The vagueness of Wicca

[Hærfest Leah]

I've had a thought and this is in no way a Wicca bashing thread.

Ok bear with me here......

Since the practice of witchcraft, views of deity & the use of elaborate rituals is optional in Wicca, what the heck makes it any different than practicing anything else? the Rede & Three fold Law, is that the difference?

See 2 yrs ago I like many others started out in Wicca but have since then felt it wasn't for me and moved on. So now I am learning Heathenism, Asatru. But now for some reason the thought popped into my head today......when you think of Asatru & then Norse/Teutonic Wicca, wheres the difference?

So when you can mold Wicca to any path like Norse Wicca, Kemetic Wicca, Hellenic Wicca etc and you don't use stuff from more than the one pantheon what the heck makes it different than just following the actual path and practicing magic with it, or not.

Have I just come to a big realization or something that people who think Wicca is pointless come to? no offense seriously

[Aidron]

I've had a thought and this is in no way a Wicca bashing thread.

Ok bear with me here......

Since the practice of witchcraft, views of deity & the use of elaborate rituals is optional in Wicca, what the heck makes it any different than practicing anything else? the Rede & Three fold Law, is that the difference?

See 2 yrs ago I like many others started out in Wicca but have since then felt it wasn't for me and moved on. So now I am learning Heathenism, Asatru. But now for some reason the thought popped into my head today......when you think of Asatru & then Norse/Teutonic Wicca, wheres the difference?

So when you can mold Wicca to any path like Norse Wicca, Kemetic Wicca, Hellenic Wicca etc and you don't use stuff from more than the one pantheon what the heck makes it different than just following the actual path and practicing magic with it, or not.

Have I just come to a big realization or something that people who think Wicca is pointless come to? no offense seriously


Wicca is a very bland path it would seem, by definition of most, and I say this not to insult Wicca, but rather to emphasize the fact that so few seem to be able or willing to define what Wicca is. Without those defining points, then who can even say what Wicca is? The Rede, Law of Return and Rule of Three are not inherent within Wicca, despite what many neo-pagans wish to believe. They were not around when Wicca was first birthed.

As far as I'm concerned, to practice Wicca, Witchcraft is not essential. What is essential is a belief in a dualistic divinity (a god and goddess for example), a reverence for nature and an attunement to natural rhythms. Of course then you have to consider Dianic Wiccans, which sometimes, do not hold the belief of a dualistic divinity in the least, so frankly I think Wicca has become so muddied that unless serious work is done to define it that it will be lost to vagueness and uncertainty and perhaps even disappear.

Though I for one do not believe in Hellenic Wicca or Egyptian Wicca. Working with those pantheons and practicing Witchcraft does not make it Wicca, since it seems most often that the beliefs of Wicca are what make Wicca... well, Wicca, not the practice. If you follow Egyptian deities and practice magic then you are simply someone who follows the Egyptian deities and practices magic, not one who follows Egyptian Wicca. More so than this, when people start tacking the title of Wicca on to all these things, it becomes more and more confusing and less and less clear what Wicca even is. Too often people simply possess Wiccan influences or leanings, yet wish to keep referring to themself as a Wiccan. [shrugs]

[Hærfest Leah]

Wicca is a very bland path it would seem, by definition of most, and I say this not to insult Wicca, but rather to emphasize the fact that so few seem to be able or willing to define what Wicca is. Without those defining points, then who can even say what Wicca is? The Rede, Law of Return and Rule of Three are not inherent within Wicca, despite what many neo-pagans wish to believe. They were not around when Wicca was first birthed.

As far as I'm concerned, to practice Wicca, Witchcraft is not essential. What is essential is a belief in a dualistic divinity (a god and goddess for example), a reverence for nature and an attunement to natural rhythms. Of course then you have to consider Dianic Wiccans, which sometimes, do not hold the belief of a dualistic divinity in the least, so frankly I think Wicca has become so muddied that unless serious work is done to define it that it will be lost to vagueness and uncertainty and perhaps even disappear.

Though I for one do not believe in Hellenic Wicca or Egyptian Wicca. Working with those pantheons and practicing Witchcraft does not make it Wicca, since it seems most often that the beliefs of Wicca are what make Wicca... well, Wicca, not the practice. If you follow Egyptian deities and practice magic then you are simply someone who follows the Egyptian deities and practices magic, not one who follows Egyptian Wicca. More so than this, when people start tacking the title of Wicca on to all these things, it becomes more and more confusing and less and less clear what Wicca even is. Too often people simply possess Wiccan influences or leanings, yet wish to keep referring to themself as a Wiccan. [shrugs]

Ok we are definitely on the same page here. Most all Pagan & Heathen religions I know of have a reverence for nature and an attunement to natural rhythms & use dualistic divinity so thats no difference.

I'm really starting to agree that since no one seems to be able to show any real defining points that many others are going to come to this realization also and like you said not too long from now it is going to disappear.

[RedRaven]

lol "wicca" is the new term for eclectic paganism. it used to have structure and it used to be well defined but not anymore (unless you are part of a well defined tradition, gardnerian, alexandrian,etc). its fine to be eclectic and all that good stuff but wicca is a good example of when things get too eclectic it loses its meaning. so you take out God and you limit the depth of your rituals and you add in more of this and that from paths and cultures that have nothing to do with where wicca came from. does it sound like wicca anymore to you? certainly doesnt to me

RR

[Hærfest Leah]

lol "wicca" is the new term for eclectic paganism. it used to have structure and it used to be well defined but not anymore (unless you are part of a well defined tradition, gardnerian, alexandrian,etc). its fine to be eclectic and all that good stuff but wicca is a good example of when things get too eclectic it loses its meaning. so you take out God and you limit the depth of your rituals and you add in more of this and that from paths and cultures that have nothing to do with where wicca came from. does it sound like wicca anymore to you? certainly doesnt to me

RR

Very well put :rotfl: So in my opinion then uness you are part of one of the well defined, "original" highly structured & secretive traditions like those you mentioned then you are just an ecclectic pagan.

[Cyzarine]

You are true...and being eclectic is not bad.

[Sage Rainsong]

Ok we are definitely on the same page here. Most all Pagan & Heathen religions I know of have a reverence for nature and an attunement to natural rhythms & use dualistic divinity so thats no difference.

I'm really starting to agree that since no one seems to be able to show any real defining points that many others are going to come to this realization also and like you said not too long from now it is going to disappear.

The way that I understand the difference between Heathenism and norse wicca has to do with theology and practice. In Norse wicca obviously they use a wiccan ritual form. Heathens do not. A more important reason is the approach to the gods. people who believe themselves to be Norse wiccans may call upon Freyja and Frey to be the Lord and Lady, They ultimately believe that all of the Gods are part of one God and All Goddesses are part of one Goddess. Heathens are hard polytheists.

[Seamus Donn]

Man I didn't know wiccans were takin from the Asatru too. To bad.

[Aidron]

Man I didn't know wiccans were takin from the Asatru too. To bad.


The thing you must understand though, and that I fear a lot of people forget is that Wicca is a new religion. Look at Christianity, it too has taken a great deal from other faiths and absorbed them into itself. Wicca is taking on the very same stance (and I'm sure it pisses off a fair amount to compare Wicca to Christianity).

It may take centuries before Wicca ever is even recognizable again, as so many Wiccans blindly absorb this and that and profess it to be Wicca when at best they themselves only have Wiccan leanings. Of course Wicca could fade out all together as I've said, but I'd consider both of these a very real possibility.

[RainInanna]

I feel like a collective lightbult just turned on over the head of a lot of people. Or at least, that we all just admitted the light is on. In agreement with all of you!

So in my opinion then uness you are part of one of the well defined, "original" highly structured & secretive traditions like those you mentioned then you are just an ecclectic pagan.

I agree, except I would hate for someone to think "just" means eclectic Paganism is "just" some spirituality, unlike Wicca which is Fabulous. I know you did not mean it that way at all, unfortunately I am afraid most people are quick to think we mean it that way when we say "I don't think you're Wiccan". This, to me, is the entire problem here, and why it feels like a lot of people are ignoring the lightbulb!

The problem is, people take it as a value judgment, and people make it a value judgment. People see "I don't think you're Wiccan" and scream "how dare you judge me, how dare you invalidate my beliefs, evil judgmental person!". When I say "I don't think you're Wiccan" I simply mean I don't think you have a lot of the beliefs that I think are part of Wicca. That's just my opinion. Take it or leave it, what the heck do I know?

The thing is, this combination of letters W, i, c, and a, they come together to make a word. And a word should symbolize something. It should mean something. And if we can't agree what it means, we can't even have a discussion. It doesn't mean I want to judge you and say your beliefs are wrong, it means I want to talk to you!

I think a lot of people are so busy defending their beliefs they are stretching the word Wicca to the point where nobody agrees on what it means. I'm not suggesting we come up with One True Definition That Everyone Has to Follow No Matter What. Just that life might be easier if we tried to compromise a bit.

[Renny]

I've always known Wicca to be god and goddess, though some of them have many gods it usually boils back down to the duality thing.

See, in many ways I am Asatru, but in some ways I'm not so I don't call myself that. I don't like to put myself into one box so to speak, so I just call myself norse pagan or norse witch. I'm not wiccan because I don't believe in one goddess and god, or their rede/three fold.. and those 3 things are the main parts of wicca I think.

[Protagonist]

Ok we are definitely on the same page here. Most all People & Heathen religions I know of have a reverence for nature and an attunement to natural rhythms & use dualistic divinity so thats no difference.
That's pretty much patently false, particularly if you look at classical pagan faiths and a lot of reconstructionist ones. Heathenism, Hellenism, etc don't worship divinity in a dualistic form; they're truly polytheist rather than duotheist. I would argue that no pagan religions "use dualistic divinity," but that's another issue altogether.

[Caitrin SilverWolf]

I think what was meant here (and correct me if Im wrong) was that when its all said and done, polytheist and duotheist faiths basically represent the same thing - an acknowledgement of a harmony between male and female, black and white, man and woman, hard and soft, however you wish to symbolise it. How many different faces or aspects you choose to represent it is the only thing that makes the difference between two gods or many.

[Aidron]

Ok we are definitely on the same page here. Most all Pagan & Heathen religions I know of have a reverence for nature and an attunement to natural rhythms & use dualistic divinity so thats no difference.


I didn't really see this until just now, and I must say that Wicca is the only religion as far as I can think of at the moment that worships a dualistic form of divinity. Most pagan faiths in fact do not worship divinity in a dualistic form as most are strictly hard polytheistic in basis.

I for one do not believe in duality in any form, nor do I think people even grasp what the belief of dualism is, which is that all things possess an opposite yet they are in conflict with one another. I support a belief of polarity (though do not assume this speaks of my divine beliefs) in that all things possess an opposite (even within themselves), yet they are in harmony with one another.

[Agaliha]

I didn't really see this until just now, and I must say that Wicca is the only religion as far as I can think of at the moment that worships a dualistic form of divinity.

Dualistic how. Male and female? or "Good" and "bad"?
Dualism: The belief that entities and concepts often appear in pairs -- typically one good and the other bad.

Because there are other faiths that are dualistic--

It is still practiced (in small numbers) there is Zorastrianism.
An all powerful God Ahura Mazda who is the only deity worthy of being worshipped, andAn evil spirit of violence and death, Angra Mainyu, who opposes Ahura Mazda.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/zoroastr.htm



Christianity has Dualism in the form of...God/Jesus vs. Satan

Or do you mean Duotheistic?

Duotheist: Synonym for bitheist; a person who believes that there are two deities -- typically one female and the other male, as in Wicca (http://www.religioustolerance.org/witchcra.htm) (http://www.religioustolerance.org/gl_d.htm)

I was just wondering which one you were refering to.
Duothiesm applies more to Wicca than Dualism.
:fpoke:

[Aidron]

Dualistic how. Male and female? or "Good" and "bad"?
Dualism: The belief that entities and concepts often appear in pairs -- typically one good and the other bad.

Because there are other faiths that are dualistic--

It is still practiced (in small numbers) there is Zorastrianism.
An all powerful God Ahura Mazda who is the only deity worthy of being worshipped, andAn evil spirit of violence and death, Angra Mainyu, who opposes Ahura Mazda.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/zoroastr.htm



Christianity has Dualism in the form of...God/Jesus vs. Satan

Or do you mean Duotheistic?

Duotheist: Synonym for bitheist; a person who believes that there are two deities -- typically one female and the other male, as in Wicca (http://www.religioustolerance.org/witchcra.htm) (http://www.religioustolerance.org/gl_d.htm)

I was just wondering which one you were refering to.
Duothiesm applies more to Wicca than Dualism.
:fpoke:


Duotheism, however, is based on the concept of dualism. One could see the universe as being very dualistic at its core, that there for everything there is an opposite and these two opposites conflict, yet they themself are not a duotheist (they could be a monotheist or an atheist in fact).

Wicca, however, is a dualistic faith (because it is duetheistic), though in this case the conflict is not necessarily obvious, but without the god or the goddess things would not have their opposing force to balance them and from that we have conflict.

BUT (just to annoy any grammar nazis reading this) this could be viewed as overt semantics which are not necessarily fundamental to the core of Wicca. Then again, who knows what the core of Wicca is anymore so I suppose we could sit here arguing in circles for hours on in. [shrugs]

[Hærfest Leah]

I think what was meant here (and correct me if Im wrong) was that when its all said and done, polytheist and duotheist faiths basically represent the same thing - an acknowledgement of a harmony between male and female, black and white, man and woman, hard and soft, however you wish to symbolise it. How many different faces or aspects you choose to represent it is the only thing that makes the difference between two gods or many.

Yes thats what I mean but I failed at using the correct teminology. How dare me with the terminology & grammar nazis running about. Thanks. I had the point in recognizing both gods & goddesses in mind including what Aidron mentioned above about polarity.

[Aidron]

I think what was meant here (and correct me if Im wrong) was that when its all said and done, polytheist and duotheist faiths basically represent the same thing - an acknowledgement of a harmony between male and female, black and white, man and woman, hard and soft, however you wish to symbolise it. How many different faces or aspects you choose to represent it is the only thing that makes the difference between two gods or many.


Then consider yourself corrected. Polytheism is not necessarily based on balance. While in certain cases you do have a balance of divinity, others cases you may not.

Duotheism, in turn, is based on the idea that opposing forces conflict or are at odds with one another, they are seperate and maintain a balance by providing oppositional force. Polarity is entirely different, based on the idea that all things inherently possess opposing forces that maintain harmony.

There seems to be difficulty with westernern theology as a majority being able to grasp the differences between polarity and duality, often leading them to intermingle the two. Sometimes I wonder if it's a western fault all together to interpret things this way given the list that includes such things as karma and yin and yang in addition to polarity and duality.

[MercysFallen]

Though I for one do not believe in Hellenic Wicca or Egyptian Wicca. Working with those pantheons and practicing Witchcraft does not make it Wicca, since it seems most often that the beliefs of Wicca are what make Wicca... well, Wicca, not the practice.

Are you saying Wiccan & Witchcraft are the same thing? The're not. You can be non religious and practice Witchcraft. Personally and speaking as a non Wiccan. Unless you are practicing Gardenian or Alexandian Wicca everything is Ecclectic Paganism.

[Ben Gruagach]

Here's another monkeywrench thrown into the discussion.

Let's keep a few key things in mind.

1. The Wiccan community does not have a central authority structure. We don't have a Wiccan Pope nor do we have a common holy scripture that all Wiccans follow.

2. There is diversity among Wiccans because we don't have that central authority structure.

3. What people attempt to identify as the core of Wicca is really nothing more than the things we think might be common to all Wiccans. (And those things are ALWAYS debatable!)

To tie those three points together, we have examples from Wiccan history such as the fact that in the early days (1960s, 1970s, even later) there was ongoing conflict between groups such as the Gardnerians and Alexandrians over which ones were the "real" Wiccans. Robert Cochrane and his people argued that neither the Gardnerians nor the Alexandrians were "real witches" (Cochrane preferred the term witch rather than Wicca.) Since then, it's come out that the Alexandrians were really an offshoot of the Gardnerians, and the two sects are now on relatively good terms so that both are usually considered to be "real Wiccans" although of course now there is still debate over whether any of the other Gardnerian-inspired groups are really Wiccan.

As the idea of formal sects or traditions took hold in the 1980s and later, we had a proliferation of groups. Many called themselves Wiccan because they were based (although not often directly linked through a lineage of initiations) on the Wiccans who came before. Many of these groups adopted the term Wiccan to refer to themselves because that was the term used within the published material they were drawing from. Without a central authority, who is to say this was not allowed?

Today we have groups who are comfortable in calling themselves by other names rather than Wiccan even though they might have more Gardnerian material in their practice than other groups that do call themselves Wiccan. Other groups have sprung up that attempt to avoid all the Gardnerian-inspired and derived material in favour of pre-Gardnerian or other material.

The result is we have a Wiccan community, and a larger Pagan community, that is quite diverse. A product of that diversity, and the autonomy of the individual groups and even practitioners (no central authority!) is that what is truly common to all tends to become more limited.

That core that is common to all Wiccans is by definition therefore going to be rather vague.

It is a mistake though to assume that because the core common to all is vague that therefore the actual sects and practitioners follow a vague system. The individual groups and even practitioners can indeed have very complex and deep systems. It's just the overlap with all other Wiccans that is necessarily vague because of the diversity within the community.

Diversity is good! One size does not fit all.

[Darkdale]

I'm really starting to agree that since no one seems to be able to show any real defining points that many others are going to come to this realization also and like you said not too long from now it is going to disappear.

Absurd. I think the problem Wicca is experiencing is that a vast majority of Wiccans aren't really all that religious. But the Wiccans who are really practicing their religion are going to be around for a long, long time and there will continue to be a strong central Wiccan presence in the pagan community. As long as Wiccan Authors like A.J. Drew keep writing and keeping people's feet on the ground, I believe Wicca will grow into a deeper and richer tradition. You'll just see more and more of the ... hmm, I guess you call them fluffbunnies, dropping out and doing something else, like joining the Unitarians.

[Aidron]

Are you saying Wiccan & Witchcraft are the same thing? The're not. You can be non religious and practice Witchcraft.


Do you even read? I said it is the beliefs of Wicca that make Wicca what it is, not the practice. The practice can vary, but most often leans toward Witchcraft, sometimes with more ceremonial magic leanings. That in no way, shape or form denotes that Wicca and Witchcraft are the same thing. :rolleyes:

Personally and speaking as a non Wiccan. Unless you are practicing Gardenian or Alexandian Wicca everything is Ecclectic Paganism.

Speaking as a non Wiccan or speaking as someone who apparently is not educated? You certainly appear to be the latter. There are many faiths, such as Hellenic reconstructionism that are most assuredly not eclectic. If anything, Wicca has more inherent eclecticism, even amongst traditions, because it is a new religion and new religions always thrive on taking this and that from every other religion in a more obvious way to form their own... and before anyone jumps on the "You're judgemental and being very mean!" bandwagon, I never said such a thing was bad.

[charmedkisses1]

One of the problems with paganism is how it lacks definition... traditional wicca does follow a standard but it seems so many people these days basically pull a few ideas together and slap a WICCA stamp on it.... one of the reasons I stay away from it.

[Elderbush]

Aidron, does ecclectic, as you define it, mean "borrowed from another religion" while not ecclectic means "never borrowed from another religon"?

[Aidron]

One of the problems with paganism is how it lacks definition... traditional wicca does follow a standard but it seems so many people these days basically pull a few ideas together and slap a WICCA stamp on it.... one of the reasons I stay away from it.


That's part of the point, or mine at least. Those with Wiccan leanings or who have Wiccan influences (to any degree) inadvertently wind up calling themselves Wiccan, when in totality they are not. Before long people begin to claim that things which are absorbed into a particular eclectic variety that included Wicca and was stamped as Wicca are therefore inherent within Wicca itself (such as karma, the law of return, calling the watchtowers, etc.).

[Aidron]

Aidron, does ecclectic, as you define it, mean "borrowed from another religion" while not ecclectic means "never borrowed from another religon"?


No, eclectic as I define it is as the dictionary defines it; variety.

Borrowing from other religions happens and I can see no inherent villainy in it, but when you begin absorbing one thing after another and eventually the religion is transmuted and claims are put forth that such qualities, practices or beliefs that stemmed from the eclecticism and not the original religion are thus now inherent to the religion, it muddies things up. There are many common things in Wicca today that did not exist when it was first created, such as the Rede.

[Elderbush]

I agree that many things come into a religion after its conception that, after a while, can be considered part of the religion. That seems to me to be inherent in any living religion over time. The religion changes and grows as the culture and needs of the followers does. A healthy religion isn't static, in my opinion.

[Aidron]

I agree that many things come into a religion after its conception that, after a while, can be considered part of the religion. That seems to me to be inherent in any living religion over time. The religion changes and grows as the culture and needs of the followers does. A healthy religion isn't static, in my opinion.


No, but I think things which are absorbed into that faith should be common to all and done so honorably. In western Paganism, I find that is rarely the case, particularly the latter, thus I refuse to honor these rather tactless additions in terms of belonging to that faith.

[Elderbush]

I do not think that you will find that every tradition within Wicca will adopt the same things, nor in my opinion should they. The different traditions (denominations) that fall under that umbrella have many differences in beliefs and practices. Some they are quite passionate about and it would be a hopeless task to get everyone to agree to believe and practice in the same manner. Just as it would be for Christians of different denominations.

It is often much more informative to ask what tradition of a person belongs to rather than expects all Wiccans to have the same beliefs and practices.

[Aidron]

I do not think that you will find that every tradition within Wicca will adopt the same things, nor in my opinion should they. The different traditions (denominations) that fall under that umbrella have many differences in beliefs and practices. Some they are quite passionate about and it would be a hopeless task to get everyone to agree to believe and practice in the same manner. Just as it would be for Christians of different denominations.

It is often much more informative to ask what tradition of a person belongs to rather than expects all Wiccans to have the same beliefs and practices.

Yet when you think of Christianity you can at least pick out common denominators from sect to sect. With Wicca, there seems to be no such case.

[DebLipp]

What's funny about this thread is how people view Wicca from the outside. Some people are never happy!

"Wicca" used to mean British Traditional Wicca (i.e. Gardnerian, Alexandrian, Mohsian, et al). That's it; you would never call yourself Wiccan if you weren't an initiate of a BTW coven, you couldn't and wouldn't call yourself Wiccan; not even if you were a student of such a group. In fact, there are BTWs who still use the word Wicca only to reference BTW, and refer to other practices as Pagan but not Wiccan.

There have been enormous, lengthy discussions on this board as to why that terminology has changed in most quarters. There is a do-it-yourself Wiccan movement that is self-invented and intensely eclectic, and that demands the right to use the word Wiccan. Okay fine. What's funny is that this very demand is what you are now complaining about. What does "Wicca" really mean if anyone can use the term? Well, the very same people who complain about that are the people who also complain if anyone tries to impose the actual, original (modern) use of the word; that is, to say that those who are not BTW aren't Wiccan.

Okay, so you don't like it to mean nothing, and you don't like it to mean one specific thing. My, what a bind.

I have, in other posts (and also on my website (http://www.deborahlipp.com/wicca.htm) listed specific qualities of Wicca that apply to both BTWs and eclectics. In addition to the stuff on my site, I'd add:

Wiccans call quarters
Wiccans balance the Lady and the Lord, or a Lady and a Lord, in ritual practice
Wiccans cast circles
Wiccans embrace magic/witchcraft as part of their religion, whether or not they, as individuals, practice witchraft (that is, they acknowledge that Wicca includes witchcraft, but not every Wiccan practices witchcraft)
Wiccans celebrate Moons, Quarters, and Cross-Quarters


What the above list does is distinguish Wicca from other Pagan paths. If you're worshiping Norse Gods and incorporating ritual boasting and oath-taking into your rites, but you're casting a circle and calling quarters, then you can say you're practicing Heathen Wicca rather than Heathenry. I think it's a good working rule of thumb that makes sense to just about everyone. If Ben T. was here, he'd agree with me. :D

[Aidron]

What's funny about this thread is how people view Wicca from the outside. Some people are never happy!

"Wicca" used to mean British Traditional Wicca (i.e. Gardnerian, Alexandrian, Mohsian, et al). That's it; you would never call yourself Wiccan if you weren't an initiate of a BTW coven, you couldn't and wouldn't call yourself Wiccan; not even if you were a student of such a group. In fact, there are BTWs who still use the word Wicca only to reference BTW, and refer to other practices as Pagan but not Wiccan.

Personally, I think it should remain as such, but since people crave their labels so voraciously, so be it.

There have been enormous, lengthy discussions on this board as to why that terminology has changed in most quarters. There is a do-it-yourself Wiccan movement that is self-invented and intensely eclectic, and that demands the right to use the word Wiccan. Okay fine. What's funny is that this very demand is what you are now complaining about. What does "Wicca" really mean if anyone can use the term? Well, the very same people who complain about that are the people who also complain if anyone tries to impose the actual, original (modern) use of the word; that is, to say that those who are not BTW aren't Wiccan.

Okay, so you don't like it to mean nothing, and you don't like it to mean one specific thing. My, what a bind.

Not this witch. Any religion should have finite qualities to it, otherwise there is no solidity, no foundation and therefore it may fade away or become so warped that it's no longer recognizable. After all, if I can be confused for a Wiccan, then there is indeed a problem.

[Hærfest Leah]

Wow this thread has gotten interesting while I was at work. Everyone is making very good points in my book. It is definitely a controversial topic.

[Hærfest Leah]

Personally, I think it should remain as such, but since people crave their labels so voraciously, so be it.



Not this witch. Any religion should have finite qualities to it, otherwise there is no solidity, no foundation and therefore it may fade away or become so warped that it's no longer recognizable. After all, if I can be confuse for a Wiccan, then there is indeed a problem.

You must spread some Karma throughout the Community before touching Aidron's again.

Damit!

You must spread some Karma throughout the Community before touching Ben Gruagach's again.

Ah man!

[Sage Rainsong]

Wiccans balance the Lady and the Lord, or a Lady and a Lord, in ritual practice

Okay actually I didn't have a whole lot of a problems with defining wicca until this thread. I thought that the most important belief of wicca is that there is a belief in a God and a Goddess and that ultimately all Gods are one God and all Goddesses are one Goddess. That belief is what turned me off from wicca personally. Now Im hearing that it doesn't matter if they believe that. It only matters if they make sure that there is a Goddess and God in the circle? What if I used a wiccan ritual format and only called in say... Pan. Does that make me wiccan because I didn't call in a goddess along side him? Please don't take this as a rude tone. Im just a little confused as to your definition of wicca.

[DebLipp]

Okay actually I didn't have a whole lot of a problems with defining wicca until this thread. I thought that the most important belief of wicca is that there is a belief in a God and a Goddess and that ultimately all Gods are one God and all Goddesses are one Goddess. That belief is what turned me off from wicca personally. Now Im hearing that it doesn't matter if they believe that. It only matters if they make sure that there is a Goddess and God in the circle? What if I used a wiccan ritual format and only called in say... Pan. Does that make me wiccan because I didn't call in a goddess along side him? Please don't take this as a rude tone. Im just a little confused as to your definition of wicca.
As we've discussed on other threads, Wicca tends to be orthopraxic rather than orthodox, meaning that there are rules about practice rather than rules about belief.

Some of the hardest core, oldest guard, strictest BTWs I know are "hard polytheists" (meaning they worship the Gods as individuals) rather than "soft polytheists" (meaning they believe all Gods are ultimately one, or are two {Lord and Lady} who are ultimately one).

As long as ritual practice is balanced between male and female deities, representing polarity, Wicca is not interested in getting inside your head. No Thought Police.

So, if you believe that Pan is Himself, and not an aspect of The Lord, that's fine. However, a Wiccan circle is polarity balanced, and so you must worship Pan alongside an appropriate goddess (say, Diana or Aphrodite or Selene), when you perform Wiccan ritual.

Also, being Wiccan does not preclude you from performing other sorts of ritual besides Wiccan ritual. It is now Navatri and I will probably be performing Hindu ritual this week in addition to Wiccan ritual.

[Aidron]

Okay actually I didn't have a whole lot of a problems with defining wicca until this thread. I thought that the most important belief of wicca is that there is a belief in a God and a Goddess and that ultimately all Gods are one God and all Goddesses are one Goddess. That belief is what turned me off from wicca personally. Now Im hearing that it doesn't matter if they believe that. It only matters if they make sure that there is a Goddess and God in the circle?


Actually, the belief that all gods are one god and all goddesses are one goddess, which thus merge together to form one greater over deity is a very new-age belief and, surprise, monotheism wrapped up in a the guise of a tidy Pagan package, and I say this because so many Pagans seem to be adverse to monotheism, yet more and more Pagans, particularly Wiccans, are admitting to being monotheists.

[Sage Rainsong]

So, if you believe that Pan is Himself, and not an aspect of The Lord, that's fine. However, a Wiccan circle is polarity balanced, and so you must worship Pan alongside an appropriate goddess (say, Diana or Aphrodite or Selene), when you perform Wiccan ritual.

Okay so if I did believe Pan to be an aspect of the Lord and I did not invoke a goddess alongside him I would not be performing a wiccan ritual. And if I were to invoke Pan and Diana together with a hard polytheistic belief I am, more wiccan, so to speak than the previous example? Do you consider Dianic wiccans to be Wiccan?

[Aidron]

Okay so if I did believe Pan to be an aspect of the Lord and I did not invoke a goddess alongside him I would not be performing a wiccan ritual. And if I were to invoke Pan and Diana together with a hard polytheistic belief I am, more wiccan, so to speak than the previous example? Do you consider Dianic wiccans to be Wiccan?


Not to keep interrupting, mind you, but...

... I think it would classify your ritual as not being Wiccan, not necessarily yourself.

[Sage Rainsong]

Not to keep interrupting, mind you, but...

... I think it would classify your ritual as not being Wiccan, not necessarily yourself.

Please do it was a good point.

[Hærfest Leah]

Alot of it could easily make one think " I don't know if what I'm doing is Wicca or not" One day I am, the next I'm not, hey who changed the rules again?

[Agaliha]

Actually, the belief that all gods are one god and all goddesses are one goddess, which thus merge together to form one greater over deity is a very new-age belief


No it's not. Actually it is seen in Hinduism, and my beliefs are more Hindu than anything else (I even considered converting, heh). Hindus believe all Gods and Goddesses are part Brahman. All are manifestations are of Bramhan (the Source). Devi is the main goddesses, but she has many aspects: Kali, Saraswati, Uma, Durga etc. Same with the Gods. They are seen as Many in One.

"The Vedas depict the monad Brahman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahman) as the one source or God, with all other deities emanating therefrom. Brahman (not to be confused with Brahma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahma)) is seen as the universal spirit." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism
Those other dieties are the many names of Gods and Goddess.

Much like the Kemetic Orthodoxy and the many Names being part of and connected to Netjer-- Totality.
It's not a new-age idea. It's been around for 1000s of years, with Ancient Egypt and India. Hunduism is one of the only non-Pagan faith that still revers the Goddess.
And things that are "new-age" aren't really new to begin with. They are old ideas from many older faiths and beliefs wrapped in a new package with new terms to zip it up.

[Aidron]

No it's not. Actually it is seen in Hinduism, and my beliefs are more Hindu than anything else (I even considered converting, heh). Hindus believe all Gods and Goddesses are part Brahman. All are manifestations are of Bramhan (the Source). Devi is the main goddesses, but she has many aspects: Kali, Saraswati, Uma, Durga etc. Same with the Gods. They are seen as Many in One. Much like the Kemetic Orthodoxy and the many Names being part of and connected to Netjer-- Totality.
It's not a new-age idea. It's been around for 1000s of years, with Ancient Egypt and India. Hunduism is one of the only non-Pagan faith that still revers the Goddess.
And things that are "new-age" aren't really new to begin with. They are old ideas from many older faiths and beliefs wrapped in a new package with new terms to zip it up.


The way it is expressed most often is in a new-age context, not in the way in which you are describing, let's go ahead and get that straight.

And a lot of new-age ideas are new to begin with, even angels as guides and helpers are a relatively new idea (Christianity is quite new in the grand scheme of things, though of course not considered new-age by any stretch... )

Lastly, it is monotheism. When all deities eventually make up the facets of one larger deity, that creates one deity when you boil it down to the bare essentials, but the distinction between monotheism and polytheism lies in whether the worship is of that one deity or the many facets. Many, from the way they describe their practice, seem to worship the one great deity as opposed to the facets, treating the facets merely as tools to be used in ritual work, frighteningly enough.

[Agaliha]

Well I worship both: the Source and the many facets. All the time. Not just for ritual or whatever else, I don't see them as tools. I see all the world's Gods and Goddesses as different aspects of the Source. I don't just pick and choose. Rather when I diety makes themselves known to me, I listen. But if I were to say honor Morrgain, I feel that I am also honoring the Source as well. When I honor Saraswati or Ushas or Ganga-- I am also honoring Brahman. Everyone has their methods and view of Diety...that is mine. I am not a hard polythiest, but I am a soft one. Actually I am henotheistic (recognize a single deity, and recognizes other gods and goddesses as facets, forms, manifestations, or aspects of that supreme God.) Kemetic Orthodoxy is Henothiestic as well.
And I'm not Wiccan, btw. I looked into it when I first started 6 years ago with Pagainsm....but it's not for me. I don't really know what I am, but I don't think it matters.

[DebLipp]

Actually, the belief that all gods are one god and all goddesses are one goddess, which thus merge together to form one greater over deity is a very new-age belief and, surprise, monotheism wrapped up in a the guise of a tidy Pagan package, and I say this because so many Pagans seem to be adverse to monotheism, yet more and more Pagans, particularly Wiccans, are admitting to being monotheists.
Wrong on both counts. It's not New Age, it's Western Occultism, specifically Dion Fortune, who missed the New Age movement by about 100 years. Also it's not monotheism, it's monism, which is different.

[DebLipp]

Okay so if I did believe Pan to be an aspect of the Lord and I did not invoke a goddess alongside him I would not be performing a wiccan ritual. And if I were to invoke Pan and Diana together with a hard polytheistic belief I am, more wiccan, so to speak than the previous example?
Remember that ritual is what you do, not what you believe. A Wiccan ritual always has a Goddess and a God. So a ritual worshiping Pan, and Pan only, would not be a Wiccan ritual.

Do you consider Dianic wiccans to be Wiccan?
There are many, many people who call themselves Dianic. You, of course, are specifically referring to the woman-centric Dianic traditions, but there are many others. Of the woman-centric ones, some invoke both a Lady and a Lord (generally with the Lord only there as Her consort) and some do not consider themselves Wiccan. If there are groups that use the word "Wicca" and never invoke a male deity at all, then to my understanding of Wicca they aren't Wiccan. Polarity as embodied by gender is inherent to Wicca.

[Agaliha]

Henothiesm also works for Wicca, depending on personal beliefs. If one views everything as a single force with many facets (Gods and Goddesses) then it would apply. Hinduism and the kemetic Orthodoxy are Henothiestic. I'm Henothiestic. It's not Monothiesm and it's not Polythiesm...it's inbetween.

Henotheism. belief in many deities of which only one is the supreme deity. This may involve: One chief God and multiple gods and goddesses of lesser power and importance. Ancient Greek and Roman religions were of this type.

One supreme God, and multiple gods and goddesses who are all simply manifestations or aspects of the supreme God. Hinduism (http://www.religioustolerance.org/hinduism.htm) is one example; they recognize Brahman as the single deity. Some Wiccans (http://www.religioustolerance.org/witchcra.htm) believe in a single deity about which they know little. They call the deity "The One" or "The All." They recognize the God and Goddess as the male and female aspects of that supreme deity.

One supreme God who rules over a country, and many other gods and goddesses who have similar jurisdiction over other territories. Liberal theologians believe that the ancient Israelites were henotheists; they worshipped Jehovah as the supreme God over Israel, but recognized the existence of Baal and other deities who ruled over other tribes.

religioustolerance.org

Also check this post out http://www.mysticwicks.com/showpost.php?p=2032949&postcount=41 there are many more forms of theism than most think. Maybe there is one there to better classify Wicca.
FROM the post--

“soft” polytheisms - "soft" polytheism refers to a version of polytheism that either denies the literal existence or the uniqueness of the gods.

functional polytheism – Symbolic use of polytheistic theology and terminology as a ritual tool or useful concept, without literal belief in the existence of multiple gods.
archetypal polytheism – Belief in multiple gods/goddesses as representing psychological (Jungian) archetypes, or elements of the human personality; belief that there are a relatively small set of unique gods/goddesses, and that gods/goddesses from different cultures who have similar personalities and domains are representations of the same god/goddess.
polytheism “plus” – polytheism “plus” one of the non-polytheist beliefs above. IE:
polytheism + monism – There are multiple Gods, but they are all aspects of one divine Force; OR, there are multiple Gods, and there is also a divine Force.
(also known as “monolatry”)
polytheism + dualism – There are multiple Gods, but they are all aspects of one of the two divine Forces (“all Gods are one God, all Goddesses are one Goddess”).

“hard” polytheisms - "hard" polytheism refers to a version of polytheism that believes in the literal existence of multiple gods/goddesses, with unique personalities, who are not reducible to one supreme god or source or god/goddess pair.

panpolytheism - Belief in all gods/goddesses, moving between pantheons at will; extreme eclectic polytheism.
henopolytheism - Devotion in one pantheon or set of gods/goddesses, without denying the existence of other gods/goddesses outside of that set.
single-pantheon polytheism - Belief in one pantheon or set of gods/goddesses, to the exclusion of all others.


Here also helps: http://www.religioustolerance.org/comp_rel.htm (http://www.religioustolerance.org/comp_rel.htm)

Humm, by that definition I am not a soft poly...as I see them as different and unique yet connected.

[Morgandria]

My path, as a Wiccan, is anything but bland, vague, and ill-defined. However, I am a member of a BTW coven, and my experience is different than most people who call themselves Wiccan.

[Elderbush]

My path, as a Wiccan, is anything but bland, vague, and ill-defined. However, I am a member of UEW tradition, and my experience is different from most people who call themselves Wiccan.

Too.:)

[Hærfest Leah]

Lastly, it is monotheism. When all deities eventually make up the facets of one larger deity, that creates one deity when you boil it down to the bare essentials, but the distinction between monotheism and polytheism lies in whether the worship is of that one deity or the many facets. Many, from the way they describe their practice, seem to worship the one great deity as opposed to the facets, treating the facets merely as tools to be used in ritual work, frighteningly enough.

Never thought of it that way, that is scary. <shudders>

[MercysFallen]

Do you even read? I said it is the beliefs of Wicca that make Wicca what it is, not the practice. The practice can vary, but most often leans toward Witchcraft, sometimes with more ceremonial magic leanings. That in no way, shape or form denotes that Wicca and Witchcraft are the same thing. :rolleyes:



Speaking as a non Wiccan or speaking as someone who apparently is not educated? You certainly appear to be the latter. There are many faiths, such as Hellenic reconstructionism that are most assuredly not eclectic. If anything, Wicca has more inherent eclecticism, even amongst traditions, because it is a new religion and new religions always thrive on taking this and that from every other religion in a more obvious way to form their own... and before anyone jumps on the "You're judgemental and being very mean!" bandwagon, I never said such a thing was bad.

Yes, sweetie I read you however do not explain yourself well. Don't jump on my A$$! Call me uneducated? I believe that goes to you who call others names for giving and honest opinion which was asked. Sorry if the only "Wiccan" info you ever received was from a LLewellyn book. READ anything on the creation of Wicca Ron Hutton for one and you will see Wicca was created by Gerald Gardner and MOST Gardnerian Wiccans will tell you that there is NO eclectic & Wicca is a religion Witchcraft is a practice!!!!!!.
Problem is with people like you is you come to think you know everything.

[MercysFallen]

Aidon Keep it on the board!!!!! That PM was un called for!!!!!!!

[Lunacie]

This is an excellent discussion and I think may well clear up things for a lot of people. However............. some posters are making points about people instead of their posts. Discussions should be about the topic, not about the person and what their motives and education may - or may not - be.

[Ben Gruagach]

Thanks for that definition of henotheism -- personally I'm a henotheist that believes that all deities are distinct yet are manifestations or aspects of a larger, and essentially unknowable, Divine.

I noticed too the definition pointed out about "soft polytheism"

“soft” polytheisms - "soft" polytheism refers to a version of polytheism that either denies the literal existence or the uniqueness of the gods.

I would be inclined to argue that this particular definition is rather biased (against soft polytheists). Believing that all deities are aspects or manifestations of a larger supreme deity does not necessarily have anything to do with denying the literal existence or unique nature of the manifestations of the deities we do have contact with. That definition just seems to be a way of insulting soft polytheists.

Another thing about the soft polytheism within Wicca that should be pointed out is that it's clear as day within one of our oldest ritual passages: The Charge of the Goddess. Gardner had a version of the Charge, which Doreen Valiente rewrote when she was working with him back in the 1950s. The version Valiente wrote is the one that most people consider to be the "traditional" version today.

Right at the start of the Charge it says:
Listen to the words of the Great Mother, who of old was called Artemis, Astarte, Dione, Melusine, Aphrodite, Cerridwen, Diana, Arienrhod, Brigid, and by many other names.

This section at the very least was drawn from a much older Pagan work. It's in "The Golden Ass" by Lucius Apuleius. He lived c. 123 - c. 170 CE and was an initiate of the cult of the Great Goddess Isis, which had spread well outside of Egypt and transformed into a "great goddess" religion where Isis was seen to be the ultimate deity, manifesting as the multitude of other deities humans know. The cult even reached the UK during Roman times. They've found archeological evidence for this in London for instance.

One interesting question arising from this is whether Gardner drew on the idea from "The Golden Ass" (which was available in England in various translations) or whether it was introduced to Wicca by someone before him (such as the New Forest coven he was initiated into), or whether its appearance in Wicca is one of those authentic survivals from Pagan times. I'm not sure if we'll ever know the answer to that question though.

So I guess what I'm saying is that while there are definitely hard polytheists within Wicca, the idea of soft polytheism was also present within Wicca right from the very early years when Doreen Valiente was Gardner's high priestess.

(We've actually discussed hard versus soft polytheism within Wicca in quite a number of threads here at MysticWicks already. I'd encourage using the Search feature to look up key words like "Apuleius" or "soft polytheism" as you'll find lots of debate!)

[Agaliha]

Thanks for clearing that up...I didn't write the definitions. I only found them.
Here, to be exact: http://www.k-state.edu/psg/handout1.doc

I've considered myself a soft polythiest before, but I believe in the uniqueness of the Gods.
I mean, people are all unique and different, yet we are all people. I see the many mainfestations as unique (I don't see Aphrodite=Venus=Ishtar) yet they are connected and part of one Source.
That's why that definition quoted confused me. Just because they are connected doesn't mean there is no uniqueness...IMO.

...personally I'm a henotheist that believes that all deities are distinct yet are manifestations or aspects of a larger, and essentially unknowable, Divine.

I believe the same exact thing. :thumbsup:

[Aidron]

Wrong on both counts. It's not New Age, it's Western Occultism, specifically Dion Fortune, who missed the New Age movement by about 100 years. Also it's not monotheism, it's monism, which is different.


I'll take your word on it until I can research re-trace my steps and research it more thoroughly.

[Aidron]

Yes, sweetie I read you however do not explain yourself well. Don't jump on my A$$! Call me uneducated? I believe that goes to you who call others names for giving and honest opinion which was asked. Sorry if the only "Wiccan" info you ever received was from a LLewellyn book. READ anything on the creation of Wicca Ron Hutton for one and you will see Wicca was created by Gerald Gardner and MOST Gardnerian Wiccans will tell you that there is NO eclectic & Wicca is a religion Witchcraft is a practice!!!!!!.
Problem is with people like you is you come to think you know everything.


No one jumped down your ass, you are obviously too quick to jump on the self-defense bandwagon, nor did I refer to you as any insulting name, I made one observation about you in how you presented yourself to my eyes, try not to cry a river.

And again, if you would read you would see that what I said was precisely that Wicca is a religion and Witchcraft is the practice, with the practice of Witchcraft obviously being intergal as far as acceptance goes to the religion of Wicca. Honestly, read, read, read.

[Aidron]

Aidon Keep it on the board!!!!! That PM was un called for!!!!!!!


Excuse me? You had better have proof to back us such a bold-faced lie and this is my official demand for it.

[blackroseivy]

Whoa!! Time!!!

[Isil Darkmoon]

Aidon Keep it on the board!!!!! That PM was un called for!!!!!!!

ADMIN MODE:

No, keep it OFF the boards! If you have issues with something another user has done, whether in a thread, a PM, or a karma touch, you must report it to one of the administrators. It's COMPLETELY unacceptable to bring it up in public on the boards like this.

[Hærfest Leah]

This is an excellent discussion and I think may well clear up things for a lot of people.

I agree

[Hærfest Leah]

I was thinking ...... yeah scary.....about how Wicca is like the doorway to the Pagan & Heathen paths since it is the most advertised. Lots of us started thru studying Wicca and either stayed with it or (in my case) moved on after realizing it just wasnt for us or finding another path we were more connected to. It's Wiccas being so vague and wide open in topics in a way that makes it actually a good learning point/place to start.

[Hærfest Leah]

I was thinking ...... yeah scary.....about how Wicca is like the doorway to the Pagan & Heathen paths since it is the most advertised. Lots of us started thru studying Wicca and either stayed with it or (in my case) moved on after realizing it just wasnt for us or finding another path we were more connected to. It's Wiccas being so vague and wide open in topics in a way that makes it actually a good learning point/place to start.

Wicca, the new gateway drug. :P

[Elderbush]

I think that a lot of people who first learn about Wicca are not really learning about Wicca, if the truth be known. I am not surprised that after the shiney wears off they move on to something else never knowing what Wicca is all about, and thinking that it is vague and ill-defined.

Some authors write really good beginners books but if you really want to know what Wicca is and isn't all about, you need to read more challenging books in order to progress. Some authors do not write about Wicca although beginners often get confused about that and think it is Wicca. Some websites openly say that "Wicca is whatever you want it to be." That's wrong, but can confuse newcomers who believe it. Some people get told about Wicca from their friends, who have no idea what it is all about, but are enthusiastic anyway.

I'm a believer in finding a good tradition that can teach you and answer questions. Solitary Wiccans have a harder row to hoe but it can be done if one reads, reads, reads and asks questions. Otherwise, yes, Wicca can be confusing.