different kinds of wicca?

[StormVixen]

Wiccan Traditions:
· Gardinerian
· Alexandrian
· Ecclectic
· Dianic
· Celtic
· Christian
· Lycian
· Seax
· Dragon Craft
· Egyptian
· British
· Caledonii
· Norse
· Boucca
· Northwind
· Protean
· Focan
· Stregheria
· Georgian
· Kingstone
· Welsh
· Shamanic
· Faery

i think they all exist but are there any more?

[Mithrea]

stormvixen, I think you should follow some of the links in the main Paths forum. There is a thread there that has links to lists of different paths and traditions. :)

[Kudzu]

· Gardinerian
· Alexandrian
· Ecclectic
· Dianic
· Celtic
· Christian
· Lycian
· Seax
· Dragon Craft
· Egyptian
· British
· Caledonii
· Norse
· Boucca
· Northwind
· Protean
· Focan
· Stregheria
· Georgian
· Kingstone
· Welsh
· Shamanic
· Faery

I notice that you have "British" listed there, and I think you're referring to the sort of greater sub-heading of "British Traditional Wicca," under which some of those other branches (Gardnerian, Alexandrian, Kingstone, etc.) may fall. The following website may help you sort it out more, though don't rely on it for accuracy! http://beaufort.bravepages.com/

[MysticWitch]

Is there a test online that can help narow down what type of wicca someone seems to be following but may not know them selves or realize it is a certain wiccan path? :ack:

[juliaki]

Is there a test online that can help narow down what type of wicca someone seems to be following but may not know them selves or realize it is a certain wiccan path? :ack:


Just a quick glance at that list, if that's what you're trying to decide between, almost all of them are ones that I would say an individual could not pick up on their own as a solitary student. They are all initiatory trads, so you'd need to find a group that teaches from that and see if that meets with your needs. Believe me, if it isn't right for you, you'll figure out pretty quick.

Also, there's quite a few folks out there who fit into the categories that you've listed who would take great offense at being called Wiccan.

[RedRaven]

I for one would certainly take "Christian" off the list.

[Gnoblod]

Why?

Wiccans seem remarkably adept at borging other religions' ideas, even if they don't do it very well at times. Christianity certainly is no exception.

It may not be compatible or similar to real Christianity, sure, but neither are things like "Celtic Wicca" or "Norse Wicca" very close to actual Celtic or Norse beliefs.

I've grown accustomed to Wiccans not meaning what they say and not saying what they mean, and make allowances. It's just an aspect of the religion (past the original, initiated type).

[Elderbush]

Are all "original, initiated types" included in the "borging others religions" and "not meaning what they say and not saying what they mean" or are they exluded from the generalization about Wiccans? Are they the Good Ones?

[Gnoblod]

Are all "original, initiated types" included in the "borging others religions" and "not meaning what they say and not saying what they mean" or are they exluded from the generalization about Wiccans?

My English was not unclear. Read my post. :)


Are they the Good Ones?

They're all Wiccan to me.

[Elderbush]

Your sentences were not very clearly stated in my opinion and I would appreciate it if you could restate. It seems as if you contradict yourself in your second post. If English is not your first language, perhaps you are unaware of it.

In that latter post you seem to say that there are no exceptions to your statement that all Wiccans do not mean what they say or say what they mean. In your first post, you seemed to make an exception of a certain group to your generalization about members of Wicca.

[Erincelt]

Wiccan Traditions:
... ... ...
· Focan
... ... ...
You may as well take Focan off the list... All of us Focans (aka Museics) have turned variously into Lycians and Alexandrians. Heh. It was an entertaining dissolution. Unless there's some "renegrade" group out there keeping it alive, then hey, more power to 'em.

[Gnoblod]

Your sentences were not very clearly stated in my opinion and I would appreciate it if you could restate. It seems as if you contradict yourself in your second post.

I entirely disagree. The phrase "...past the original, initiated type" obviously differentiates that said type with what was discussed before.


In that latter post you seem to say that there are no exceptions to your statement that all Wiccans do not mean what they say or say what they mean.

I believe your own post is confusing you. I said "they're all Wiccan to me" in response to your question "are they the Good Ones?" My views of good and bad (or whatever dichotomy you were fishing for) are irrelevent to the facts of Wicca co-opting parts of other religions. Don't attempt to conflate a moral judgement with a technical description.

[Elderbush]

You're confused again, I'm afraid, but that's ok. No doubt your morality is difficult to follow.

Yes, yes, Wicca includes some practices that are also included in other religions. This has never been the in dispute.

It was the general moral judgement that you stated about "Wiccans do not mean what they say or say what they mean."

But now it appears you have cleared that up.

Wiccans who have been initiated do mean what they say and say what they meanand all Wiccans who haven't been intitiated do NOT mean what they say or say what they mean. This is what you are saying now?

[Gnoblod]

You're confused again, I'm afraid, but that's ok. No doubt your morality is difficult to follow.

These irrational jabs are unnecessary. I could suggest you simply have no morality, but what would that accomplish?


Yes, yes, Wicca includes some practices that are also included in other religions. This has never been the in dispute.

:rolleyes:


It was the general moral judgement that you stated about "Wiccans do not mean what they say or say what they mean."

You dispute this? Tell me, what's Norse in any meaningful way about a "Norse Wiccan?" A "Celtic Wiccan?"


Wiccans who have been initiated do mean what they say and say what they meanand all Wiccans who haven't been intitiated do NOT mean what they say or say what they mean. This is what you are saying now?

Forget the "now"...try to understand what's being said in the first place.

[Morgandria]

I guess it boils down to the fact you seem to be saying Wiccans are liars, or deliberately mislead people.

I can take offense to that, myself.

If, however, this is not what you are saying, then I suggest you clarify your statement.

[Gnoblod]

I guess it boils down to the fact you seem to be saying Wiccans are liars, or deliberately mislead people.

Not all Wiccans. And not necessarily deliberately. Many simply don't know any better.

Are Celtic Wiccans Celtic? In what meaningful fashion? When you people say that, you don't really mean you're some manner of Celt, you just mean you worship modern interpretations of Celtic gods. This does not make your Wicca Celtic any more than Wicca with Jesus makes Wicca Semitic.

Do you see what I mean? At all?

[Morgandria]

Yes, now that you've elaborated.

I could say the same thing about Druids - in what manner or meaningful fashion are modern Druids worthy of the word? It's all a matter of perception and opinion. I personally abstain from such sophistry....it leads to too much stupidity.

[Gnoblod]

I don't see any sophistry involved. "Druid" is a title. "Celtic" and "Norse" are cultural descriptors. You can claim any number of titles, but it's a bit different when you're speaking of heritage, language and belief.

[Lunacie]

First you write:



I've grown accustomed to Wiccans not meaning what they say and not saying what they mean, and make allowances. It's just an aspect of the religion (past the original, initiated type).


And then you write:



Not all Wiccans. And not necessarily deliberately. Many simply don't know any better.


Now who's backtracking?

First you say Wiccans are liars, then you say they're not all liars, some are simply ignorant. Any more insults you'd care to hurl?

[Gnoblod]

Now who's backtracking?

Now who's following around hoping for a debate they can actually win?


First you say Wiccans are liars...

Quote me, liar. I said "I've grown accustomed to Wiccans not meaning what they say and not saying what they mean..." When someone claims to be a "Celtic Wiccan", I know they don't mean they're some manner of Celt, as the meaning of the word in this language would indicate.

Or are you willing to defend the "Wicca is Celtic" fallacy?


...then you say they're not all liars, some are simply ignorant. Any more insults you'd care to hurl?

Would you care to explain how Norse Wiccans are Norse? Or do a lack of facts matter less to you than attempting to attack me?

You don't know enough about religion to win this. Seriously.

[Gnoblod]

As for backtracking, learn to read. I exempted quite a few Wiccans from my initial comment. Confirming that is hardly a retraction.

Try again, please. With something like sense this time.

[Gnoblod]

What's Norse about Norse Wicca? Are Wiccans that worship Jesus Semitic? If you call your god Burrito, does that make your religion or yourself Mexican?

Your insults don't interest me; that's a lame way to "debate." Try some fact and reason this time.

I'm looking at you, Lunacie and Elderbush.

[Lunacie]

You think I care enough about all this to follow you around? Report me.

I simply clicked on "new threads" as I generally do, and this was at the top of the list, so I looked to see what had been added.

Would you be happier if the label was "Celtic-based Wicca" or "Norse-based Wicca"? Perhaps "Celtic-flavored Wicca" would come closer to your meaning?

Dearling, I'm not attacking you. Really I'm not. I'm not trying to debate whatever it is you're trying to prove, because it doesn't really have any merit to me. However, your initial comment clearly condemned all Wiccans. I see no exceptions in what you first wrote:



I've grown accustomed to Wiccans not meaning what they say and not saying what they mean, and make allowances. It's just an aspect of the religion (past the original, initiated type).


In plain English, you're calling Wiccans 'liars'.

[Gnoblod]

You think I care enough about all this to follow you around?

No, I'm sure it's mere coincidence that you happen to decamp on another thread you had no participation in until you felt like attempting to argue with me.


Report me.

It's not against any rule to follow anyone and make a fool of yourself.


Would you be happier if the label was "Celtic-based Wicca" or "Norse-based Wicca"? Perhaps "Celtic-flavored Wicca" would come closer to your meaning?

I'd be happier if you'd address the issue you claim to be taking exception to.

If it's the way I say things, and not anything topical, just say so.


However, your initial comment clearly condemned all Wiccans. I see no exceptions in what you first wrote:

Quote:
I've grown accustomed to Wiccans not meaning what they say and not saying what they mean, and make allowances. It's just an aspect of the religion (past the original, initiated type).

So you don't know what "...past the..." means? It's an exception by definition.


In plain English, you're calling Wiccans 'liars'.

That leads us right back to the point you'd like to argue but can't. Are Wiccans that worship Jesus Semitic? Just answer that question. That one question. I'm not saying every Wiccan is a liar, I'm saying some Wiccans don't mean what they say. If you call yourself a Mongolian Wiccan, but your religion isn't Mongolian, and you're not Mongolian, you don't really mean you're a Mongolian Wiccan in any meaningful sense, do you?

[mol]

ADMIN MODE

Gnoblod...and the rest of you.

Go here fast:

http://www.mysticwicks.com/faq.php?faq=mw_faqs#faq_rules

[Gnoblod]

Ok.

Are Wiccans that worship Jesus Semitic?

Is (a) Mongolian Wicca(n) really Mongolian if neither the person in question nor their religion is Mongolian?

I ask this without any manner of insult, because I believe I will be shown right if one simply takes the time to think about it.

[Lunacie]

That leads us right back to the point you'd like to argue but can't. Are Wiccans that worship Jesus Semitic? Just answer that question. That one question. I'm not saying every Wiccan is a liar, I'm saying some Wiccans don't mean what they say. If you call yourself a Mongolian Wiccan, but your religion isn't Mongolian, and you're not Mongolian, you don't really mean you're a Mongolian Wiccan in any meaningful sense, do you?

While I'm Wiccan I don't worship Jesus, so it really doesn't matter to me whether those who do call themselves Christo-Wiccans or Christo-Pagans or Semetic-Pagans. However, from those I've had discussions with, they feel they are able to fully blend both religions, so that doesn't seem to be the same issue you're having with "Celtic Wicca." Very few of those folks claim to be actually descended from Celtic bloodlines, they just base their Wicca on Celtic beliefs and practices. And, frankly, as long as they're not preaching that theirs is the only true religion and those who don't agree are destined for a horrible afterlife, I don't care what they call themselves.

[mol]

Is (a) Mongolian Wicca(n) really Mongolian if neither the person in question nor their religion Mongolian?

If in their perceived universe they are Mongolian then who are you to try and take that away?

More importantly, was this thread intended to be a debate on personal theology and ideology? Let's remain on topic, please...that might be the best way for this thread to not be closed.

[Gnoblod]

While I'm Wiccan I don't worship Jesus, so it really doesn't matter to me whether those who do call themselves Christo-Wiccans or Christo-Pagans or Semetic-Pagans.

But it matters as regards the issue we're wrangling over.


Very few of those folks claim to be actually descended from Celtic bloodlines, they just base their Wicca on Celtic beliefs and practices.

Then it's not Celtic, by definition of the word. Thus, they don't mean what they're saying, even if only for ignorance of what words mean.

This isn't disrespectful, just English.

[Gnoblod]

If in their perceived universe they are Mongolian then who are you to try and take that away?

There's nothing to take away, mol. They're not Mongolian. If we decide that words mean nothing, we'll never be able to communicate.

[Erincelt]

Call me strange, but I actually do see Gnoblod's point. Coming from a mostly Irish-Scottish background myself, I do on occasion cringe at some of the things I see labeled as "Celtic." Although, that said, I don't really maintain any Celtic origined practices in my own personal path (aside from a few family social traditions that I couldn't escape if my life depended on it). However, I think a relatively small comment about an unintuitive word usage has turned into a flamewar about who has the right to call who a liar... which, now that I re-read the whole mess, no one ever really did.

But: now I start to deviate from my initial statement... Heh, I am a Gemini. ;) While it may seem unobvious that something called "Celtic Wicca" wouldn't be composed entirely of Celts and wouldn't be trying hard to maintain all semblence of old Celtic religion, one has to remember that Wicca is a modern religion. Perfectly maintaining traditional Celtic beliefs and practices is the role of Celtic reconstructionist religions, not of modern religions drawing from Celtic lore. Celtic Wicca is Wicca first, so it has to maintain core Wiccan theology and ritual formulae (our primary glue, to begin with), re-interpreting Celtic lore to fit that structure. In this case, Celtic is just a basic adjective, meaning that form of Wicca has a strong Celtic influence, not neccessarily that it tries to remain perfectly Celtic... that, honestly, would be impossible. So it isn't "Wiccans not saying what they mean", its "Wiccans not meaning what you expected them to mean" or something like that... I think my diction might be questionable.

However... (putting on Guide hat...) This really isn't a Forum for deep debate, that would be the theology Forums. This area is meant to be for presentation/statement of positions, and for Q&A activity. If we really want to continue this discussion, we should go start a new thread in that area, and reproduce our posts so far, for reading convenience. Yes, I'm guilty too... I just couldn't help myself.

[StormVixen]

all i wanted to do was make a list... i didnt mean to start a debate... i dont personally want to be a wiccan again... but if i ever did i think i would try and find a decent "real" coven to join...

i wanna make a list of ALL the modern Pagan traditions (aka recently or still practiced thingies and traditions that have apparently been practiced for ages)

[Gnoblod]

Call me strange, but I actually do see Gnoblod's point. Coming from a mostly Irish-Scottish background myself, I do on occasion cringe at some of the things I see labeled as "Celtic."

Yay! :)


However, I think a relatively small comment about an unintuitive word usage has turned into a flamewar about who has the right to call who a liar... which, now that I re-read the whole mess, no one ever really did.

But I must have. Lunacie said so. She would never say anything untrue.


Celtic Wicca is Wicca first, so it has to maintain core Wiccan theology and ritual formulae (our primary glue, to begin with), re-interpreting Celtic lore to fit that structure.

If you have to maintain a foreign theology and ritual structure, how can you be part of something that said theology and ritual structure is foreign to? Does that make sense?

I.e., core Wiccan theology, as I understand it, is not Celtic in any way, shape or form. The ritual formulae certainly are not. To make another example, a Wiccan trying to fit Celtic beliefs into a Wiccan framework is like a Christian trying to fit Celtic beliefs into a Christian framework...it may "work" from the individual's perspective, but what you're left with after having to maintain that Wiccan/Christian model isn't Celtic. Celtic beliefs are Celtic.


So it isn't "Wiccans not saying what they mean", its "Wiccans not meaning what you expected them to mean" or something like that... I think my diction might be questionable.

Wiccans not meaning what everyone else means by the same word because it has a special Wiccan meaning...? :)


However... (putting on Guide hat...) This really isn't a Forum for deep debate, that would be the theology Forums. This area is meant to be for presentation/statement of positions, and for Q&A activity. If we really want to continue this discussion, we should go start a new thread in that area, and reproduce our posts so far, for reading convenience. Yes, I'm guilty too... I just couldn't help myself.

I'm amenable to a move at this point. Can some mod-type jerk most of this over there?

[Gnoblod]

all i wanted to do was make a list... i didnt mean to start a debate...

It's not your fault. I'm just too focused on debate and knowledge rather than acceptance and hugs. :shhhh:

[Dawa Lhamo]

There's nothing to take away, mol. They're not Mongolian. If we decide that words mean nothing, we'll never be able to communicate.Well, to get metaphysical here, everything is ultimately a projection of our minds, so my thought that I am Mongolian may be an illusion, but does that make it any less real than the billions of other illusions that we have?

Words have meaning, but that doesn't mean that there aren't differences between what I believe a word to mean and what anyone else believes that word to mean. There's an agreed-upon similarity and that's how we communicate. Not because the meaning is absolute, unchanging, perfectly clear. That may work for a very small number of words, but most are far more subjective.

I practice Wicca. I also practice Tibetan Buddhism (Vajrayana). (Tibetan because I have been taught by Tibetans, I chant in Tibetan --and Sanskrit-- and I practice according to the Tibetan way) Now, if I wanted to incorporate some practices from Tibetan Buddhism which I felt were compatible as well as various essential bits of cosmology and philosophy, with my practice of Wicca, I think it fair to qualify my religion of Wicca with the word Vajrayana. I could hyphenate Vajrayana-Wicca as such because it's neither pure Vajrayana, nor pure Wicca, it's an amalgamation of the two. (I don't, for the record, I keep them separate, but I could.)

For Celtic Wiccans and so forth, I think that they are qualifying Wicca with a descriptor that describes how their tradition differs from "classical Wicca"... if they incorporate Celtic theology and cosmology and practice in with Wiccan practice, and call it Celtic Wicca, they are not claiming to practice ancient Celtic religion and they are not claiming to practice traditional Wicca, they are practicing a blending of the two and acknowledging where they got their influences from in the name.

I think that's fairly clear-cut.

As for the original topic, you might include Progressive Wicca in your list. And there is some discrepancy as to whether some of those on there would call themselves Wiccans.

Many of those are initiatory traditions, so you can't really say, "well, my practice is closest to Alexandrian, so I'm an Alexandrian". But, you CAN say, "my practice is closest to Alexandrian, so I'm going to do some research and find some Alexandrians and see if I can join their group or if they will initiate me". As for non-initiatory traditions, you very well can say that you're of that tradition if your practice follows that tradition. I believe in The Tree, Ray Buckland says explicitly that if you cannot find a Seax-Wica group, then you can perform a self-initiation and be recognized as Seax by other Seax-Wiccans. I donated my copy to the local pagan college group so I can't check, but I believe that is what he wrote.

As for narrowing it down, I don't know what else you can do but to research every one and determine for yourself which fits best.

Good luck!
Tashi delek!
Dawa Lhamo

[Dawa Lhamo]

Well, to get metaphysical here, I'm happy with moving this part of the discussion over to T&P if people are amenable. I'm gonna go create a new thread, unless someone's gotten there before me. I'll link it back here.

Tashi delek!
Dawa Lhamo

[Lunacie]

all i wanted to do was make a list... i didnt mean to start a debate... i dont personally want to be a wiccan again... but if i ever did i think i would try and find a decent "real" coven to join...

i wanna make a list of ALL the modern Pagan traditions (aka recently or still practiced thingies and traditions that have apparently been practiced for ages)

I think there's a pretty good list of them all at www.witchvox.com (http://www.witchvox.com). You could check there and see which ones you don't have your list yet. Is this for personal knowledge or do you plan to do something with the list?

[Lunacie]

But I must have. Lunacie said so. She would never say anything untrue.

Not intentionally.



If you have to maintain a foreign theology and ritual structure, how can you be part of something that said theology and ritual structure is foreign to? Does that make sense?

I.e., core Wiccan theology, as I understand it, is not Celtic in any way, shape or form. The ritual formulae certainly are not. To make another example, a Wiccan trying to fit Celtic beliefs into a Wiccan framework is like a Christian trying to fit Celtic beliefs into a Christian framework...it may "work" from the individual's perspective, but what you're left with after having to maintain that Wiccan/Christian model isn't Celtic. Celtic beliefs are Celtic.


This may shock you, but I agree, and that's why those new combinations aren't called simply Wicca, because they aren't the same as the original. But then, what is? All religions grow and morph and incorporate new stuff all the time.



I'm amenable to a move at this point. Can some mod-type jerk most of this over there?

I agree, it should be moved. I've already debated this issue ad nauseum on another forum, so I don't know if I'll join in here though.

[Gnoblod]

I'm moving to the other thread. See people there.

[Lunacie]

I'm happy with moving this part of the discussion over to T&P if people are amenable. I'm gonna go create a new thread, unless someone's gotten there before me. I'll link it back here.

Tashi delek!
Dawa Lhamo

How 'bout a link from here to there as well?

[Dawa Lhamo]

Those interested in the theological/ideological discussion about this should go over to different kinds of wicca? (T&P style) (http://www.mysticwicks.com/showthread.php?t=115154)... I've pasted in people's posts (but if I've missed one, let me know and I'll fix it)... I think this is an interesting topic and deserves further discussion.

Tashi delek!
Dawa Lhamo

[Lunacie]

I'd karmalize you but it's too soon since I did that last. So just know I appreciate your moving this topic to it's own thread, I appreciate the link to the new thread, and I appreciate your cool, level head. :)

[StormVixen]

I think there's a pretty good list of them all at www.witchvox.com (http://www.witchvox.com). You could check there and see which ones you don't have your list yet. Is this for personal knowledge or do you plan to do something with the list?

i think i got most of them from witchvox... its personal at the moment... just for bordom killing really... but one day i do wanna write books... when i get round to it... there are ALOT of pagan traditions it is SCARY!!!

[Lunacie]

Scary... how?

Do you mean its daunting to try to list them all and figure out what each one is actually all about? Whew, big job, that.

[Xentor]

Admin mode

Stop it, all of you. The Paths forum isn't meant for discussion but for education. Go start a thread in Philosophy and Theology, if you wish to discuss Wicca.

Gnoblod, specifically: if you want to debate, I suggest you spend some time in Political Pagan.

[Xentor]

Admin mode

Stop it, all of you. The Paths forum isn't meant for discussion but for education. Go start a thread in Philosophy and Theology, if you wish to discuss Wicca.

Gnoblod, specifically: if you want to debate, I suggest you spend some time in Political People.

Admin mode

I myself am out of line. I didn't see you already did move the discussion. Moving it is good.

I also failed to notice that the forum description does allow discussion. Therefore my admin mode will be revised mostly.

What stays behind is this: if you discuss, do so respectfully. If you debate, do so without attacking each other. This isn't a dog pit.

My apologies and my thanks to those that corrected my behaviour.

[Lunacie]

Thanks for reopening the thread Xentor. Good advice about debating the topic instead of attacking each other. My apologies as well for furthering the debate in this setting.

[Mithrea]

To be more specific, you *all* need to read this thread: http://www.mysticwicks.com/showthread.php?t=113890

[Gnoblod]

Actually, this has all been made clear numerous times at this point. The discussion is now in T&P. Stop beating the deceased equine.

[Gnoblod]

To be more clear, I was unaware that the description of the area itself..."Debating and discussion is allowed, but be respectful."...was, in actuality, contradicted by Mithrea's post that says "These threads are not for debate." Surely one can see how my confusion came about; the description of the board is apparently wrong, but I had no way of knowing that.

It's over. Please stop pointing it out to me as if it hasn't been said half a dozen times. Pretty please. With respectful sugar on top.

[Mithrea]

To be more clear, I was unaware that the description of the area itself..."Debating and discussion is allowed, but be respectful."...was, in actuality, contradicted by Mithrea's post that says "These threads are not for debate." Surely one can see how my confusion came about; the description of the board is apparently wrong, but I had no way of knowing that.

It's over. Please stop pointing it out to me as if it hasn't been said half a dozen times. Pretty please. With respectful sugar on top.

Yes, I am aware that the description is contradictory. That is a fact I cannot change and have asked mol about. That is why I posted, for clarity, and it wasn't directed at any one member. Notice that I emphasized *all.* In lieu of mol changing the description, it's the best I can do for now.

The issue in this thread really isn't whether it was a debate or not anyway. The issues is the ad hominem tacticts used by the participants. A tactict not allowed by the MW respect rule.

That being said. . . if you feel I am pointing it out to you often (something I hadn't noticed), them maybe there is a reason. Anything further can be discussed via pm, with myself or an Admin.

Let's get back on topic :)

[Lunacie]

To be more specific, you *all* need to read this thread: http://www.mysticwicks.com/showthread.php?t=113890

Yes Ma'am. That does help clear it all up. And I have offered an apology. Apology accepted?