You probably know about my opinion on this certain path, and im sure something like this came up a few days ago...however....Wicca, Gardiner started it, or at the very least took credit for starting it, my question is: with all the diffrent wicca paths these days can they truly be called wicca? I'd agree that Alexandrian could also claim to be a wiccan path but after that could they? with new ones popping up all the time this has been bugging me? (faery wicca for example ....which I think is just basically orgys for old pagans)
Touch
Full Version: Wicca
I wouldn't call anything other than Gardnerian or Alexandrian Wicca, Wicca.
maybe cos I know a fair few Gardnerians.
some of them wouldn't even call Alexandrian Wicca, Wicca.
maybe cos I know a fair few Gardnerians.
some of them wouldn't even call Alexandrian Wicca, Wicca.
Yes, I'm with Galena.
I don't even subscribe to calling non-Gardnerian paths wicca with a small W. To me, followers of these path are either "witches," practitioners of "the Craft" or just plain old pagans, whichever name they like, but not Wiccans.
I don't even subscribe to calling non-Gardnerian paths wicca with a small W. To me, followers of these path are either "witches," practitioners of "the Craft" or just plain old pagans, whichever name they like, but not Wiccans.
I was having a debate on another site that argued if you didn't follow Wicca, including the Reade, you can't call yourself Wicca. I disagreed, only because as far as I'm concern, you can call yourself anything you want to. Many follow a lot of the Wicca beliefs but not necessarily to the letter. And the reade makes some sense if only you don't realize that sometimes one needs to work with both the light and the dark. At times they work together.
I've always liked the spirituality of the Celtic, Witchcraft and Native American (Shamanism) paths and still do, even after doing a lot of reading and researching. (No, I won't put any 'research' questions here
) I still prefer those.
I've found Vodou (thank you Crow for reminding me the correct way of spelling Vodou) and Santeria interesting because I've known people who follow those paths, but it seemed too involved for my simple tastes and detailed in a lot of ways. I just didn't feel a connection to it as I do of those mentioned.
Except I like a certain Patchuli oil that I could only find in a Bodaga (sp) which has long since gone out of business. It was a very light smell, similar to vanilla, not the stringent aroma of some of the others I've seen, the more spicy ones.
I've always liked the spirituality of the Celtic, Witchcraft and Native American (Shamanism) paths and still do, even after doing a lot of reading and researching. (No, I won't put any 'research' questions here
) I still prefer those.I've found Vodou (thank you Crow for reminding me the correct way of spelling Vodou) and Santeria interesting because I've known people who follow those paths, but it seemed too involved for my simple tastes and detailed in a lot of ways. I just didn't feel a connection to it as I do of those mentioned.
Except I like a certain Patchuli oil that I could only find in a Bodaga (sp) which has long since gone out of business. It was a very light smell, similar to vanilla, not the stringent aroma of some of the others I've seen, the more spicy ones.
Hmm... you're looking for a light patchouli oil. Have you tried a bottle of really good vetiver oil instead? That has all the sweet and earthy qualities of patchouli but it's not as spicy or licquorice-like as some lower-quality variants of patchouli.
I suppose words have a life of their own, and their usage can broaden or change much faster than any attempts at consistent definition can hope to keep up.
From my own experience, there seems to be a 'narrow' and a 'broad' definition of what Wicca is:
Narrow definition: the attitudes and practices of initiates within Gardnerian and Alexandrian traditional lineages. I accept Galena's point that some Gardnerians don't recognise Alexandrians as Wiccans, but the feuds of the 60's & 70's (and ok, maybe someone later) seem to have (mostly) faded away now, and the only people I've met who still hold that attitude strongly are rather elderly (though admittedly, still very strong willed). Does that seem a reasonable generalisation, Galena?
Broad definition: the attitudes and practices of Witches who are not Gardnerian or Alexandrian initiates, but who draw to a greater or lesser degree on published elements of those traditions.
Perhaps we'd now have to add an extremely broad definition which would be little more than "anything anyone anywhere has called Wicca at anytime" but that's stretching the word so far that it would be effectively meaningless.
BB,
John Macintyre
From my own experience, there seems to be a 'narrow' and a 'broad' definition of what Wicca is:
Narrow definition: the attitudes and practices of initiates within Gardnerian and Alexandrian traditional lineages. I accept Galena's point that some Gardnerians don't recognise Alexandrians as Wiccans, but the feuds of the 60's & 70's (and ok, maybe someone later) seem to have (mostly) faded away now, and the only people I've met who still hold that attitude strongly are rather elderly (though admittedly, still very strong willed). Does that seem a reasonable generalisation, Galena?
Broad definition: the attitudes and practices of Witches who are not Gardnerian or Alexandrian initiates, but who draw to a greater or lesser degree on published elements of those traditions.
Perhaps we'd now have to add an extremely broad definition which would be little more than "anything anyone anywhere has called Wicca at anytime" but that's stretching the word so far that it would be effectively meaningless.
BB,
John Macintyre
Dear Touchstone,
"faery wicca for example ....which I think is just basically orgys for old pagans"
Why only for old Pagans? (can't work out how to use the smiley controls so just imagine a smiley there)
BB,
John Macintyre
"faery wicca for example ....which I think is just basically orgys for old pagans"
Why only for old Pagans? (can't work out how to use the smiley controls so just imagine a smiley there)
BB,
John Macintyre
I believe the only people who can legitimately call themselves Wiccans are those who have been initiated into a coven, and whose lineage goes back to Alex or Gerald, mainly because it is an initiatory tradition, and based ofn the oral distribution of knowledge, therefore what goes on in a coven is completely different to what you get in a book.
However I know for a lot of people, especially in the states the terms wiccan and witch are interchangable. I don't agree with that, and I would not agree that any of the other offshoots of wicca can really lay claim to that title unless started by an initiated Wiccan. Mind you, what I know about such things as faery wicca and the like could be written on the back of a postage stamp in big letters1
I asumed it was either a path that involved working with fairy beings, or a path that caters specifically for gay men. I'm probably wrong on both counts.
However I know for a lot of people, especially in the states the terms wiccan and witch are interchangable. I don't agree with that, and I would not agree that any of the other offshoots of wicca can really lay claim to that title unless started by an initiated Wiccan. Mind you, what I know about such things as faery wicca and the like could be written on the back of a postage stamp in big letters1
I asumed it was either a path that involved working with fairy beings, or a path that caters specifically for gay men. I'm probably wrong on both counts.
I'm one of those who, like Dragenfach, believe that you can only really call yourself Wiccan (capital W) if you've been initiated into a coven with a Gardnerian/Alexandrian lineage. I do believe that you can say you follow wiccan practices if you are not in a Wiccan coven, but do follow those practises laid down and followed in covens. What bothers and irritates me though, and I think it's along the same lines as Touchstone was talking about, is that the term "Wicca" seems to be becoming more and more interchangeable for "Pagan" - it's almost like there are pagan practises which do not have a label, so it's easier just to say that they're wiccan as a kind of "catch-all"...
QUOTE(gypsimoon @ Nov 18 2004, 07:46 PM)
I disagreed, only because as far as I'm concern, you can call yourself anything you want to.
In that case, my dear, I'm a Doctor.
no one can say I'm not, because I've a right to be a Doctor if I want, and saying I need training to call myself a Doctor is just being a big mean bully.
so there you go.
oh, and have you encountered Tonka Bean?
that's a bit vannilla-y patchouli-y. Lush have it in some of their stuff adn it smells lovely. just thought you might like it.
some of those Gardnerians were somewhat grumpy and long in the tooth.
and some weren't. just depends really. I can see their point on one hand, but on the other, both paths grew alongside each other.
Hmmm, my driving instructor recently twigged that i'm a witch. He said 'oh you're one of those wiccans then' and then was trapped in the car for the rest of the lesson getting a rather ranty lecture about my ideas on the difference. Poor man. The term is becoming generic, which must be as irritating for those who have worked very hard on their Wiccan path as it for those of us who do not wish to be considered wiccan.
exactly.
I get offended on behalf of myself, who is in no way Wiccan, and on behalf of the Wiccans I know who worked very hard before they ever thought to call themselves one.
I get offended on behalf of myself, who is in no way Wiccan, and on behalf of the Wiccans I know who worked very hard before they ever thought to call themselves one.
QUOTE
In that case, my dear, I'm a Doctor.
Ooh Doctor - could you just have a look at this rash for me
Yes - you can call yourself anything you like, but that also means that anyone adopting titles that aren't deserved can be called anything we like!! Such as . . . bonkers, barking, fruit loopy, foolish, a sandwich short, a pretender, a pratt . . .
bb
Rhiannon
Faery Wicca: yes they work with the Fae which is quite acceptable (my mom does so I have to put that in dont I ) and while they are working with the Fae they go into an orgasmic condition (apparently) and (to put it crassly) ride each others brains out. But from what I've read and heard about it, it seems to attract a lot of old men and women who cant get their kicks anymore.
) and while they are working with the Fae they go into an orgasmic condition (apparently) and (to put it crassly) ride each others brains out. But from what I've read and heard about it, it seems to attract a lot of old men and women who cant get their kicks anymore.
ok.. so what about those that consider themselves solitary then?
I dont know how I feel about this.. to me Wicca, have become like Christianity... one book... many paths.
I dont know how I feel about this.. to me Wicca, have become like Christianity... one book... many paths.
QUOTE(Touchstone @ Nov 19 2004, 07:26 PM)
But from what I've read and heard about it, it seems to attract a lot of old men and women who cant get their kicks anymore
Can I go a bit off topic and ask just exactly how old, in your opinion, you have to be before you stop being able to get your kicks in the, apparently, normal way and have to resort to shagging fairies?
I only ask because I'm in my mid forties and wonder if I should start searching out said fairies
Julia
yeah 40 is too old you should start picking out your coffin!!! 
There should be a law that people have to commit suicide on their 60th B-Day
As for solitary's....nah they not wiccan, they just Sol's is all that call themselves a funny name
you should start picking out your coffin!!! There should be a law that people have to commit suicide on their 60th B-Day
As for solitary's....nah they not wiccan, they just Sol's is all that call themselves a funny name
QUOTE
nah they not wiccan, they just Sol's is all that call themselves a funny name
Not sure I agree with that Touchstone. I dont think (now maybe I am wrong on this and some wise person will correct me on this) that you HAD to be part of a coven to be wiccan. Certainly, Gard et al.. worked with covens, but I got the feeling that, that was more down to the fact of people being used to that style of "religion" that a group was required. I dont remember reading anything anywhere that made me think that good ole Gerald would be spinning in his grave at the thought of people practicing alone.
Perhaps there was some desire by him for Wicca to be "recognised" and that required "groups".
Again, and going back to the Xtain analogy, most xtians work in groups.. or congregations (I DO like that word.. it makes me laugh for some reason). Most would say that you SHOULD go to church to do that. But... Im thinking that there are people out there, who follow everything that could be construed as the Xtain way to live and not beling to a church... it doesnt make them any less a Xtain, and I think if we suggest that the ONLY way to be a wiccan is to be part of a 13 member coven... we are shoving Wicca.. into the "cult" section. ANYTHING that rigid.. takes a cult persona and I never got the impression that was what Gerald wanted.
Pomona wrote:
"What bothers and irritates me though, and I think it's along the same lines as Touchstone was talking about, is that the term "Wicca" seems to be becoming more and more interchangeable for "Pagan""
That certainly seems to be true in the USA, and may well be spreading over here. Much of this may be down to marketing. There are plenty of young people who are sincerely and effectively studying and practising Wicca and other forms of Witchcraft. But there seems to be an even larger number, possibly a very large number indeed, who are drawn to an idea of Witchcraft based on Gothic fashions (no disrespect to Goths), television programmes and the internet (no disrespect to present company). They associate it with glamour and rather fantastic notions of spellcraft, but many seem completely unaware of modern Paganism in general and its relationship to modern Witchcraft in particular. When they look for information, that most readily found will be on Wicca because Wicca is, unfortunately, the best known and most-written about Pagan Witchcraft tradition. So anyone trying to sell to this large and rather lucrative market will naturally put 'Wicca' in there because it's a name that nearly all the target group will have heard of, whether or not they know much about it. Thus perpetuating the process.
It's a shame because it gives newcomers a completely misleading impression that Wicca is the only form of Pagan Witchcraft, and it causes trouble for Wiccans because other Pagans sometimes think i) we actually believe in and practise 'pop-Wicca', or ii) we are trying to take over the world, or iii) we believe in and practise 'pop-Wicca' as a means of trying to take over the world.
You can understand why some Wiccans no longer call themselves Wiccans in public!
BB,
John Macintyre
"What bothers and irritates me though, and I think it's along the same lines as Touchstone was talking about, is that the term "Wicca" seems to be becoming more and more interchangeable for "Pagan""
That certainly seems to be true in the USA, and may well be spreading over here. Much of this may be down to marketing. There are plenty of young people who are sincerely and effectively studying and practising Wicca and other forms of Witchcraft. But there seems to be an even larger number, possibly a very large number indeed, who are drawn to an idea of Witchcraft based on Gothic fashions (no disrespect to Goths), television programmes and the internet (no disrespect to present company). They associate it with glamour and rather fantastic notions of spellcraft, but many seem completely unaware of modern Paganism in general and its relationship to modern Witchcraft in particular. When they look for information, that most readily found will be on Wicca because Wicca is, unfortunately, the best known and most-written about Pagan Witchcraft tradition. So anyone trying to sell to this large and rather lucrative market will naturally put 'Wicca' in there because it's a name that nearly all the target group will have heard of, whether or not they know much about it. Thus perpetuating the process.
It's a shame because it gives newcomers a completely misleading impression that Wicca is the only form of Pagan Witchcraft, and it causes trouble for Wiccans because other Pagans sometimes think i) we actually believe in and practise 'pop-Wicca', or ii) we are trying to take over the world, or iii) we believe in and practise 'pop-Wicca' as a means of trying to take over the world.
You can understand why some Wiccans no longer call themselves Wiccans in public!
BB,
John Macintyre
I can see your point. On the other hand Galana, there are Methodist, Catholics, Mormans, Quakers etc who call themselves Christians and yet have different rituals. Some believe that Mary had other children then just Jesus and other said she had only one child, etc, yet they all call themselves Christians. If people follow Wicca in every way except for the Reade, I can't see why they still can't call themselves Wiccans.
Same goes for Doctors. You can get a PHD in any subject and call yourself a Doctor, just not a Medical Doctor.
And thanks for the info on Tonka Bean. I've never heard of it, but will see if I can find it and thanks to Crow to for her suggestion
Same goes for Doctors. You can get a PHD in any subject and call yourself a Doctor, just not a Medical Doctor.And thanks for the info on Tonka Bean. I've never heard of it, but will see if I can find it and thanks to Crow to for her suggestion
Reading these posts i cannot agree with the general theme that you have to be from an gard or alex coven to be called Wiccan. But i am a solitary Wiccan as i cannot find a coven near by and also i am gay so i doubt that these covens will except me. i follow the rede and many of the ways written by gard does this make me less of a Wiccan then any one else. I don't think it does. i agree that you have to work to have the honour of becoming Wiccan which i believe i have achieved so i can do a self initiation. i also believe that pagan and Wiccan are interchanged too much wiccan is a pagan path yes but paganism isn't a Wiccan path.
QUOTE
of Witchcraft based on Gothic fashions (no disrespect to Goths),
you know where that started? I think it started with Excalibur, and Helen Mirren as a very gothic Morgana. I never knew fishnet was a viable clothing source back in the days of Arthur!
Hi Elunedd,
"I never knew fishnet was a viable clothing source back in the days of Arthur!"
I don't know about that, but suspect anything Helen Mirren wore would become a viable clothing source immediately! Wonderful actress.
BB,
John Macintyre
"I never knew fishnet was a viable clothing source back in the days of Arthur!"
I don't know about that, but suspect anything Helen Mirren wore would become a viable clothing source immediately! Wonderful actress.
BB,
John Macintyre
Hi John,
If you shop around ebay for long enough I'm sure you'll find some of her old underwear up for grabs sooner or later.
I've not found any yet but when I do I'm damned well going to buy it and wear it for special occasions.
If you shop around ebay for long enough I'm sure you'll find some of her old underwear up for grabs sooner or later.
I've not found any yet but when I do I'm damned well going to buy it and wear it for special occasions.
Xalle- I'm not sure that you have to work IN a coven to be recognised as a Wiccan. After all, if you move to Outer Mongolia or something, you could have trouble finding 12 other like-minded people.
However I DO think you have to be initiated to be a Wiccan. What you do after that is up to you and your circumstances.
Shining_Wolfe- I certainly respect your following of the Wiccan Rede, and I don't believe that your way of practising makes you any less of a Witch. However I also believe that by its very nature it makes you not a Wiccan, as without initiation there are many parts of the path that remain unexplained.
As for finding covens that will accept a gay member. i would be most shocked if they would turn you down on that account. It's pretty much accepted now that the anti gay sentiments in early Wiccan writing were a product of the culture at the time, and Sanders and Crowley both had homosexual tendancies. I know of 2 gay Wiccan men running an Alexandrian coven in my area, and several other gay or bi Wiccans. If you wish you can PM me and I can get you details of gay pagan groups, and gay friendly Wiccan resources
Well, so long as they washed it well first, bits of seaweed and dead cod really aren't a good look.
However I DO think you have to be initiated to be a Wiccan. What you do after that is up to you and your circumstances.
Shining_Wolfe- I certainly respect your following of the Wiccan Rede, and I don't believe that your way of practising makes you any less of a Witch. However I also believe that by its very nature it makes you not a Wiccan, as without initiation there are many parts of the path that remain unexplained.
As for finding covens that will accept a gay member. i would be most shocked if they would turn you down on that account. It's pretty much accepted now that the anti gay sentiments in early Wiccan writing were a product of the culture at the time, and Sanders and Crowley both had homosexual tendancies. I know of 2 gay Wiccan men running an Alexandrian coven in my area, and several other gay or bi Wiccans. If you wish you can PM me and I can get you details of gay pagan groups, and gay friendly Wiccan resources
QUOTE
I never knew fishnet was a viable clothing source back in the days of King Arthur
Well, so long as they washed it well first, bits of seaweed and dead cod really aren't a good look.
QUOTE
However I DO think you have to be initiated to be a Wiccan.
Why? Because Gardiner said so? Also.. what then of self initiation.. is that valid?
I think that as Gardner created the religion, it's kinda makes sense to stick to what he said. It's not like he was teaching an ancient religion and adding his own bits... he cribbed lots of things and re-packaged them.
The classic argument against the whole initiation thing is "who initiated the first witch?" As we now know that it wasn't an ancient religion, and there's potential for good ol' Dot Clutterbuck to have never existed - or at least never have met Gardner - so there was most likely a self-initiation performed right back at the begining of Wicca.
To me, that says that self-initiation is acceptable, but then I'm not Wiccan.
The classic argument against the whole initiation thing is "who initiated the first witch?" As we now know that it wasn't an ancient religion, and there's potential for good ol' Dot Clutterbuck to have never existed - or at least never have met Gardner - so there was most likely a self-initiation performed right back at the begining of Wicca.
To me, that says that self-initiation is acceptable, but then I'm not Wiccan.
Hi Dave,
"If you shop around ebay for long enough I'm sure you'll find some of her old underwear up for grabs sooner or later."
Much as I admire her, I'm not sure that would be an entirely appropriate way of expressing this...... besides, it wouldn't be the same without her in it!
"I've not found any yet but when I do I'm damned well going to buy it and wear it for special occasions."
Now that's dedication!
BB,
John Macintyre
"If you shop around ebay for long enough I'm sure you'll find some of her old underwear up for grabs sooner or later."
Much as I admire her, I'm not sure that would be an entirely appropriate way of expressing this...... besides, it wouldn't be the same without her in it!
"I've not found any yet but when I do I'm damned well going to buy it and wear it for special occasions."
Now that's dedication!
BB,
John Macintyre
Hi Fuzi,
"The classic argument against the whole initiation thing is "who initiated the first witch?" As we now know that it wasn't an ancient religion, and there's potential for good ol' Dot Clutterbuck to have never existed - or at least never have met Gardner - so there was most likely a self-initiation performed right back at the begining of Wicca."
The difference might be considered along these lines: Self-initiation is between you and the Gods. Coven initiation is between you, the Gods, and the 'group-mind' of that coven and the tradition it forms part of. Which suits any given individual will really depend on what that individual seeks and needs. The most important part of any initiation is probably the state of mind, and state of deep preparedness, of the person entering upon it, but that's by no means the only factor at work in either case.
BB,
John Macintyre
"The classic argument against the whole initiation thing is "who initiated the first witch?" As we now know that it wasn't an ancient religion, and there's potential for good ol' Dot Clutterbuck to have never existed - or at least never have met Gardner - so there was most likely a self-initiation performed right back at the begining of Wicca."
The difference might be considered along these lines: Self-initiation is between you and the Gods. Coven initiation is between you, the Gods, and the 'group-mind' of that coven and the tradition it forms part of. Which suits any given individual will really depend on what that individual seeks and needs. The most important part of any initiation is probably the state of mind, and state of deep preparedness, of the person entering upon it, but that's by no means the only factor at work in either case.
BB,
John Macintyre
QUOTE
I think that as Gardner created the religion, it's kinda makes sense to stick to what he said. It's not like he was teaching an ancient religion and adding his own bits... he cribbed lots of things and re-packaged them.
I THINK thats my point Fuzi
Im starting to get confused!In all religions there's dogma and adaptation. I know gardiner "made" wicca... but isnt that kinda why it CAN be questioned just like any other? Its like yer woman and her "must be physically whole" where exactly was that written? Did Gardiner say it and if he didnt.. then why does she feel it is a pivotal point?
And if we agree that there WAS someone who first initiated themselves, and by that logic that makes self initiation ok... then doesnt it make saying that you SHOULD follow what he says to the letter moot?
*brain turning to mush now... need coffee...*
*Edited for spelling like a 4 year old!
QUOTE(shining_wolfe @ Nov 23 2004, 11:19 AM)
i am a solitary Wiccan as i cannot find a coven near by and also i am gay so i doubt that these covens will except me. i follow the rede and many of the ways written by gard does this make me less of a Wiccan then any one else.
There is hope.
I am working towards first in a Wiccan Coven and am openly Gay.
My HPS and HP are very happy for me to be a member and so are all the other members of the Coven [who are not Gay].
This Coven was not the first one I met with before making a dessision on which to join. However I have to say that all were willing to welcome me as an out Gay man.
Try to look for a Coven and talk to them if you have any questions. What part of the country do you live in? Perhaps someone on these boards can help. You never Know? What have you done so far to look for a Coven?
BB Jax
QUOTE(Touchstone @ Nov 20 2004, 02:20 AM)
yeah 40 is too old you should start picking out your coffin!!!
There should be a law that people have to commit suicide on their 60th B-Day
As for solitary's....nah they not wiccan, they just Sol's is all that call themselves a funny name
you should start picking out your coffin!!! There should be a law that people have to commit suicide on their 60th B-Day
As for solitary's....nah they not wiccan, they just Sol's is all that call themselves a funny name
Having just read this latest load of childish drivel from touchstone, it is my considered opinion that he or she, is an extremely good advertisment for the idea of selective euthanasia of little children, before they have the opportunity of growing into big babies.
hi jaxom
i am looking for a coven in the farnborough area i have contacted a couple but have had no reply. if anyone knows of any please please PM me.
thanks
i am looking for a coven in the farnborough area i have contacted a couple but have had no reply. if anyone knows of any please please PM me.
thanks
QUOTE(pasher @ Nov 25 2004, 02:20 AM)
QUOTE(Touchstone @ Nov 20 2004, 02:20 AM)
yeah 40 is too old you should start picking out your coffin!!!
There should be a law that people have to commit suicide on their 60th B-Day
As for solitary's....nah they not wiccan, they just Sol's is all that call themselves a funny name
you should start picking out your coffin!!! There should be a law that people have to commit suicide on their 60th B-Day
As for solitary's....nah they not wiccan, they just Sol's is all that call themselves a funny name
Having just read this latest load of childish drivel from touchstone, it is my considered opinion that he or she, is an extremely good advertisment for the idea of selective euthanasia of little children, before they have the opportunity of growing into big babies.
Well I took it for a joke but I'm very thick skinned so I may have been wrong
And I thought it was just me who thought it was childish drivel so I was keeping my head down
Trouble is, how do you know which babies to euthanase? Which ones are gonna grow up to be useful members of society and which ones providers of drivel? I see problems with the killing of babies and probably not just those mentioned above
Julia
QUOTE
'However I DO think you have to be initiated to be a Wiccan.'
Why? Because Gardiner said so?
Why? Because Gardiner said so?
Because Wicca is predominately an oral tradition, and information is passed from coven member to coven member, any written information also being kept strictly within the group. Therefore, if you don't join a coven, you don't know that information. Equally, if you initiate yourself, you are not a Wiccan, as you cannot pass that information on to yourself, unless of course you are channeling the spirit of Gardner at the time
Of course, none of this should be read as me saying people who do follow a path like that decribed in many of the Cunningham type books, or who have self initiated or whatever are not 'proper' pagans or somehow less credible because of it. I just don't think wicca is a suitable name for their path, as it is very different from the initiatory tradition of Wicca.
QUOTE(drachenfach @ Nov 25 2004, 03:58 PM)
. Equally, if you initiate yourself, you are not a Wiccan, as you cannot pass that information on to yourself, unless of course you are channeling the spirit of Gardner at the time
DF I love it
You know this could be a whole new "Mc wicca" book:
"Channelling G Gardner for successful wiccan self initiation" by Ivor Vision
QUOTE(Jaxom @ Nov 25 2004, 08:42 PM)
QUOTE(drachenfach @ Nov 25 2004, 03:58 PM)
. Equally, if you initiate yourself, you are not a Wiccan, as you cannot pass that information on to yourself, unless of course you are channeling the spirit of Gardner at the time
DF I love it
You know this could be a whole new "Mc wicca" book:
"Channelling G Gardner for successful wiccan self initiation" by Ivor Vision
It would no doubt be published by Llewelyn.
QUOTE(drachenfach @ Nov 25 2004, 03:58 PM)
Of course, none of this should be read as me saying people who do follow a path like that decribed in many of the Cunningham type books, or who have self initiated or whatever are not 'proper' pagans or somehow less credible because of it. I just don't think wicca is a suitable name for their path, as it is very different from the initiatory tradition of Wicca.
Exactly.
Gardner was no more special than anyone else that chooses to start their own religion, but if you do, adn call it Wicca, then it's not Wicca, but something else EQUALLY VALID!
because lets face it, someone had to invent every religion.
QUOTE(pasher @ Nov 25 2004, 03:20 AM)
QUOTE(Touchstone @ Nov 20 2004, 02:20 AM)
yeah 40 is too old you should start picking out your coffin!!!
There should be a law that people have to commit suicide on their 60th B-Day
As for solitary's....nah they not wiccan, they just Sol's is all that call themselves a funny name
you should start picking out your coffin!!! There should be a law that people have to commit suicide on their 60th B-Day
As for solitary's....nah they not wiccan, they just Sol's is all that call themselves a funny name
Having just read this latest load of childish drivel from touchstone, it is my considered opinion that he or she, is an extremely good advertisment for the idea of selective euthanasia of little children, before they have the opportunity of growing into big babies.
Blatantly meant to be a joke matey. I think I'll take yours as one to. see what a nice guy I am.
QUOTE(Xalle @ Nov 19 2004, 09:18 PM)
ok.. so what about those that consider themselves solitary then?
I dont know how I feel about this.. to me Wicca, have become like Christianity... one book... many paths.
I dont know how I feel about this.. to me Wicca, have become like Christianity... one book... many paths.
If only
At least the Bible is just one book. With the 'wiccan' press there are just too many books out there all claiming to be THE book and few coming close.
Kev
Right here is what this fool thinks on the subject..
Wicca is a religion created by (or at least the creation was organised by) Gardner. Therefore to be a Gardnerian Wiccan you have to follow his idea of the tradition and so must be initiated into a Coven that can trace its lineage back to him.
Over time there have been schisms and divisions within various covens that have resulted in new traditions being formed. This started IIRC with the Alexandrians and as far as I'm concerned a member of any such coven that can again trace its lineage back is entitled to use the term Wiccan - though for convenience it is nice if they specify which type they are.
Of course solitaries have sprung up, sometimes because someone has left their coven and either not found a new one or has prefered to work alone. In these instances they are still wiccans, either of the traditon they were intitiated in or are fully entitled to form their own personalised tradition and still call it Wicca. After all they can trace their lineage back through their old coven, and anyone they teach can also trace their lineage back through them. It is likely that they will use some form of initiation for any pupils, though it may be nothing more than a verbal contract between the two of them.
Now it all gets a little muddy when you get to those who use the term wicca to describe themselves or their paths, when all they have done is read one, or even a few books.
To me these people should be referring to themselves as wicca inspired or at the very least - Lay Wiccans.
While I accept that a coven can form around book taught knowledge, afterall the argument is that by learning from the author you are accepting them as your teacher, I feel that it would only be right to acknowledge this by saying that you are again wicca inspired, lay wiccans or even just saying that you are a member of a coven that is book learnt in the tradition of....insert author's name here.
Of course as soon as you start changing practices, beliefs and concepts then you forfit the right to use the term wicca in any way other than the past sense.
Take me as an example, I started out looking towards wicca, and yes it was book learnt (I.....have....got.....Cunningham's Witchcraft for the Solitary Practioner (I am sure that is the old PO from Cell Block H on the cover ) please, I was still new at this then), but I found that the more I looked into Wicca the more I felt that I couldn't really call myself Wiccan, of course then I started to see divinity in a totally non wiccan way so that was that anyhoo. However I still observe a lot of Wiccan concepts and practices in my path, as well as some heathen and shamanic practices and a touch common sense (welll more than a touch I hope ) As such though I do have commonalities with Wicca I prefer to term myself as following a wicca inspired eclectic path. For the same reason, although a few of my workmates call me a witch, I refute this as I feel that I still have a way to go before I would consider myself able to accept that title in true faith.
Phew that was longer than I expected.
Kev - the not-yet witch with wiccan influences.
Wicca is a religion created by (or at least the creation was organised by) Gardner. Therefore to be a Gardnerian Wiccan you have to follow his idea of the tradition and so must be initiated into a Coven that can trace its lineage back to him.
Over time there have been schisms and divisions within various covens that have resulted in new traditions being formed. This started IIRC with the Alexandrians and as far as I'm concerned a member of any such coven that can again trace its lineage back is entitled to use the term Wiccan - though for convenience it is nice if they specify which type they are.
Of course solitaries have sprung up, sometimes because someone has left their coven and either not found a new one or has prefered to work alone. In these instances they are still wiccans, either of the traditon they were intitiated in or are fully entitled to form their own personalised tradition and still call it Wicca. After all they can trace their lineage back through their old coven, and anyone they teach can also trace their lineage back through them. It is likely that they will use some form of initiation for any pupils, though it may be nothing more than a verbal contract between the two of them.
Now it all gets a little muddy when you get to those who use the term wicca to describe themselves or their paths, when all they have done is read one, or even a few books.
To me these people should be referring to themselves as wicca inspired or at the very least - Lay Wiccans.
While I accept that a coven can form around book taught knowledge, afterall the argument is that by learning from the author you are accepting them as your teacher, I feel that it would only be right to acknowledge this by saying that you are again wicca inspired, lay wiccans or even just saying that you are a member of a coven that is book learnt in the tradition of....insert author's name here.
Of course as soon as you start changing practices, beliefs and concepts then you forfit the right to use the term wicca in any way other than the past sense.
Take me as an example, I started out looking towards wicca, and yes it was book learnt (I.....have....got.....Cunningham's Witchcraft for the Solitary Practioner (I am sure that is the old PO from Cell Block H on the cover
) please, I was still new at this then), but I found that the more I looked into Wicca the more I felt that I couldn't really call myself Wiccan, of course then I started to see divinity in a totally non wiccan way so that was that anyhoo. However I still observe a lot of Wiccan concepts and practices in my path, as well as some heathen and shamanic practices and a touch common sense (welll more than a touch I hope ) As such though I do have commonalities with Wicca I prefer to term myself as following a wicca inspired eclectic path. For the same reason, although a few of my workmates call me a witch, I refute this as I feel that I still have a way to go before I would consider myself able to accept that title in true faith.Phew that was longer than I expected.
Kev - the not-yet witch with wiccan influences.
QUOTE
Wicca is a religion created by (or at least the creation was organised by) Gardner. Therefore to be a Gardnerian Wiccan you have to follow his idea of the tradition and so must be initiated into a Coven that can trace its lineage back to him.
AH HA!! thats exactly my point... Wicca or rather Gardinarian wicca was ORGANISED by him.. not created by him. So yes.. if you want to be a Gardinarian wiccan then you need to follw his rules. In the same way to me a methodist, you need to follow the methodist rules... but there are other forms of wicca... his is NOT the only way and solitary wiccanship is JUST as valid a form of the wicca faith.
Thats my opinion and im sticking to it!
QUOTE(Xalle @ Dec 2 2004, 04:29 AM)
QUOTE
Wicca is a religion created by (or at least the creation was organised by) Gardner. Therefore to be a Gardnerian Wiccan you have to follow his idea of the tradition and so must be initiated into a Coven that can trace its lineage back to him.
AH HA!! thats exactly my point... Wicca or rather Gardinarian wicca was ORGANISED by him.. not created by him. So yes.. if you want to be a Gardinarian wiccan then you need to follw his rules. In the same way to me a methodist, you need to follow the methodist rules... but there are other forms of wicca... his is NOT the only way and solitary wiccanship is JUST as valid a form of the wicca faith.
Thats my opinion and im sticking to it!
Well its also what I'm saying too, if you want to belong to any tradition of Wicca you have to trace it back to Gardner. If you can't trace it back directly but you adhere to all the basics and acknowledge your 'history' then fine. But you cant be a Gardnerian, Alexandrian whatever, without joining and being initiated into that tradition. You can still call yourself a wiccan - just you shouldn't expect to be seen as a Gardnerian, Alexandrian or whatever.
Your beliefs can be as equally valid (posibly moreso if they are personal) but you must acknowledge what you are.
Now if you change the rules too much, then you probably aint wiccan but should look for another name
Kev
QUOTE(Cosmic_Fool @ Dec 2 2004, 06:49 AM)
Well its also what I'm saying too, if you want to belong to any tradition of Wicca you have to trace it back to Gardner. If you can't trace it back directly but you adhere to all the basics and acknowledge your 'history' then fine. But you cant be a Gardnerian, Alexandrian whatever, without joining and being initiated into that tradition. You can still call yourself a wiccan - just you shouldn't expect to be seen as a Gardnerian, Alexandrian or whatever.
Your beliefs can be as equally valid (posibly moreso if they are personal) but you must acknowledge what you are.
Now if you change the rules too much, then you probably aint wiccan but should look for another name
Your beliefs can be as equally valid (posibly moreso if they are personal) but you must acknowledge what you are.
Now if you change the rules too much, then you probably aint wiccan but should look for another name
What's wrong with just calling yourself a Witch?
Rhionnach
Heh, nice to see that you have same kind of discussions here than we do in Finland. Iīm a follower of the Alexandrian path, and I identify myself as a Wicca. Still, if somebody would say that only Gardnerians are "true" Wiccas, i wouldnīt have a problem with that. I know what i am, and i know what i believe in and, if you can say, how to believe.
It seems, in these days, at least in Finland, it is more important that you can say that you are a Wicca, although you wouldnīt even know the first basics about it.
Since we got the charmed ones here in telly, especially young (under 14-15yrs) have joined to our Finnish Wicca forum and asking for guidance. Which is of course grate. But, the problem is, that in those same forums we have ppl who think that they are ready to teach those youngsters.
Anyway, Iīm nobody to tell anybody that what they are or arenīt. I just think that ppl too easily start to call themselvs Wiccas. Like i for excample, I had to study for years before i was initiated to coven and started to call myself a Wicca.
Iīve always thought that ppl can belive just the way they want and be whatever they want as long as they donīt hurt anybody. The most important thing is that you are happy with your life.
And, as a P.S; I apologize typos, i speak better than i write
It seems, in these days, at least in Finland, it is more important that you can say that you are a Wicca, although you wouldnīt even know the first basics about it.
Since we got the charmed ones here in telly, especially young (under 14-15yrs) have joined to our Finnish Wicca forum and asking for guidance. Which is of course grate. But, the problem is, that in those same forums we have ppl who think that they are ready to teach those youngsters.
Anyway, Iīm nobody to tell anybody that what they are or arenīt. I just think that ppl too easily start to call themselvs Wiccas. Like i for excample, I had to study for years before i was initiated to coven and started to call myself a Wicca.
Iīve always thought that ppl can belive just the way they want and be whatever they want as long as they donīt hurt anybody. The most important thing is that you are happy with your life.
And, as a P.S; I apologize typos, i speak better than i write
Yep, the 'I wanna be a wicca' too is a problem here, it's like no other path exists or that all witches are wiccans, which they're not. Looks it going very global then 
[/quote]
What's wrong with just calling yourself a Witch?
Rhionnach
[/quote]
Ah, but what if you DON'T practice witchcraft but would argue that you follow the more "religious" aspects of Wicca? Or are the two (inasfar as Wicca goes) in separable? Can you be Wiccan, or wiccan, but not be a witch?! Or is that a WHOLE other thread?!
QUOTE(Rhionnach @ Dec 2 2004, 07:13 AM)
QUOTE(Cosmic_Fool @ Dec 2 2004, 06:49 AM)
Now if you change the rules too much, then you probably aint wiccan but should look for another name
What's wrong with just calling yourself a Witch?
Rhionnach
Nothing at all, just not a wiccan witch
Kev
QUOTE
What's wrong with just calling yourself a Witch?
Rhionnach
Rhionnach
Its that old chestnut!
Im my little mind.. a witch is someone who uses magic. Creates builds and uses spells as a part of their practices.
Wiccans do not necessarily use magic. Therefore they are just wiccans (whatever form of path they follow, be it Gardinarian, Alexandrian, Solitary or otherwise), following the religious path of wicca. Some wiccans use magic and are therefore wiccan witches.
Not all wiccans are witches, not all witches are wiccans. Im a witch, certainly not a wiccan.
Hi, I guess this is another old thread Ive dug up again! Sorry and I also apologise if this has already been covered! But...........
I see a lot of talk about Garderian and Alexandrian Wicca here, but what about Traditional Witchcraft and Hereditary Witchcraft (eg not Alexandrian or Garderian), does no one practice these?
I know of at least 2 Covens that claim to be Traditional Witchcraft, or is Wicca purely the more modern version? After all, Gardener didnt claim to invent Wicca, he just made public the teachings he knew of, of a Traditional Coven, true, he may well have added to these Teachings considerably, or even made it all up! The only one who will truly know was Gardener I suspect!
So, what do you think? Did he make it all up ?( I know a lot is based on many old traditional teachings from around the world and many systems, which he basically stuck together)? In which case any Modern / New forms of Wicca would be equally valid wouldnt they? Do you work in a Traditional Coven? Are you a Hereditary? I suspect these are Mythological, but feel free to prove me wrong!
I see a lot of talk about Garderian and Alexandrian Wicca here, but what about Traditional Witchcraft and Hereditary Witchcraft (eg not Alexandrian or Garderian), does no one practice these?
I know of at least 2 Covens that claim to be Traditional Witchcraft, or is Wicca purely the more modern version? After all, Gardener didnt claim to invent Wicca, he just made public the teachings he knew of, of a Traditional Coven, true, he may well have added to these Teachings considerably, or even made it all up! The only one who will truly know was Gardener I suspect!
So, what do you think? Did he make it all up ?( I know a lot is based on many old traditional teachings from around the world and many systems, which he basically stuck together)? In which case any Modern / New forms of Wicca would be equally valid wouldnt they? Do you work in a Traditional Coven? Are you a Hereditary? I suspect these are Mythological, but feel free to prove me wrong!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.