I dunno.. I would agree if we were talking about becoming a druid or something here... but I kinda look at it differently...

If someone finds "god" they can call themselves a christian, they dont have to join a church or be baptised to be a christian... however... if they called themselves a minister, or priest, or pope... THEN I would have a problem.

The wiccan path is not always a coven path. You CAN be a solitary wiccan and you can initiate yourself. I dont see the problem.

But again it comes back to the difference.. WHY would a witch want to call her/himself a wiccan? This is an old line.. but here goes... Not all witches are wiccans and not all wiccans are witches...

I disagree. As far as I'm concerned, the only people with the right to call themselves solitary Wiccans are those that have joined a coven, been initiated and then left. Wicca started out an initiatory tradition and I think that the whole solitary wiccan thing is just handy for selling more books. Think about it - would silverravenrubbish sell as many books if she was actually honest and said 'look, reading this book doesn't make you a Wiccan - only being initated does....oh and while we're at it, I can't really tell you too much because I'd be violating my own oaths of secrecy so yeah....'

And no, I don't get why a Witch would want to call themselves a Wiccan when they're not. And I think that it's pretty stunting development-wise for a person to try and follow a Wiccan path from books that only tell half the story anyway.

Ditch the books, it's all the same regurgitated pap anyway.

I guess thats something we will just have to agree to disagree on. I mean if thats the case then eclecticisim is invalid too and I dont think you would agree to that.

[quote=Xalle,Sep 29 2006, 10:47 PM]
[quote=elswyth,Sep 29 2006, 10:25 PM]
I guess thats something we will just have to agree to disagree on. I mean if thats the case then eclecticisim is invalid too and I dont think you would agree to that.

[/quote]

How does what I said invalidate ecclecticism?

What I object to is people claiming to be something they're not because like it or lump it, Wicca is an initiation kind of deal. How does that invalidate ecclecticism?

Well... ok just by my reconing (flip i hope this makes sense..)

If someone chooses to be a Wiccan and chooses to be a solitary wiccan and chooses NOT to initiate through the coven, they have chosen a part of the wiccan path that is right for them.. much like the christians who "find god" but choose not to join a church many christians believe that you cant be "saved" unless you are baptised but NOT conforming to a church does not make you any less a christian, in the same way that not being intiated in a coven doesnt make you any less a wiccan. (Im getting to the Ecclectic part...)

Ecclectics pick and choose odds and ends from all sorts of paths to make their own "faith" it doesnt make them any less pagan because they dont follow a particular path.

Again and Im sorry of I keep bringing it back to Christianity... but its the best comparison I can make... My grandmother is a Christiain... she has been all her life. (it was my great grandmum that was the previous witch in my family..) My mum and dad are agnostic. She was chatting to me once about my path and her mums path and about heaven. I asked her was she worried about us not getting into her version of heaven? She said.. no.. that if we were good people and lived good lives we would be ok. Now the acceptance of christ as the saviour is a fundamental tennant of the christain faith and the getting into heaven deal. But it was a part of that faith that she felt differently about, it doesnt make her any less a christian.. it might put her at loggerheads with some others from her church, but it doesnt alter HER faith.

Gods Im rambling... what Im trying to say is that in every faith, EVERY faith, there are parts of the faith that people choose NOT to adhere to blindly. It doesnt make you any less a Christian, wiccan, pagan, buddist, muslim, etc etc....

Maybe ecclectic was a bad way to go with it... my powers of explanation and the working of the english language not as elloquent as some on here! But Im sure that you get where Im trying (albeit badly) to come from.

I might be wrong but I'm going to stick my neck out here and say that I think you do have to be baptised to be a christian.

cern?

However, if you believe in Jesus and god and all that you can call yourself a christian. It doesn't mean you are one.

Likewise, if you believe all the wiccan stuff you can call yourself a wiccan but it doesn't mean you are one.

To be honest now that I've read what I've written I think I've gone the long way round for a short cut.

What I mean is, you can call yourself whatever you like it doesn't mean you are that.

I don't hink I'm making much sense and I think I've had too much wine

but I think I'm right about the baptism thing...

???

Just double checked this with a friend of mine... was "born again" a few years ago.. Aparently not. Baptisim is optional.. accepting christ is the only "must"

I agree Tilia.



Well if your friend was 'born again', they probably already were baptised as a baby. However I disagree with your friend that a person does not need to be re-baptised to be 'born again'. Look at the symbolism of baptism. It's all about washing away old sins and being born anew.I could ask my work colleague who's a lay preacher in the born again mob but I think he'll agree seeing as his church does total immersion baptisms because they're more accurate to the bible.

Also Christianity and Wicca are massively different in that Christianity isn't an initiatory tradition that deals with 'inner' mysteries. Christianity is more of a faith intended for the masses. They proselytise to try and get more members whereas Wiccans keep themselves to themselves and most likely don't want everyone to be Wiccan - well the real ones probably don't anyway.

Besides which, what's wrong with being a good old Bogstandard Pagan or Witch?

Without casting stones here, if you are a 'wiccan' you Have been initiated (and yes maybe left a coven), if you have not be initiated your a witch (eclectic, hedge whatever).

Once you have been 'made' then you always will be a wiccan wether you later become a xcian or muslem, when you've been done you stay done. That is my understanding of the way it goes

Just my further two cents worth

BB
Moonwolf

Just to quibble further but Wicca relates to an integrated spiritual and practical aspect whereas witchcraft relates to the practical only. Therefore it doesn't necessarily fall that an someone following the solitary, uninitiated wiccan path will be a witch.

you can squabble all day and night until the light of eternity fades for all i care.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicca

to say what i really think about wiccans would just upset to many folk

Fair comment. But can an unitiated solitary person really follow a wiccan path? mainly because what is taught in wicca is an oral not written tradition, I know there are loads of 'wiccan' books around but only a couple give you any insight to what is really going on and even these (two of which are considered 'primers') say that they are missing the greatest part of what goes on because it's oathbound.

I think that as we have already seen peoples views vary wildely and will never be truely reconciled on this matter, I am happy to be what I am and am comfortable with myself enough to not mind if others want to use the title without going the hard yards of learning.

Blessed Be

[quote=moonwolf,Oct 1 2006, 05:07 PM]
[quote=Pomona,Oct 1 2006, 05:05 PM]Fair comment. But can an unitiated solitary person really follow a wiccan path? mainly because what is taught in wicca is an oral not written tradition, I know there are loads of 'wiccan' books around but only a couple give you any insight to what is really going on and even these (two of which are considered 'primers') say that they are missing the greatest part of what goes on because it's oathbound.


[/quote]

Now you see, that's exactly what a Gardnerian friend of mine says about it.

Oh, I completely agree with that. My own view is that you're not Wiccan unless you've been initiated. Following a path which has wiccan elements but not being formally initiated does not make you a Wiccan. I've said in other threads on this subject that in my view, strictly speaking, someone who has not been initiated but follows a wiccan path should really call themselves that. But it's too long winded so I can see the argument for the small "w" to denote non-initiation.

Evermorelong, not sure why you appear to have such a low opinion of wiccans - at least, I'm guessing that from the comment - the wiki link doesn't really give any clues either. I have to say that the Wiccans (and wiccans) of my aquaintance are decent, honourable pagans who have the courage of their path and I would absolutely defend their right to walk it.

personal magickal/coven working experience has given me not only a low opinion of some who practise wicca but a negative one too.

"Can unitiated witches call themselvs Wiccan?"

the answer to the original question is no they cannot.

" I have to say that the Wiccans (and wiccans) of my aquaintance are decent, honourable pagans who have the courage of their path and I would absolutely defend their right to walk it."

I would defend any persons right to do as they choose(obiviously within the law) regardless of what branch or brand or football team they followed.

evermorelong your post above is one of the reasons my HP and HPS think I'm a pain in the ass, I ask questions all the time when I meet ex covenors and I pass these views back to my coven for discussion as I think that if, as we are all told at the begining, we can talk about anything then this topic needs airing.

I understand that 'perfect love and perfect trust' are not 'real' outside the circle only within it, so we as humans continue to f**k up which in the end feeds back into circle. I can only hope that what ever happened to you has left you stronger and from your posts I would say that maybe it has.

A female friend of mine told me after she had been 'initiated into the coven she was working with the HP tried it on so she has run a mile and thinks that maybe Wiccans should be avoided like the plague, she is slowly comming round to see that in the end we are all human and we are flawed some more than others.

As a Wiccan I can hold my head up and say I'm trying to be the best I can, and as a human I'm just trying .

Blessed Be
Moonwolf

hi Moonwolf

I hope you carry on asking questions, im assuming you'd like to know why ive such a low opinion of some (not all) who practice wicca.
firstly i know its wrong to tar all with the same brush, and i do try not to most of the time unfortunatley i havent accended yet!
What is gone is gone my feeling towards those people has subsided because they never mattered.One of the many groups ive been in became the subject of a to put it simply "a you cant play with our ball" campaign the protaganists were the hp and hps of the local wicca group, because myself and my then partner refused to join their group. these people purposely disrupted our meetings and even tampered with mail. they did all this with the same i know better than you pomposity i read in some of the replies on some of the threads.

I use to be a born again myself.. and I would dispute your friend, baptism is very much encouraged because it is consider a rite of passage, so to speak, it's washing away the stain of sin and begin emerging cleansed, it can be a deeply moving experience.

The difference with Born Again type Xtains is it is the individual who decides when they will be baptised, rather than the Church saying that at such and such a time all new xtains will be baptised into the faith.

Yes born agains are xtains... but they don't become "committed" xtains or confirmed to use an Angelican term until they are baptised. Baptism is if you like, xtains own initatory rite.

Accepting Jesus as the son of god and saviour of mankind is of course the main ingredient for xtainity in the born again / evangelical strain... baptism is considered the thing that those who are truly committed and serious about thier faith will do.

Regarding the debate over Wicca. Well as it's a initiatory mystery religion, then it rather stands to reason one does have to be initated into it..... however, I wouldn't necessarily say someone who calles themselves wiccan and has self initated has is being dishonest, entirely possible they are unaware of this debate and the books do advise them it is a perfectly valid way to become wiccan... until they meet an initated Wiccan how are they to know otherwise?

And really what do you call someone who has tried to carve a path based on Wiccan teachings that are available publically? Some of these individuals will be very serious in their study and truly feel a calling for Wicca, but circumstances may mean they are unable to attend or find a real Wiccan coven.

Perhaps we and iniated wiccans prehaps should acknowledge that a whole new branch of Wicca has developed.
??

Very nicely put.

** edited to say** Erm.. no pun intended!

Agreed

I'm sure Valiente herself said that she thought that solitary Wicca was the way ahead and that it would sit alongside coven-Wicca. I wonder what she'd think of the whole wicca/Wicca debate. Probably consider it a lot of tosh from what I can gather of that formidable woman!

Frankly, the problem with "clannishness" in some Wicca covens, is not necessarily a Wiccan phenomenon. Any social group can be prone to this, given that nature is essentially opportunistic. There will always be people in the world looking for even the merest opportunity to play their domination games. I've seen it in even the most trivial little interest groups. Indeed it's unfortunate that jerks can spoil a good thing, but I'm sure anyone with good sense and personal integrity is not going to let that discourage their quest.

Hmm just as an aside, Anglican churches do both confirmation and baptism. Baptism is an early thing done to "cleanse original sin" I think, and it is considered that a person isn't responsible for sins committed before baptism. You then need to do confirmation to be allowed to take communion. Confirmation is the more significant rite.

(In the Anglican view of things, unbaptised Anglicans go to purgatory. I'm not sure where unbaptised non-Anglicans are meant to go...)

I think this is much more true of born-agains. Most people with Christian upbringings are baptised before they can even walk!

All I can comment on with regards to the Wiccan name is that there's no regulatory body to approve the use of the word Wiccan, but perhaps the sort of naming scheme used in music could be applied? Nu-Wiccans, perhaps? NeoWiccans? (I'm being silly, please don't take offense! )

Well I was speaking from a Born Again experience rather than Anglican point of view, in Born again view baptism is done by someone who is able to give consent (does not necessarily have to be an adult.. a child is able to say whether they want to be baptised or not) I'm not aware of any anglecian "confirmation" type ritual within born again strain... they reference John the Baptist a lot (saving people and then baptising them...)

Anglicans usually christain the baby into the religion, with those adults involved promising to teach the child xtain morals etc... and then I believe when a kid is about 12 they are confirmed?

The born agains I was involved with were very against xtaiining babies, they very much believed the person must make an individual committment to God and Jesus and so while the kiddies were still taught their parents's faith, the child wasn't baptised into xtainity (born again strain) until they were old enough to say that is what they wanted.

Oh and the born agains I was involved with did not prevent anyone from taking communion (or breaking bread as they called it), it was down to individual choice and relationship with God. i.e. if you thought you wree worthy of joining in the breaking of bread you did, if you didn't you didn't.

Sorry I probably shouldn't have mixed anglican terminology with born again.

I think you're right that xtaining was basically done to expunge the taint of original sin so if the child died before being confirmed they he/she would still go to heaven. Born Agains however, do not believe (or at least the one's I knew) babies are born with orignal sin.




Well without being offensive to those who believe quite strongly on this topic Pomona, I do think it is a bit of old tosh; although I can kinda understand the emotions a topic such as this can rise, afterall look how passionate we can get on the whole Wicca / Witchcraft debate.

I see it this way.

Wicca is a team sport, with the HPS as the Coach and her HP as assistant Coach. As a team thing everyone works by the same rules or leaves, members can get up the Wisdom ladder quicker than those who rely on booklearning alone (solo wiccans). Also Wicca has a religious element.

Witchcraft is a Craft, in the past it was learned via Master and Apprentice system. Nowadays it can be learned from books in part. It is not religious in and of itself, but more in the nature of a Trade. Those who wish to add a religious element can do so.

I trained within a Gardnerian Coven, but am now solo as the Coven broke up after the death of the HPS a few years back. I have no desire to take on the responsibility of running a Coven in my old age.


Cheers, Midori