Are you a true Wiccan if you are a Solitary Practioner

[Kudzu]

I agree with those who have said that, to be Wiccan, one must be Initiated into a lineaged Coven. That doesn't mean that, if they move away from their Coven, they are no longer Wiccan. And it doesn't mean that they don't have their own home worship even if they are in a Coven. But it does mean that I don't perceive people as Wiccan if they have never been Initiated into a lineaged Coven. Such people I believe are just as fulfilled by their Pagan path, but simply don't have the label assigned to the Clergy of the Initiatory, Oathbound, Mystery religion of Wicca.

[Elderbush]

Many BTW members have that opinion despite 50 years of Wiccans who believe otherwise. Intiation into a BTW tradition only means to many of us that a person has been intiated into a particular tradtion. I feel as strongly as you do that BTW doesn't own the Wiccan name nor does it define the Wiccan religion and hasn't for many years.

[Salanthos]

just poking my nose in...

to be Wiccan, I beleive, the only initiation required is the Gods. covans can help people reach that, but people can also do this alone with the Gods. I sincerely doubt anyone can say the Gods don't know who is truly Wiccan.

to be part of a specific tradition requires initiation by the trad involved.

in my experience, as far as I could tell, of those who lable themselves Wiccans, about three-quarters of solitaries and one half of initiory traditions have had initiation by the Gods. the rest are usually either fairly new and reaching that stage, or fluffbunnies who wouldn't know the Gods if they stood before them (and many fluffbunnies do have real initiations, too).

part of the diffrence in numbers is that fluffbunnies more often drag their friends in to form fluffcovens rather than remain solitary, but there is also the fact that some (not many) people in initiory traditions beleive the trad's initiation is sufficient and never seek the deeper one.

I was, at one point, a solitary Wiccan. once my personal beliefs accrued enough changes that Wiccan no longer fit, I changed my lable. many who find their path is too far from the core beliefs of Wiccan do the same, and there's nobody like the Gods for letting people know what names best fit their chosen paths, or when that name is not Wicca.

ok, I apologize if someone is upset by my veiws, I don't mean to offend, its just how I see the world.

[Little Billy]

I'm not a wiccan but..
I really don't see the problem of someone calling themselves "wiccan".
Especially if that is what they feel they are.

It's not like calling yourself "High Lord Priest of Ye Fluffy Bunny Bunny Coven and Elitist Wiccan Country Club" if you are not even a member of that coven.

So what if Miss "Most Holy Highpriestess Lady Rhianna bana bo bana banana bana bo bana fe fi fo fana" doesn't like it if people who are not in her little snobby clique call themselves 'Wiccans'.
Tell her to remove that broomstick from out ye olde buttocks and get over it.
Of course,thats just my opinion.I'm just a discordian,what do I know.

Every time I see the phrase "True Wiccan", I keep wanting to put a trademark after it...True Wiccan(tm).

[Njorun Alma]

This topic is way too interesting for me to refrain from posting even more!
(Adding more things and clarifying a few from my last post)

1. To be a solitary Wiccan who's been initiated by the Lord and the Lady/God and Goddess/Universe/Spirit is complealty possible in my eyes. To claim to be of a specific TRADITION in Wicca without having been initiated isn't possible from my point of view. There's a big difference. None of the solitary and un-initiated Wiccans I've met have claimed a cirtan tradition.

2. I have a very big respect for those who have been initiated into coves and have been initated Wiccans for a while. I also recognize the fact that there is no way I could claim the title of High Priestess if I don't belong to a specific tradition or coven and have gone through the proper education. I have respect for those who know more then me, I have respect for high priestesses and high priests, I have respect for all of your opinions... but I don't always have to agree with them.

3.I do feel that I don't need to lable myself, and I frankly don't care if someone who has been initiated in some Wiccan tradition don't view me as a Wiccan. The only lable I put on myself publically is Pagan and Witch, unless I'm trying to explain my believes more in depth to close friends. Then I mention Wicca so that they have some sort of reference if they'd like to research it on their own.
Ultimately what matters is what I feel comfortable with in my own heart. I don't think anyone can claim that I cannot call myself a Wiccan when I'm communicating with the Gods or when I'm preforming a ritual in my own home if that is what I feel most comfortable with during that time.

We'll always have different opinions on what makes a Wiccan and what doesn't. What really bugs me is the fact that some people seem to have such a hard time saying.
"I disagree with you, but you ARE intiteled to your own opinion. If you are wise and have knowledge and can call yourself a Wiccan with a pure heart and you feel that you have had some kind of acceptance from the Gods in this matter, go about your path as you wish. Even though I won't see you as a Wiccan."

So many people are so obsessed with being right, I'm not specifically talking about people on MW, but people everywhere. It's so hard to accept that someone won't agree with you. I have a hard time hearing that people won't see some outstanding, wise and cunning people as Wiccan due to the fact that they have not been initiated by a High Priest/Priestess into a traditional coven. But I try hard to maintain the view that he/she is entiteled to their own opinion, and even though I don't see it that way, they have the right to do so.

That's my input for now. :)

[Elderbush]

Snip....Even though I won't see you as a Wiccan."



That is where I see a problem. The constant need to say to others "well, I don't see you as a Wiccan." That is where the need to be right comes in. It is totally uneccessary to share your opinion about the religion in which they claim membership unless you want to convince them that they are wrong and you are right.

The only thing that anyone is excluded from, by the way, is attending a tradition"s private ceremonies but this goes for any tradition.

[Dawa Lhamo]

That is where I see a problem. The constant need to say to others "well, I don't see you as a Wiccan." That is where the need to be right comes in. It is totally uneccessary to share your opinion about the religion in which they claim membership unless you want to convince them that they are wrong and you are right.I don't see that that follows at all. So what you're saying is, that if we aren't going to include everyone and anyone, we'd better shut up? What about sharing our own views about things? If our opinion contradicts someone else's then we'd best not share it? If I say that I believe it is an initiatory tradition, that's not saying that YOU must believe me, or even that I want to convince you, I'm merely sharing what I believe. Religion is an open marketplace (at least in this country).

If you know you're Wiccan then it doesn't matter what I think, and it doesn't matter what I say. Because you know yourself. If you DON'T know yourself, that's when you might give my words a bit more weight. But that's not MY fault. I can't predict how secure each person's religion is and tailor my words to avoid shaking their faith.

Is religious dialogue unneccessary, then?

How the heck do you expect anyone to grow?

Tashi delek!
Dawa Lhamo

[Ben Gruagach]

I don't see that that follows at all. So what you're saying is, that if we aren't going to include everyone and anyone, we'd better shut up? What about sharing our own views about things? If our opinion contradicts someone else's then we'd best not share it? If I say that I believe it is an initiatory tradition, that's not saying that YOU must believe me, or even that I want to convince you, I'm merely sharing what I believe. Religion is an open marketplace (at least in this country).

There is a difference between sharing your own way of doing things and telling others that they are wrong. Telling others that they are not "true Wicca" means that person has set themselves up as some sort of authority who can judge others.

In a religion like Wicca that does not have a central authority structure, not even a central scripture which we are all expected to follow, it's to be expected that anyone who puts themselves in the position of dictating to others might not have their authority blindly accepted.

[Lunacie]

That's exactly my point. It doesn't matter if everyone accepts one definition. But that means, by it's very nature, that it's OK for some people to have more narrow definitions of their own. Most of the traditionalists who have commented haven't said that they think that no one else CAN call themselves Wiccans, they've said that they reserve the right to believe that others are not really Wiccan, according to their own definition.



I suppose I really should read back through the whole thread before responding to this... but what the heck, I'm going to go with what I remember reading. There were several posters who said that no one should/can call themselves Wiccan unless they've been coven initiated.

I fully agree that we all are entitled to use our own discretion in who we honor as fellow Wiccans, and we all have different criteria for making that judgment. My criteria are not quite as stringent as most who follow a BTW tradition, but I don't feel Wicca is a catch-all either.

[Elderbush]

Dialog is good. Growing is good, hence we've had 26 pages of it. Obviously free speach means that a person can say whatever they wish that falls within the laws of the land and this board.

I question the motivations. It is a control issue. You can certainly say that the other person cannot share in the benefits of belonging to your tradition if they do not follow all of its rules. Saying "You are not Gardnerian!" is valid but how can a person kick another out of the religion? A Catholic cannot kick a Babtist out of Christianity. A Gardnerian cannot kick a Georgian out of Wicca. All this "you are not Wiccan!" is bullhockey.

I quite agree that no one else's opinion matters but my own. I am talking about newbies, really, who meet this early on and have not so thick a skin to deal with it.

[Ben Gruagach]

Darn, I wanted to give some good karma but I have to spread it around more first!

Good posts everyone -- this is definitely a thread I wish more people could read through.

[Kestrel Firesong]

I agree with the middle ground here, the ones that say that you cannot claim a tradition unless you've been iniitiated into it, if it is an initatory tradition, such as Gardnerian, but, no, a BTW member does not have the authority to tell anyone they are not Wiccan, and that is exactly what I've seen some BTWs do.

[Meadhbh]

Good pint, kestrel. It really depends on the tradition. I'm not Wiccan so I could be wrong, but I believe some paths allow a person to claim that tradition if they are a solitary and some state you have to have been initated and belong to a coven. I guess it all depends on your claim.

[Dawa Lhamo]

Good pint, kestrel. It really depends on the tradition. I'm not Wiccan so I could be wrong, but I believe some paths allow a person to claim that tradition if they are a solitary and some state you have to have been initated and belong to a coven. I guess it all depends on your claim.Right. In the Tree, Ray Buckland says that a self-initiated Seax Wiccan would be welcomed by other Seax Wiccans as part of the same tradition. Some traditions have this kind of provision. But pretty much the BTW do not. So it does depend. ^_^

Tashi delek!
Dawa Lhamo

[Ben Gruagach]

Right. In the Tree, Ray Buckland says that a self-initiated Seax Wiccan would be welcomed by other Seax Wiccans as part of the same tradition. Some traditions have this kind of provision. But pretty much the BTW do not. So it does depend. ^_^

Tashi delek!
Dawa Lhamo

Does anyone know of other Wiccan denominations that permit self-initiation into that specific group? Buckland's Seax-Wica is the only one I've heard of.

The other self-initiations I know of (like the one Doreen Valiente provided in one of her books) were not meant to be a way into a specific denomination. More like a self-dedication to Wicca than granting membership into a denomination.

Just curious.

[Dawa Lhamo]

I agree with the middle ground here, the ones that say that you cannot claim a tradition unless you've been iniitiated into it, if it is an initatory tradition, such as Gardnerian, but, no, a BTW member does not have the authority to tell anyone they are not Wiccan, and that is exactly what I've seen some BTWs do.Authority is something that must be given. ^_^ So while I respect the work that BTW's do, I don't give them the authority to determine if I am Wiccan or not.

It is certainly true that some people claim to have authority over Wicca. It's unfortunate, but true. I call these people deluded. Not necessarily crazy, but... misguided at least.

But, I think we are confusing right with authority. A person has the right to speak his mind (just as others have the right to speak right back, or ignore him), and thus the right to say that he doesn't think that so and so is really a Wiccan. However, his words don't necessarily carry any more authority than anyone else. At least not outside his tradition.

CAN and SHOULD are very different words. If I say that a person can not say that he is Wiccan, that is saying that I have power over the words that they choose to speak. In other words, that I can control that person. If I say a person should not say that he is Wiccan, it automatically implies that I have an opinion. It's still making a judgement, of course, but it's conditional. Saying "people should recycle" implies that "if it were my ideal world, people would recycle"... "should" and "ought to" speak about how we would like the world to operate. What we think is the best way. However, using "can" or "may" implies that we already have power over the way the world is.

Morgandria:The only problem I have with that approach is when the Wiccan puzzle has too many holes in it. When you're missing so many pieces that you're making up a lot of new ones, or stealing pieces from other puzzles to cram into the gaps...well, it a) doesn't even resemble a coherent picture, and b)you can't really call it a Wiccan puzzle anymore. When the percentage of original material gets too low, but people still call it "Wicca"...that's where I have issues.

...

Personally, I feel that if you are not an initiate of Wicca - ie. you have not been initiated by someone else - you are not a Wiccan. Naturally, that makes some people angry.

...

I expected this reaction, to be honest. I am a member of a BTW coven, Alexandrian, and we do believe Wicca to be an mystery, initiatory faith. Self-initiation is not possible...which is not to say that one can't self-dedicate and practice a Wiccan-inspired path. But by the definition of the word "initiate", self-initiation isn't possible.

Being on your own can be wonderful; you can learn many things, practice many things, have wonderful experiences. I was a solitary practicioner for a long time, and I didn't call myself Wiccan. I still technically am not, because I am not an initiate of my tradition. But I will be, in time. I believe in keeping some standards, and some clear definitions - "Do whatever feels right" doesn't work for me, and I don't like the lack of clarity certain things are devolving into.

If you really have to have a word to describe your path or practices, make up your own - don't subvert a word to fit any number of things until it's meaningless. People can get upset if they like, but that's my opinion.


ancestral lee:
my personal view here is that wicca gives you an outlook, a set of techniques and ways to connect with the divine, it isnt the only way to connect with herself and himself or themselves. so whe somebody says you dont need to be in a coven to be accepted by the goddess and god they are right, thats fine - theyve done it in thier own way on thier own terms.
they arent using the wiccan way or are only using part of it so therefore it coudl be said they arent opperating as a Wiccan, more a wiccan inspried.

...

if you havent joined a wiccan coven and are following a wiccan inspired path then you are singing from a different songsheet or playing without a full set.... so strictly speaking you arent a Wiccan, more a wiccan inspried witch.

...

you have right to call yourself Wiccan just as i have the right to point out you are wrong.

...

i dont recall mentioing i want to control anything, merely point out the errors you are making.

...

i.

am.

not.

out.

to.

control.

anyone.

...


the issue i have is that anybody who reads a single book on the subject can call themself wiccan if they want to, but thats it, theyve read a single book, and from what you are saying youd give them equal standing with those people who have gained admittance to a coven and worked to get where they are.

...

i dont mnd people calling themselves wicca if they are solitary, cant find a coven or have simply read a book on it, but i think that addressing the distinction between initiates and not is important.

...

wicca is an initatory religion, like it or not, thats how it is. From what I've seen, neither has said that a solitary CANNOT call himself a Wiccan, but that they have issues/problems with those who do, and that they think that a solitary IS not a Wiccan (regardless of what he does or does not call himself). They have been arguing less about the right to call oneself anything and more about the legitimacy of others' claims as they see it. Perhaps others in other threads have said that solitaries can't call themselves Wiccans, but in this thread it's been argued only that they don't think solitaries actually *are* Wiccans.

Tashi delek!
Dawa Lhamo

---now I'm off home, probably won't be on 'til very late or tomorrow... gots Candlemas plannin' to do. ^_^

[Kestrel Firesong]

Dawa, I've seen this on another group of forums, not here, but yes, I have seen people tell others that they CANNOT call themselves Wiccan because they are not Gardnerian or Alexandrian. However, they can call themselves wiccan, but it doesn't hold the same definition.

[Lunacie]

the only way to be a solitary wiccan is to be initiated inot a coven then leave.

wicca is an initatory religion, like it or not, thats how it is.

I certainly agree that what others write on this subject only has the power we give it, but the point of the thread in the beginning was that folks who have had little experience in general and no experience with covens beyond the internet may be getting the idea from posters like Ancestral Lee that what she believes is the only truth in this matter. They lack the power to make an experienced judgment and may simply accept an answer like hers because it sounds so self-assured.

[Elderbush]

I think that the problem would be solved if newcomers could be informed early on that no one and no tradition has the authority to dictate to anyone outside their tradition either how the word Wicca is defined or who is Wiccan. It could be suggested that they simply say if they run into it "I do not recognize your authority."

Possibly those who have been around longer could model that behavior? I think that some people bully newcomers simply because they are allowed to get away with it.

[Lunacie]

Well, I do what I can to get the word out on this forum and on the "other" forum where I post, but of course someone always has to argue with me. :lol:

[Little Billy]

It could be suggested that they simply say if they run into it "I do not recognize your authority."



If more people said this about damn near EVERYTHING, the world would be a better place.

[MGD]

Police: PUT THE GUN DOWN!

Bobby: I don't recognize your authority.

Police: Fair enough, lets get out of here guys.

[juliaki]

To date, I've never met a self-professed solitary Wiccan who can provide a well-thought-out answer to one very simple question:

Why are you Wiccan? (as opposed to Pagan, witch, Hindu, Buddhist, whatever)

Every time I ask that question, I get one of three responses.

1. I'm a Wiccan because I do spells.
2. I'm a Wiccan because I believe in a goddess. (sometimes with the "and Christianity is mean and icky" add-on)
3. I'm a Wiccan because I read part of a book or a web site and it sounds really cool.

Maybe it's hidebound of me, but for those people, I'll gladly tell them that they can say whatever they want, but that I do not consider them Wiccan and will gladly tell that to anyone who asks me.

Of course none of them have actually realized that if they *were* Wiccan then it wouldn't matter what my view of them was....after all, I'm not Wiccan either. ;)

[Elderbush]

I believe that you have read Lunacie's posts? She is a solitary Wiccan. Now you have "met" a solitary Wiccan that does not fall into your 3 insulting catagories. Would you care to add another catagory?

[juliaki]

I'll be the first to agree that those are insulting categories, which is *why* I don't see those people as Wiccans. Those are the reasons that they provide for why they call themselves Wiccan, however.

As far as "meeting" someone on a message board, I'm a bit old-fashioned in that as well... in a message board, people have time to think up answers, revise answers, and come up with "the perfect answer". I'm only referring to the people that I've talked with in "real time". Those are the answers that they have provided. I don't think those answers are valid ones for me to consider a person a Wiccan. I have a feeling, based on your reply, that you also agree with that...

[Lunacie]

To date, I've never met a self-professed solitary Wiccan who can provide a well-thought-out answer to one very simple question:

Why are you Wiccan? (as opposed to Pagan, witch, Hindu, Buddhist, whatever)

Every time I ask that question, I get one of three responses.

1. I'm a Wiccan because I do spells.
2. I'm a Wiccan because I believe in a goddess. (sometimes with the "and Christianity is mean and icky" add-on)
3. I'm a Wiccan because I read part of a book or a web site and it sounds really cool.

Maybe it's hidebound of me, but for those people, I'll gladly tell them that they can say whatever they want, but that I do not consider them Wiccan and will gladly tell that to anyone who asks me.

Of course none of them have actually realized that if they *were* Wiccan then it wouldn't matter what my view of them was....after all, I'm not Wiccan either. ;)

I've never met an Asutruar (except online).
I’ve never met a Buddhist (except online).
I've never met a Discordian (except online).
I’ve never met a Druid (except online).
I’ve never met a Hellenic (except online).

And guess what? Because I don't follow any of those paths I don't feel qualified to pass judgment on who does and who doesn't qualify to use those titles.

I don't remember seeing any posts here where anyone said they advocated accepting that everyone who calls themselves Wiccan has actually done anything to earn that title. We know there are plenty of people who are just looking for something cool or who change their minds on a whim. I said earlier in this thread that I don't consider them to be a huge problem because they don't usually hang onto the title for very long before they are off to discover something new and even cooler.

Then there are some who start off with the $ilverRavenWolf books and have about half a clue, but do some questioning and studying and become serious Wiccans in time. I do have a problem with "hidebound" people who tell them that they can't be Wiccan and stiffle any interest they have in pursuing the Wiccan path. I know some people say that if that's all it takes to disuade them then who needs them in the Wiccan population, but I say we've all had our less-than-serious times in our lives and with encouragement we've hopefully found our way. Wicca may not be the best fit for those who are easily discouraged, but they may just need some time and some guidance to find that it does indeed fit them. I chose to give people the benefit of the doubt until they show me that it's not deserved.

[Cassie]

To date, I've never met a self-professed solitary Wiccan who can provide a well-thought-out answer to one very simple question:

Why are you Wiccan? (as opposed to Pagan, witch, Hindu, Buddhist, whatever)

Every time I ask that question, I get one of three responses.

1. I'm a Wiccan because I do spells.
2. I'm a Wiccan because I believe in a goddess. (sometimes with the "and Christianity is mean and icky" add-on)
3. I'm a Wiccan because I read part of a book or a web site and it sounds really cool.



I'll be the first to agree that those are insulting categories, which is *why* I don't see those people as Wiccans. Those are the reasons that they provide for why they call themselves Wiccan, however.

Perhaps you live in a particularly fluffy neighborhood. I don't think any of the people who have identified in part or in whole with the religion of Wicca in this thread have answered in the way you suggest. In fact there have been some very thoughtful and thought provoking responses.

[Dawa Lhamo]

Why are you Wiccan?
My first response, rapid-fire answer to that would be:

*blink, blink* "Because that's what I am." *smile*
*Wondering what else she wants from me...*

Meh. That's just me.

I said in my first post to this thread that both sides were using straw-men. And they're still using them. The people that juliaki (and others) refer to are actually out there, though they're not present on this thread. Kestrel Firesong (and others) have noted that there are strict (controlling) BTWs out there, but again, they're not present in this thread. So, if we're going to accept that juliaki's examples are off-base because there's no one here like that, then we need to accept that the solitaries' examples are off-base because there's no one here like that. The limits we apply to one must apply to all to keep this a fair conversation. If we're going to talk about people who aren't here and now, then we need to be honest about that. (Though I think it's important to remember that the extremes are NOT necessarily representative of the "sides" they're on.)

----
At my own initiation, something was said to the effect that I was already Wiccan and part of the coven (part of the family), but it was officially official. (Granted, my "year and a day" was the 22 years from my birth until then, so it might not be representative of newer Wiccans.) Before then, I had considered myself Wiccan (a Witch, really) and I'd felt that they were my family (heck they all helped raise me), but I still wanted to take that step and make it official. And I'm really glad I did.
----

Personally, I think it's like marriage. You can have a common law marriage for years without ever "tying the knot", and it doesn't mean that you're not absolutely devoted to each other, or that you aren't, in truth, husband and wife. However, the marriage license is a recognition of the relationship. One can instantly tell that these two people are married if they have that license. However, teenage sweethearts don't have a marriage-kind of relationship, and *often* are not as connected as they (and their hormones) have led themselves to believe.

And just like with Wicca, there are people who have the license, but aren't married in truth, and there are people who claim to have a common law marriage, when they really aren't married in truth, either. Bringing up fundamentalists who want to ban certain marriages, or Britney Spears, or teenagers who are "SO in LOVE", doesn't do much to describe what marriage really is.

Official initiation is really an easy determinant of the veracity of the claim of being Wiccan. Because those who've gone through a standard initiation have naturally had a certain standard of training. But that doesn't mean that there aren't "common-law" Wiccans (at least in my mind). You just have to dig deeper to see who they are to determine whether or not their claim is justified.

And I'm always in favor of digging deeper. It's healthy. So long as we don't rip each other apart. ^_^ That last part is particularly important. ^_^


Tashi delek!
Dawa Lhamo

[Lunacie]

Perhaps you live in a particularly fluffy neighborhood. I don't think any of the people who have identified in part or in whole with the religion of Wicca in this thread have answered in the way you suggest. In fact there have been some very thoughtful and thought provoking responses.

I tried to touch your karma but it's been too soon since last time I guess. So :fpoke: thank you.

[juliaki]

My first response, rapid-fire answer to that would be:

*blink, blink* "Because that's what I am." *smile*
*Wondering what else she wants from me...*

Meh. That's just me.

To put it in context, the topic usuallly comes up when someone sees me reading something Pagan-based or out in public wearing my pentacle and says "It's so nice to see another Wiccan around here". I let them know that I'm not a Wiccan, and the conversation goes from there. (Including being told once that I *have* to be a Wiccan because I'm wearing a pentacle.) Also is a personal pet peeve when they grab it for a closer look. Grr.


Personally, I think it's like marriage. You can have a common law marriage for years without ever "tying the knot", and it doesn't mean that you're not absolutely devoted to each other, or that you aren't, in truth, husband and wife. However, the marriage license is a recognition of the relationship. One can instantly tell that these two people are married if they have that license.

That's an awesome analogy... I may have to "borrow" it, fi you don't mind. ;)

The way I look at it, if they have that "licence" (re: initiation) to be Wiccan, then that is acceptable proof for me to take them at their word that they are Wiccan (although if something doesn't seem quite right, I'm not above checking up on their lineage...and I've found some interesting individuals out there who claim to be initiated by so-and-so and yet so-and-so has never heard of them before). If they *don't* have that, then the person in question would need to have something else aside from "because I said I'm a Wiccan" for me to see them as Wiccan.

But why should it matter what I think anyhow? Presumably any solitary practitioner that I run into has opted to be solitary as a matter of choice (I've lived in PA, VA, FL, and MD/DC-metro in the past decade and change, and in all of those areas I've never been unable to find people of Craft persuasion, Craft stores, open rituals and events, and covens.) I'm just one of the masses of Craft folk out there, no more and no less. Why does any solitary practitioner care what anyone thinks about their spiritual pursuits? Isn't part of the point of being solitary that you don't have to care what anyone else thinks about what you believe or do?

[Lunacie]

Dawa Lhamo, excellent comparison to common law marriage. But to take the example one step further, not everyone who goes to the trouble of getting married is truly in love or willing to walk that path.

[Lunacie]

But why should it matter what I think anyhow? Presumably any solitary practitioner that I run into has opted to be solitary as a matter of choice (I've lived in PA, VA, FL, and MD/DC-metro in the past decade and change, and in all of those areas I've never been unable to find people of Craft persuasion, Craft stores, open rituals and events, and covens.) I'm just one of the masses of Craft folk out there, no more and no less. Why does any solitary practitioner care what anyone thinks about their spiritual pursuits? Isn't part of the point of being solitary that you don't have to care what anyone else thinks about what you believe or do?

I've never lived in a place where access to Wicca was not hidden, until just the last five years, and even now not everyone who asks is able to join a tradition or a coven or even an eclectic group or circle.

There are many reasons a person may be solitary: they can't find a group nearby, or the groups in their area are not taking new members, or they don't mesh well with the groups that are open to new members, or they don't feel comfortable joining a traditional group, or many other reasons including but not limited to wanting to be solitary.

Why do we care what others think about us? Social conditioning? Human nature? Hmmm.....

[Ben Gruagach]

And still more interesting parts turn up in this conversation! I'm impressed.

I hope no one seriously believes the only way to know if someone else is Wiccan (or whatever) is to meet them in person. I know you said something to that effect, juliaki, but I don't think you've thought it through. If meeting a person in the flesh were required, then how could any of us say the following:

Yes, the Pope is Catholic.

Yes, Gerald Gardner was Wiccan.

Yes, Alex Sanders was Wiccan.

How many of us have been able to meet the Pope, Gerald Gardner, or Alex Sanders in person let alone grill them to determine if they were True Practitioners of whatever religions they claim they follow?

By the way, I'm another one like Lunacie. I've long used the label "solitary eclectic Wiccan" to refer to my spiritual path. It's been over twenty years for me now and I've done a lot of reading, have talked with a lot of people (Wiccans from specific denominations such as Gardnerian, as well as people who weren't, as well as other Pagan paths, and people who aren't Pagan at all.)

Wicca is a religion, a spiritual path, with lots of different denominations and ways it can be practiced. I don't pretend to be a Gardnerian or an Alexandrian because I'm not initiated into those denominations. But they don't have the authority to dictate to me whether I am a Wiccan or not. And like it or not, they can't dictate to some twelve year old who watched "Charmed" once and decides to call themselves a Wiccan either.

I'm also gay, and in a legal same-sex marriage with my longterm partner. (We're Canadian -- same-sex marriage is legal in Canada.) This whole debate reminds me a lot of the debate over whether same-sex couples should be "allowed" to use the term marriage. Those who argue against it say that allowing others who are different to use the term somehow debases the marriages of opposite-sex couples. How my being legally married to my same-sex partner could possibly change the quality, benefits, responsibilities, or legal standing of any opposite-sex marriage just escapes me. Similarly, the fact that there are Wiccans out there who do things differently, who might not be as serious as you or might have different motivations than you, does not in any way affect your relationship with the Divine, does it? Are those other Wiccans getting in the way between you and the Divine? Are they barging in on your denominations' rituals and messing things up?

Gardnerian covens can and do have differences and even disagreements with other Gardnerian covens -- yet they seem to have learned to get along and "allow" those others to call themselves Gardnerian Wiccans too. Gardnerians and Alexandrians used to feud over which sect were the REAL Wiccans (the other being obvious fakes, of course.) They learned to get over that and now work their separate systems in peace. And despite the fact that there have been solitary Wiccans around for at least twenty years (like me for example) in a religion that is only fifty or sixty years old itself, we haven't learned the pattern yet and still distract ourselves from practicing our own religions in order to tell others that they aren't REAL practitioners.

Diversity is OK. In fact, I think diversity is one of the things that Wicca has been teaching since the early days (although we fallible humans seem to forget it awfully quickly.) After all, in the Charge of the Goddess the Lady tells us, "All acts of love and pleasure are My rituals." And in the closest thing we have to a common Wiccan guideline, the Wiccan Rede, it says "An it harm none, do what you will."

Are we going against some of the oldest Wiccan teachings in our zeal to turn Wicca into a dogmatic religion where only approved people are allowed to call themselves Wiccans?

[juliaki]

I hope no one seriously believes the only way to know if someone else is Wiccan (or whatever) is to meet them in person. I know you said something to that effect, juliaki, but I don't think you've thought it through.


I think it is difficult at best to actually know someone if you haven't met them, thus blindly accepting what someone says can be a slippery slope.

I can tell you that I'm a thirtysomething female. Can anyone be really sure that I'm in my 30s or female, however?

That's the point I was trying to make. Someone can tell me that they're Wiccan (or an alien or in their 40s or anything else), but without any corroborating evidence, there's no real way to know for sure, especially in a format where there's a time delay in posting.

Make a bit more sense? :)

[Ben Gruagach]

I think it is difficult at best to actually know someone if you haven't met them, thus blindly accepting what someone says can be a slippery slope.

I can tell you that I'm a thirtysomething female. Can anyone be really sure that I'm in my 30s or female, however?

That's the point I was trying to make. Someone can tell me that they're Wiccan (or an alien or in their 40s or anything else), but without any corroborating evidence, there's no real way to know for sure, especially in a format where there's a time delay in posting.

Make a bit more sense? :)

It comes down to this: Does it matter?

How does it really matter to your practice as a Wiccan whether your neighbor calls themselves a Wiccan, whether they practice the same way you do, whether their training meets your approval?

Which is more important: turning Wicca into a dogmatic hierarchical authoritarian religion so that all "those types" can be denied the right to use the label Wicca, or practicing your own spiritual path?

I ask these questions because they seem to be what's behind the debate.

[juliaki]

It comes down to this: Does it matter?

Unfortunately there are times it does.

1. If a person is engaging in illegal or unethical acts, but saying that they are justified in those actions because they are Wiccan and it is "what Wiccans do", then it reflects poorly on most neopagan paths in a society that doesn't understand the nuances of different paths. This ends up reflecting poorly on me, so I feel moved to speak out against it.

2. If a person is trying to take advantage of newcomers to the Craft by claiming qualifications, education, and experience that they don't have, then I feel moved to speak out against it. (For instance, someone claiming to be a Wiccan teacher when their "qualifications" to teach Wicca is that they've read a book or two.) I feel doubly moved to speak out against it if they're charging fees for their "training" or "initiation".

3. If a person says that I *must* accept their statement of what religion they follow, regardless of whether I agree with it or not. They can call themselves whatever they want in their own minds...but the minute they tell me that I have to accept what they call themselves as "the truth", I take issue with that.

What people do, say, or call themselves in the privacy of their own practices is their own business. When they bring it out into the court of public opinion, I think it is unreasonable to expect that everyone will agree with their assertions. Peoples is peoples. :)

[Ben Gruagach]

It's good to see there is open discussion. We will never grow if we don't confront the hard questions. (Not that the hard questions will ever be finally answered of course...)

;)

Unfortunately there are times it does.

1. If a person is engaging in illegal or unethical acts, but saying that they are justified in those actions because they are Wiccan and it is "what Wiccans do", then it reflects poorly on most neopagan paths in a society that doesn't understand the nuances of different paths. This ends up reflecting poorly on me, so I feel moved to speak out against it.

Christians commit crimes all the time -- but does that mean they are not Christians? (Probably not GOOD Christians, but they are still Christians.)

Being a good spokesperson involves taking the daring step of coming forward publicly and presenting a role model. In my opinion trying to claim exclusive ownership of a term without the authority to do so, especially in a religion set up where there is no central authority structure, is tilting at windmills.

2. If a person is trying to take advantage of newcomers to the Craft by claiming qualifications, education, and experience that they don't have, then I feel moved to speak out against it. (For instance, someone claiming to be a Wiccan teacher when their "qualifications" to teach Wicca is that they've read a book or two.) I feel doubly moved to speak out against it if they're charging fees for their "training" or "initiation".
Qualifications to teach has little or nothing to do with whether one has the right to say they practice a particular religion.

I can think of an interesting historical example of a person who did set themselves up as a teacher and a leader with very questionable qualifications: Alex Sanders.

Sanders got his start in Wicca by approaching Gerald Gardner about joining up. Gardner and his various high priestesses didn't like Sanders so they turned him down. Sanders, meanwhile, befriended a young woman who was a Gardnerian initiate and got her to do the initiation ceremony for him. He "borrowed" the Gardnerian Book of Shadows and then disappeared for a short time.

Within about a year after this he popped up in the media and started telling everyone he was a Wiccan third degree high priest who had been initiated by his granny back when he was about nine years old. (Or was it seven?) He even had a Book of Shadows to prove his authority. Alex initiated Maxine (who he married a few years later) and had made her his third degree high priestess by the time she was all of eighteen or nineteen years old. (Alex was in his thirties.) They took in anyone who was interested, initiated them all, and the rest is history.

Does this invalidate the whole Alexandrian denomination? Was Alex not a "real Wiccan"? (I hardly think their validity as Wiccans is in doubt today.)

3. If a person says that I *must* accept their statement of what religion they follow, regardless of whether I agree with it or not. They can call themselves whatever they want in their own minds...but the minute they tell me that I have to accept what they call themselves as "the truth", I take issue with that.

What people do, say, or call themselves in the privacy of their own practices is their own business. When they bring it out into the court of public opinion, I think it is unreasonable to expect that everyone will agree with their assertions. Peoples is peoples. :)

And just like you don't have to accept anything anyone else tells you, in person or in writing, whether it's true or not, no one else has to accept your own opinion regarding who counts as Wiccan as valid either.

So it seems to me we might as well just focus on what our personal spiritual paths ARE about and stop wasting our energy on worrying about what our neighbors are doing. If the Lord and Lady don't like it I'm sure They are perfectly capable of handling it Themselves.

By the way, I strongly encourage people to read Sarah M. Pike's book "Earthly Bodies, Magical Selves: Contemporary Pagans and the Search for Community" as it explores this whole topic with a lot of depth. It also compares what the modern Pagan community is experiencing with what other religious (and non-religious) communities have gone through in the past. We're not the first community to confront these sorts of questions!

[Edited to correct some grammar mistakes.]

[juliaki]

Christians commit crimes all the time -- but does that mean they are not Christians? (Probably not GOOD Christians, but they are still Christians.)


Part of the difference comes about from the minority religion status that neopagan faiths (including Wicca) are in. When a Christian does something unethical or illegal, for instance drowning their kids because Jesus told them to, there are Christians who come out and say that no one who does something like that can actually be a Christian. Society at large also does not accept that the individual in question can do something like that and be Christian. On the other hand, when someone says they are a Wiccan and then commits some rather nasty acts (the case of two "Wiccans" who descrated a church not that long ago comes to mind) that they justify by saying that it is their "Wiccan duty" to perform, society is more inclined to believe that their actions *do* represent what Wiccans do.

Another example that comes to mind is the tragic incident of two teens who committed suicide by standing on a railroad track. According to the writings they left behind, suicide is an acceptable part of Wicca because Wiccans believe in reincarnation. Now I doubt there would be many Wiccans out there who would agree that suicide is a "Wiccan act", but society doesn't have personal experience and education to draw from and would be more likely to believe this.

Qualifications to teach has little or nothing to do with whether one has the right to say they practice a particular religion.

I think it ends up being tied into the same essential issue, however. Where are lines drawn? There was a "Wiccan teacher" out there a handful of years ago who would only initiate virgin minor females (and they had to make sure to take an oath of secrecy about it all). If it is a gray area between who is a Wiccan and who isn't a Wiccan and between who can be a teacher and who can't be a teacher, then how do we keep from falling into the trap that there are no minimum standards?



And just like you don't have to accept anything anyone else tells you, in person or in writing, whether it's true or not, no one else has to accept your own opinion regarding who counts as Wiccan as valid either.

Absolutely. For some reason, it doesn't stop people from craving my approval for what they call themselves, even though it shouldn't matter. As long as they're craving my approval, I'm going to say what I feel...whether that is in agreement with their self-assessment or not. They have the option at any time to say "Eh, she's a nutcase...I'm not going to bother with her."

So it seems to me we might as well just focus on what our personal spiritual paths ARE about and stop wasting our energy on worrying about what our neighbors are doing.

As long as they're not harming the "property values" (to use the neighbor analogy), I don't care what they do behind closed doors (with the exception of the first condition that I listed).

By the way, I strongly encourage people to read Sarah M. Pike's book "Earthly Bodies, Magical Selves: Contemporary Pagans and the Search for Community" as it explores this whole topic with a lot of depth. It also compares what the modern Pagan community is experiencing with what other religious (and non-religious) communities have gone through in the past. We're not the first community to confront these sorts of questions!

Sounds like a good read...I'll go looking for it.

[Elderbush]

I think it is time for Wiccans to admit that we have bad actors in our religion just like everyone else. It is the truth. Trying to deny it is rather like lying isn't it? If a Wiccan does bad things they do reflect on the rest of us - Just like those people reflect badly upon the Christian community. You remembered didn't you?

There are bad teachers in every religion too that take advantage of innoscents. Yes, it would be a very good thing if Wiccans took those things to the police if necessary to stop it. Breaking the laws of the land, not to mention ethical ones is not good and people who are good citizens report it.

As for you telling someone they are Wiccan, you should tell them that you have no authority and aren't Wiccan - how would you know?

[Dawa Lhamo]

Dawa Lhamo, excellent comparison to common law marriage. But to take the example one step further, not everyone who goes to the trouble of getting married is truly in love or willing to walk that path. Of course! I thought I included that thought in there. Hmmm... anyway, yeah, there are those who wish to accumulate titles or for whatever reason is not really Wiccan at heart, though they've been initiated. I'd like to think, though, that it's a good bit rarer than those who officially marry yet aren't married heart and soul. (Divorce rates being over 50%, I should hope that initiation failure rates aren't that high!!!) For one, it generally takes a good bit more effort and time to get an initiation than a marriage license. ^_^ lol. But that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. ^_^

Tashi delek!
Dawa Lhamo

[Ben Gruagach]

Of course! I thought I included that thought in there. Hmmm... anyway, yeah, there are those who wish to accumulate titles or for whatever reason is not really Wiccan at heart, though they've been initiated. I'd like to think, though, that it's a good bit rarer than those who officially marry yet aren't married heart and soul. (Divorce rates being over 50%, I should hope that initiation failure rates aren't that high!!!) For one, it generally takes a good bit more effort and time to get an initiation than a marriage license. ^_^ lol. But that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. ^_^

Tashi delek!
Dawa Lhamo

It might be the case with today's Gardnerian and Alexandrian covens that initiation is something that is only bestowed after lots of hard work. However, in the not-too-distant past we know that Alex Sanders, founder of the Alexandrian denomination, would happily initiate anyone and everyone who would allow him to do it. Janet and Stewart Farrar have joked that he would have initiated the mailman if he stood still long enough!

Things certainly change. Now initiation is usually reserved for those who have done at least a year-and-a-day of training, who show determination and dedication, and who prove to be "proper persons" in the eyes of the denomination's elders. It used to be that you had to be initiated BEFORE you got that first bit of training.

[Elderbush]

I heard that a high number of people drop out of or change traditions or covens. I wish I could remember where I read it but it was just someone who canvased friends in different groups rather than a formal study. It was something like 75-80%, maybe not that high, leave? Anyone have any figures?

[Lunacie]

Wow, I missed some really great stuff while I was out running errands and spending time with my grandchild today.

I know that Christians can do things that are wrong, or sinful, or against Christian dogma, and they can still be forgiven and retain their Christian status. Surely Wiccans can make mistakes without loosing any right to claim the title.

I think there are Wiccans who are a sterling example and there are Wiccans who give us a bad name, but I think most of us are just struggling to live a good and spiritual life. I think we learn our best lessons from our mistakes and from the gods giving us a whack with a clue-by-four. Maybe other Wiccans are ashamed of us because we did something stupid, and it's okay to share that we think it was a really dumb thing to do, but it shouldn't revoke our Wiccanity (sorry for the wordage ;) ).

[ancestral_lee]

from posters like Ancestral Lee that what she believes is the only truth in this matter.

just found this thread again and been having a browse.

Lunacie - for the second time - ancestral lee is male/a guy/ a bloke/man, i have testicles and a penis.

i am a 'he'

[Elderbush]

:)

Hi Lee! It was me you had to tell the first time that you were a man. On another thread I had someone call me a man. Possibly I was posting in a deep voice.

[Lunacie]

just found this thread again and been having a browse.

Lunacie - for the second time - ancestral lee is male/a guy/ a bloke/man, i have testicles and a penis.

i am a 'he'

Oops, sorry about that. I do makes mistakes now and then, but when they're pointed out I do try not to make the same ones.

Or... I could blame it on Elderbush for mixing me up. :lol:

[AlleyCat]

Well for one we all have to accept the fact that DEFINITIONS CHANGE e.g Shakespeares time "for want of serpent tounge" doesn't mean they wanted it, did it? NO its a lack of, but the DEFINITION HAS CHANGED WITH TIME..

Thus it appears the definition of what is required to be classified "Wiccan" has changed too, its up to the individual whether to hold onto the "traditional" meanings of the word as was in the 1960's or to come to terms with the 2000's...

Personally though as I said in my previous posts I do hold a bit to the older definition in my personal value but that's just me...let people call themselves what they want to, they want the title Wiccan go ahead, but Im not going to use it lol :D

[juliaki]

I heard that a high number of people drop out of or change traditions or covens. I wish I could remember where I read it but it was just someone who canvased friends in different groups rather than a formal study. It was something like 75-80%, maybe not that high, leave? Anyone have any figures?


Don't have figures, but I would hazard to say that the drop-out rate would vary depending on the standards for initiation. The more selective the initiation process, the less likely an individual will drop out or change traditions (although they may get cross-trained in other traditions as well). In the tradition that I've petitioned to, there were about 25-30 people who started at the introductory level around the time when I did. By the time our first year of classes had ended, we were down to 6. By the time the second year of classes had ended, we were down to 4 (all of whom have petitioned for initiation). Certainly any initiate who asks for release would be granted it... but it is a rare occurrence from what I've heard. (For the couple cases that I've heard, the people who asked for release were dealing with life issues and opted to go with "no spiritual path" while they sort things out.) Even people who have geographically moved out of the area still more often than not retain their membership (and, whenever possible, travel back home to participate in some form of rite).

I'd love to see a formal study comparing the length of time within the Craft for solitary practitioners to coven initiates. My guess would be that the initial "drop out" rate for people training with a coven would be higher than the "drop out" rate for solitary practitioners, but then within the 3-5 year range those numbers would reverse. After 5 years, the numbers probably even out to some extent (percentage-wise). My theory on that would be that in the first couple years of solitary practice, there's not as strong of an indication of how much work that this path would be, whereas most coven training puts that pretty strong in the forefront. By the time someone has been actively studying and honoring their Craft for a few years, they have a better idea that the Craft isn't an hour a week spiritual path.

[juliaki]

Maybe other Wiccans are ashamed of us because we did something stupid, and it's okay to share that we think it was a really dumb thing to do, but it shouldn't revoke our Wiccanity (sorry for the wordage ;) ).


Doing "stupid things" is a part of life's lessons for us. I certainly wouldn't want a case of stupidity to be a meterstick for revoking one's "Wiccanity". On the other hand, outright habitual malice would be something that I'd love to kick someone to the curb for. Likewise habitual stupidity (without any evidence of a person trying to learn) would be something I'd love to have removed from "Wiccandom". ;)

Within a coven setting, both of those can be addressed through certain channels. Is divine intervention the only channel to address habitual malice or habitual stupidity for a solitary practitioner?

[juliaki]

It might be the case with today's Gardnerian and Alexandrian covens that initiation is something that is only bestowed after lots of hard work. However, in the not-too-distant past we know that Alex Sanders, founder of the Alexandrian denomination, would happily initiate anyone and everyone who would allow him to do it.


I think that ends up being true of most religions when they're getting started. Probably the example most people are familiar with is Christianity...the idea of grabbing any ol' person to be a disciple of that new prophet. The idea is that you grab as many people as you can to form a large base for your religion. Eventually time will weed out the people who aren't cut out for it, and then standards can be raised and selectivity increased. Perhaps that's what's going on right now? Instead of just letting any ol' person slap on a label and become an insta-Wiccan, now there's a desire to have some form of standard. The bigger question becomes what standards should apply and within what circumstances?

Things are getting a bit better, I think. I've only run into one atheist Wiccan this month.

[Lunacie]

Thus it appears the definition of what is required to be classified "Wiccan" has changed too, its up to the individual whether to hold onto the "traditional" meanings of the word as was in the 1960's or to come to terms with the 2000's...
:D

Hmmm, going on what BenG has shared in his vast amount of reading (and unlike me he seems to retain what he reads ;) ), it seems that some traditionalists have gotten rather more strict than Gardner was rather than less strict. However, you have a good point and it's one I've made myself in discussion on another board on this same topic. The world changes and it's only natural that religions change as well.

[Lunacie]

Juliaki, I think that sounds about right for the balance between those who follow a Wiccan tradition dropping out sooner and those who follow a solitary or more eclectic Wicca dropping out later.

Doing "stupid things" is a part of life's lessons for us. I certainly wouldn't want a case of stupidity to be a meterstick for revoking one's "Wiccanity". On the other hand, outright habitual malice would be something that I'd love to kick someone to the curb for. Likewise habitual stupidity (without any evidence of a person trying to learn) would be something I'd love to have removed from "Wiccandom". ;)

Within a coven setting, both of those can be addressed through certain channels. Is divine intervention the only channel to address habitual malice or habitual stupidity for a solitary practitioner?

I'm not sure what I think about this, I may have to let it percolate for a bit.

I keep getting mental cross-references to the serial killer here in Kansas who was caught a few months ago following a 30+ year reign of terror. The man was definately psychotic and amazing in his ability to balance the good part of his spirit with the evil side of it. He did some very good work with the boy scouts, was greatly appreciated in his home church and was even put in a position of responsibility and authority there. His pastor has continued to counsel him through the trial and visits him in prison now.

He committed horrible, unspeakable acts of violence, yet he was still a Christian. Okay, I know most people aren't that schitzophrenic, but we all have different sides to our personalities, so I still have trouble saying someone isn't Wiccan because they do something I personally find reprehensible. Without a concensus in agreement about what exactly is and what exactly isn't Wicca, it's up to our personal perspective to make that discernment.

However, I have no problem saying someone like Kevin Carlyon is a "Silly Wiccan." :hehehehe:



As far as "habitual stupidity" I was very much like that for far too many years, refusing to see the gods honest truth about something because I was so damn stubborn. But one day someone said something to me that just clicked and it all started to change around. Yeah, habitual stupidity is quite frustrating and nothing says a coven has to accept a member like that, but booting someone to the curb might sour them on ever listening to that little voice that says "Aha ! So that's what they meant!"

[Elderbush]

So, Juliaki, the drop out rate in your tradition was even higher than 80%. I hadn't believed the figures mainly because in my tradition it is considerably less than that.

As for the solitaries, a lot of them become solitaries because they drop out of a tradition and others "drop-out" of being a solitary by joining a tradition. Frankly I think some time spent as a solitary give one a different and valuable perspective on Wicca as a whole.

I'd like to comment on the controlling factor of a tradition or coven. They can kick people out of the tradition for bad behavior but they can't kick them out of Wicca. They don't have that authority. Wicca is unfortunately stuck with our bad Wiccans just like all the other religions are.

[Elderbush]

I have a question but possibly it is better on a different thread. If many peole drop out of a tradition is that a good thing? Instead of being an example of how exclusive it is, could it not be a sign that the tradition cannot serve the religious needs of very many people, that it is inflexible?

Ed. to add - I think perhaps that the initial screening process in the tradition I am in is more difficult which cuts down on the rates but it still has a big dropout rate, not that I think mine serves the public better. That's in case anyone misunderstands where I'm coming from.

[Lunacie]

A bit of background... I was initiated into a coven, but the coven did not follow a specific tradition. The person who taught us and initiated us didn't want to be the leader of a coven. And it didn't start that way. We were just a group of students looking for a teacher. He asked the local coven if they would take us in, but they had just accepted two new members and didn't want to take any more just then. So he stepped up to the plate.

The teacher was my then-husband and there was one other couple with us in the beginning. My ex didn't want to form a coven, he wanted to keep things more informal, but the other couple really wanted the whole experience. And so we ended up doing the whole initiation business. It wasn't something I particularly craved and when my ex told me he thought I was ready for initiation I was pretty surprised. I told him that I needed to spend some time in meditation before deciding whether or not to do that.

So I went off by myself and called on the wisdom of the Old Ones and the God and Goddess and listened for their responses. I was still so new that I delighted in hearing the different ways they each had of speaking to me, but they all gave me the same message, that I had already recieved my spiritual initiation from the goddess and this was a good step for me to take, I would learn much from it. Well, not all lessons are easy, eh?

The other woman really wanted to become a high priestess, as quickly as possible, and she is the one who pushed for more initiations and for things to be done in a rigid, inflexible manner. That's just who she was. We bumped heads a lot. She was also pushing to be intimate with my husband and we bumped heads about that, but as men will be, he was flattered and they ended up having an affair that went on much too long. Her husband divorced her and eventually I kicked my husband out of our house and told him to go and live with her. The coven was no more.

I was a solitary Wiccan for the next 6 years. I got to know a new coven that was forming, but it really wasn't a good fit. They wanted to do everything "by the book" so they would have legal status. Now I think legal status is a good thing and I admire the people who are willing to stand up for our rights as a real religion, but I don't do well in that kind of structured environment. So I kept looking. I was getting kind of desperate by the time I found the circle I work with now, but we all have so much in common that it's a really good fit. We're pretty eclectic and we have fun together and laugh at our mistakes during ritual, and giggle about the things that happen being signs from the gods or the Old Ones.

We had about 8 in the group when we first formed up some three years ago, and only two of us original members are left, along with four who joined about 2 years ago, and two who just joined before Yule. I believe members of traditional covens feel like they are part of a family and they stick with each other, even if one moves away they are still part of the family. But this works just fine for me, I meet new people and learn something from each of them and they are getting experience that will help them decide whether to join a traditional coven, or decide if they would be happier working solitary, or if they are happy to stay with our informal circle of Wiccans.

Not sure what my point was here, or even if I had one. Just thought I'd share what has and what hasn't worked for me in the 16 years since I started following the Wiccan path and became a Wiccan myself.

[Ben Gruagach]

Personally I think Wicca as a religion has room for lots of diversity. There is room for those who are interested in what is essentially a very demanding religious order -- they are the types who find their way into the strict denominations which have rigorous screening processes in place. But those religious orders are just one part of the larger religion. Just like not every Christian is expected to become a monk or nun or priest, I'm not sure that Wicca needs to expect every member to belong to a strict coven, or even work with a coven at all.

[juliaki]

So, Juliaki, the drop out rate in your tradition was even higher than 80%. I hadn't believed the figures mainly because in my tradition it is considerably less than that.

No, the dropout rate in the tradition I've petitioned to is probably less than 5%. The people I mentioned were fellow students...not part of the tradition whatsoever.


I'd like to comment on the controlling factor of a tradition or coven. They can kick people out of the tradition for bad behavior but they can't kick them out of Wicca. They don't have that authority. Wicca is unfortunately stuck with our bad Wiccans just like all the other religions are.

Without going too far on the mystical side of things, I'd wager that within Trad Wicca there are ways to remove someone from that spiritual alignment such that they are no longer Wiccan (and probably would run screaming away from anyone who even suggests that they are). I would hope that there aren't too many people in the short history of Wicca who have done enough such that they would get that to happen to them, however. (shudder)

[juliaki]

Just like not every Christian is expected to become a monk or nun or priest, I'm not sure that Wicca needs to expect every member to belong to a strict coven, or even work with a coven at all.

Just to make things more interesting, do you agree with the statement that every Wiccan is a priest or priestess? Or does the whole "solitary Wiccan" aspect simply equate to Wiccan laity?

[juliaki]

I have a question but possibly it is better on a different thread. If many peole drop out of a tradition is that a good thing? Instead of being an example of how exclusive it is, could it not be a sign that the tradition cannot serve the religious needs of very many people, that it is inflexible?

Ed. to add - I think perhaps that the initial screening process in the tradition I am in is more difficult which cuts down on the rates but it still has a big dropout rate, not that I think mine serves the public better. That's in case anyone misunderstands where I'm coming from.


I think the reasons why people drop out should be assessed. If people are leaving over one paticular bit of dogma or because of personality clashes with members, that might be something to look at as a less-than-positive issue within a tradition. If people are leaving because life, the gods, and circumstance are directing them elsewhere, that would not be as bad, IMO. On the other hand, if a particular tradition has a lot of members that, due to life issues, are no longer physically in the area but still maintain the close traditional ties, that's a beautiful statement to the strength of the tradition, at least from my perspective.

[juliaki]

A bit of background... I was initiated into a coven, but the coven did not follow a specific tradition. The person who taught us and initiated us didn't want to be the leader of a coven. And it didn't start that way. We were just a group of students looking for a teacher. He asked the local coven if they would take us in, but they had just accepted two new members and didn't want to take any more just then. So he stepped up to the plate.

Thanks for sharing your story. It's good to hear where other people are coming from. At the risk of opening another can of worms, another issue that I see coming up regarding defining aspects of the Craft is what does or does not constitute a coven. My personal belief is that not every group that gets together to study and/or perform rituals is a coven. There's something "more" to it... a deeper connection that you can clearly see but can't likely explain to anyone else.

The other woman really wanted to become a high priestess, as quickly as possible, and she is the one who pushed for more initiations and for things to be done in a rigid, inflexible manner.

A long time ago, someone said to me that anyone who wants to become a high priest or high priestess is the last person in the world who should become one.

I was getting kind of desperate by the time I found the circle I work with now, but we all have so much in common that it's a really good fit.

I don't mean to pry, so feel free to tell me to buzz off, but why if you were a solitary practitioner did you feel the desperate need to find others to circle with?

I believe members of traditional covens feel like they are part of a family and they stick with each other, even if one moves away they are still part of the family.

From my experience, that "family feeling" is so strong, it's amazing...it's something that can't be put into words. Just got back from FL, and while I was down there, I got to meet up with one of the HPSs who just moved down there. She's still part of the family and in everyone's heart. Connections like that don't just disappear, no matter how many miles are between everyone (and sometimes, like when one ends up going to Iraq, it's a lot of miles).

[Ben Gruagach]

Just to make things more interesting, do you agree with the statement that every Wiccan is a priest or priestess? Or does the whole "solitary Wiccan" aspect simply equate to Wiccan laity?

I expected that to come up.

There are two things (probably more) that are going on with this label of "priest/ess" in a Wiccan context.

1. One of the Wiccan precepts is that ours is religion without the middle-man. We Wiccans do not require the intercession of a clergy in order to have a relationship with the Divine. That's what it means to me when they say that "every Wiccan is a priest/ess."

2. The mainstream definition of priest/ess is a person who is clergy, who acts as a leader of a spiritual community and does things such as lead ritual, provide counselling, etc. for a congregation or for the community at large. In my opinion, being Wiccan does not automatically mean we are all clergy. In a Wiccan context I think that the clergy role (except as being an intercessor to the Divine) is what we have with the high priest/ess. Not all Wiccans can, will, or should be expected to take on the role of high priest/ess.

So I guess I'm saying that yes, all Wiccans are indeed priest/ess but only high priest/ess are clergy. And all Wiccans are priest/ess because our system does not require a middleman, a clergy, in order for us to have a relationship with the Divine.

[Ben Gruagach]

For those who are interested, there are some other MysticWickers discussing similar things over in this thread (http://www.mysticwicks.com/showthread.php?p=2352230).

They are perennial topics after all!

[Vincent Verthaine]

From the eyes of an outside observer,(I'm a discordian,dontchaknow) and it seems to me it really breaks down to being only really two types of wicca.
Institutionalized and Independent.

and both sides always seem to be at each others throats.

The debate "Are you a true Wiccan if you are a Solitary Practioner" has been
raging for what,50 years?

If a group of wiccans prefer a structured belief system,with a structured hierarchy,with structured rules,thats fine.
Thats what covens are for.
They can decide who is or who isn't a member of a said coven,but I still don't understand what gives them the right to say who is or who isn't a wiccan?

A lot of established covens refused to even recognize discordians as "pagan" when we came out in the early 60's.

It's all about control.
It is my experiance that certian coven leaders seem to have a big problem with anyone calling themselves "wiccan" they can't control.
They lay down the rules,and enjoy the benefits of having power over those "below them".
Anything independent "wiccan"threatens the status quo,and thus threatens their power over their group.
If coven members see someone "doing their own thing",a wiccan who doesn't subscribe to their reality tunnel,those in charge are afraid that their members will start to want to do things on their own also,thus taking away their power,and "high status'.
Next thing you know,coven members are going to start thinking for themselves.They are going to start to wonder why they need to take orders from "the High Priest/ess.
They are going to want to have more say in what goes on in the coven.
And we can't have that,can we? They are a fraid of wiccans doing this :ringaroun
instead of wiccans doing this :hailmol:

Happens in the business world all the time.It's called the "Peter Principle".

Eclectic and solitary wiccans are important to wicca because they are the scouts that charter unknown territories that established covens may be to hidebound to seek.

We discordians went through the same treatment when we came out in the 60's,and the Chaosmages got the same treatment from the Ceremonialists in the 80's.

It is just a fact of life.
Certian people hate anything new,independent,or different.
And when it is people with influence or power,they transfer their prejudices to those below them.

But hey,if the institutionalized wiccans don't want the solitary wiccans,we discordians have no problem taking them in.
We don't care what they call themselves.We don't even require them to worship Eris.
In discordianism,everyone is his/her own high priest.

[juliaki]

There are two things (probably more) that are going on with this label of "priest/ess" in a Wiccan context.



I can certainly understand where you're coming from regarding those two definitions. I also think that any coven member who requires an intercessory to the divine is missing something... even in a coven setting, I'd feel very nervous about a required "spiritual middleman".

One issue that I've seen come up fairly frequently (and yes, largely in the under 18 set, but not exclusively there) is the idea that #1 is equivalent in every way to #2. I remember one time when a 15-year-old girl told me that because she had started a coven (re: a group of friends who got together for sleepovers with a ouija board), that she was in fact a high priestess and I must refer to her as such. And, because I am studying with a tradition that does use honorific titles for our clergy and elders, I should bestow that honorific title upon her as well.

I also think that every person has the *potential* to be a priest or priestess (either in this life or in future lives), but that not everyone will ever actualize that potential. Just stating that one follows a Wiccan-inspired path doesn't automatically bestow priestliness or priestessness upon an individual. (Case in point, someone an individual I met who had attended some classes I taught who in one breath told me he was a priest of Wicca and in the next breath asked me if it was possible for Wiccans to pray, because he never really bothered with that whole "god/ess thing" and thought it might be worthwhile to "try it out someday." I told him something to the effect of that he might want to rethink bandying around the title of priest because the gods might take him seriously and act accordingly.)

[Ben Gruagach]

There are jerks in every community. The danger though is in treating whole classes of people as though the few jerks represent them.

Being a teen ager and ambitious does not mean they aren't "real" Wiccans or even not a "real" high priest/ess. Case in point: Alex Sanders gave Maxine her third degree initiation by the time she was all of eighteen years old. She seems to have filled that role pretty well (as have others I'm sure.) Perhaps she was the rare exception. Just like those jerks who clearly didn't know their stuff who were calling themselves "high priest/ess" might be rare exceptions.

Vincent Verthaine's excellent post reminded me of the phrase "high priest/ess disease." Vivienne West's entertaining poem (http://paganrealm.tripod.com/poems/hps-disease.html) explains the terrible affliction.

[Elderbush]

Juliaki, if you start with 25-30 students, you have to count them. Those were all possible initiates but they left for one reason or another, leaving less to continue, with more dropping during each circle and only a few making it to the final one. That is how I was counting it. All those people went on to another tradition, became solitaries or left the religion. If you start talking to other traditions that is a very common pattern for Wicca.

[Elderbush]

Our group is wrestling with this topic. We think that there should be a place within our tradition for Wiccans who have different amounts of time (and interest!) to spend, who want a close knit coven or who want to be solitary practitioners but have a community to interact with. We also think that it is ok to stay at one level, to not go all the way and we're trying to work that out. It is important to us to keep those who leave for whatever reason still within our community.

In addressing the high priestess thing: we have clergy who fill those roles. They have the education and experience and the desire others may lack.

[Ben Gruagach]

Our group is wrestling with this topic. We think that there should be a place within our tradition for Wiccans who have different amounts of time (and interest!) to spend, who want a close knit coven or who want to be solitary practitioners but have a community to interact with. We also think that it is ok to stay at one level, to not go all the way and we're trying to work that out. It is important to us to keep those who leave for whatever reason still within our community.

In addressing the high priestess thing: we have clergy who fill those roles. They have the education and experience and the desire others may lack.

Thanks for posting that, Elderbush.

Reading things like that gives me hope that our community is, in fact, maturing. We're getting through the growing pains and will stick around for the long haul!

[Lunacie]

Thanks for sharing your story. It's good to hear where other people are coming from. At the risk of opening another can of worms, another issue that I see coming up regarding defining aspects of the Craft is what does or does not constitute a coven. My personal belief is that not every group that gets together to study and/or perform rituals is a coven. There's something "more" to it... a deeper connection that you can clearly see but can't likely explain to anyone else.



A long time ago, someone said to me that anyone who wants to become a high priest or high priestess is the last person in the world who should become one.



I don't mean to pry, so feel free to tell me to buzz off, but why if you were a solitary practitioner did you feel the desperate need to find others to circle with?



From my experience, that "family feeling" is so strong, it's amazing...it's something that can't be put into words. Just got back from FL, and while I was down there, I got to meet up with one of the HPSs who just moved down there. She's still part of the family and in everyone's heart. Connections like that don't just disappear, no matter how many miles are between everyone (and sometimes, like when one ends up going to Iraq, it's a lot of miles).


You're not prying when I was the one who opened the subject, eh? And the reason I really wanted to work with another circle was pretty much what you've written in this post. Although in the first circle I belong to not everyone agreed about everything, there was still a very strong connection. I'm still very good friends with the other fellow (and with his second wife too). And I really missed having others to work with, and talk things over with, and celebrate with, and just feel connected to - in part because we had gone through initiation with each other and worked magic together and I had been 'rescued' by them when I was dumb enough to let down my shield at the wrong time.

And I agree, anyone who wants to be a High Priest/ess is hardly the best person for the role - which is one reason I thought my ex made a pretty good (albeit reluctant) teacher and leader. I think the same thing is true of the job of president of the U.S.. As I understand it, George Washington didn't want the job. :hahugh:

<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->

And what Ben G. wrote in response to the question about every Wiccan being a priest/ess, but not all are high priests and high priestesses which means able to lead a group and teach and do community work and a host of other things. Clergy is a good title for that I guess.

[Lunacie]

Our group is wrestling with this topic. We think that there should be a place within our tradition for Wiccans who have different amounts of time (and interest!) to spend, who want a close knit coven or who want to be solitary practitioners but have a community to interact with. We also think that it is ok to stay at one level, to not go all the way and we're trying to work that out. It is important to us to keep those who leave for whatever reason still within our community.

In addressing the high priestess thing: we have clergy who fill those roles. They have the education and experience and the desire others may lack.

That has always made plain good sense to me. I thought that's what "Inner Court and Outer Court" were all about.

[juliaki]

Juliaki, if you start with 25-30 students, you have to count them. Those were all possible initiates but they left for one reason or another, leaving less to continue, with more dropping during each circle and only a few making it to the final one. That is how I was counting it. All those people went on to another tradition, became solitaries or left the religion. If you start talking to other traditions that is a very common pattern for Wicca.

Given the way the training is set up, none of the people who take the first year's worth of classes are potential initiates. As such, none of them were members, and therefore cannot be counted among the membership.

[Little Billy]

Given the way the training is set up, none of the people who take the first year's worth of classes are potential initiates. As such, none of them were members, and therefore cannot be counted among the membership.

Jebus...what a racket.

LB,
Is in the wrong business.

[Elderbush]

Yep. Well, Juliaki, whatever.:)

[Lunacie]

Gotta agree to disagree on that one.

[juliaki]

Why is it hard to believe that people can take introductory (non-outer court) classes and not be considered members (inner court/initiates) and/or not be on the path to go towards initiation?

[Little Billy]

Why is it hard to believe that people can take introductory (non-outer court) classes and not be considered members (inner court/initiates) and/or not be on the path to go towards initiation?

It's not hard to believe. It is morally wrong to allow suckers to keep their money, after all.

[juliaki]

And just a point of clarification, there are people who have gone through the intro class, the second year of classes, gone through the various aspects of dedication, the dedication rite, petitioned for initiation, gone through various aspects of the initiation process and not initiated or been taken through initiation. Some have been going through the process for more than a decade. Some people make it to the edge of the circle and are turned away. Initiation is something that isn't a guaranteed given, but if it is worth it to an individual then it doesn't matter how long it takes.... this lifetime or another.

[juliaki]

It's not hard to believe. It is morally wrong to allow suckers to keep their money, after all.

Umm...what money?

[Little Billy]

Umm...what money?

The classes are free?

[Little Billy]

And just a point of clarification, there are people who have gone through the intro class, the second year of classes, gone through the various aspects of dedication, the dedication rite, petitioned for initiation, gone through various aspects of the initiation process and not initiated or been taken through initiation. Some have been going through the process for more than a decade. Some people make it to the edge of the circle and are turned away. Initiation is something that isn't a guaranteed given, but if it is worth it to an individual then it doesn't matter how long it takes.... this lifetime or another.


Meh. Screw that. Who the hell needs an elitist religion?

[juliaki]

The classes are free?

Yup.

[juliaki]

Meh. Screw that. Who the hell needs an elitist religion?

I'm of the opinion that all religions are elitist to one level or another, because the gods figure out who stays in what religion....can't get more selective than that. ;)

[Little Billy]

I'm of the opinion that all religions are elitist to one level or another, because the gods figure out who stays in what religion....can't get more selective than that. ;)


And, of course, the coven elders interpret the word of the gods.

Neat.

[Little Billy]

Yup.

You just made "Bob" cry. ---> :wah:

[juliaki]

And, of course, the coven elders interpret the word of the gods.

Neat.

Every person is responsible for interpreting the words of the gods... personally I've found that coven elders are more useful to go to when help is needed interpreting the words of other people. :)

[Little Billy]

Every person is responsible for interpreting the words of the gods... personally I've found that coven elders are more useful to go to when help is needed interpreting the words of other people. :)

Bottom line: Who translates the God's words, when the God's say they don't want someone in a coven?

[juliaki]

Bottom line: Who translates the God's words, when the God's say they don't want someone in a coven?

As I hear it, "life stuff" seems to happen that takes an individual down a different path. Sometimes that's challenges that a person has to face and overcome. Sometimes that's blessings that take them into a different spot in life. Sometimes that means a person takes time away to gather themselves together. Sometimes that means a person ends up going on a totally different path for the rest of this life. However it happens, it's acknowledged for the blessing that it is.... and acknowledged as just as much of a blessing as someone continuing to initiation, because it all comes down to "know thyself".

[Little Billy]

As I hear it, "life stuff" seems to happen that takes an individual down a different path. Sometimes that's challenges that a person has to face and overcome. Sometimes that's blessings that take them into a different spot in life. Sometimes that means a person takes time away to gather themselves together. Sometimes that means a person ends up going on a totally different path for the rest of this life. However it happens, it's acknowledged for the blessing that it is.... and acknowledged as just as much of a blessing as someone continuing to initiation, because it all comes down to "know thyself".

So...blessings happen? :lol:

But you said, IIRC, that some were "turned away".

[juliaki]

So...blessings happen? :lol:

Of course. At least I believe that there are blessings in the world.


But you said, IIRC, that some were "turned away".

Yep. That doesn't mean it was elders or initiates doing the turning, however.

[Little Billy]

Of course. At least I believe that there are blessings in the world.

Yep. That doesn't mean it was elders or initiates doing the turning, however.


1. So do I. Some days "Bob" showers them down on you. Some days, he even takes them out of the big heavy can, first.

2. Okay. That isn't how that post looked, so please pardon me.

[juliaki]

1. So do I. Some days "Bob" showers them down on you. Some days, he even takes them out of the big heavy can, first.

That sounds perfectly right to me.

2. Okay. That isn't how that post looked, so please pardon me.

No worries... I'm trying to edit some rather dull standardized tests while I get caught up with online stuff from this weekend (all while trying to get my bearings from everything I did this weekend out there in the "real worl"), so I'm lucky to be able to string together two words into a sentence. Sorry if it didn't come across quite right. :awilly:

[Ben Gruagach]

Perhaps juliaki's particular coven has never turned away a person but the dropouts have all left of their own accord. There are plenty of covens that do actively turn away people that they feel are not up to their standards.

There are all sorts of reasons for this. Personally though I think it just means the candidate was not right for that particular group -- and in any case it's not up to the particular group to say whether the candidate is Wiccan or not.

[Little Billy]

Perhaps juliaki's particular coven has never turned away a person but the dropouts have all left of their own accord. There are plenty of covens that do actively turn away people that they feel are not up to their standards.

There are all sorts of reasons for this. Personally though I think it just means the candidate was not right for that particular group -- and in any case it's not up to the particular group to say whether the candidate is Wiccan or not.

Sounds kinda clique-y to me.

The Church of the Subgenius doesn't turn anyone away, for any reason other than Pinkness.

[Vincent Verthaine]

How individual covens view things shouldn't necessarily indicate how every coven should view things.Or every practicioner for that matter.

I still don't understand how covens and their leadership should have the right to dictate who is or who isn't a true wiccan.I can understand the right to accept or deny members from their respective covens.But who has the right to say a solitary practictioner isn't a "true wiccan"
Isn't what this thread is about?
After 50 years and this debate is still raging?
But of course,I'm just a discordian,what do I know?

[Elderbush]

Wanting to dictate to others and actually having the power to do it are two different things. Unfortunately, some people have rather exagerated ideas of their (super)powers.:)

[Lunacie]

Vincent, you may be "just a discordian" but you know plenty. That was very well written. Thank you.

[Amythest]

I beleive that even a solitary is considered a wiccan. Just because we as solitaries don't practice in a Coven setting does not make us less of a Wiccan. By holding true to the 13 Principles and living by the Rede and the Law of 3, even a person that practices as a Solitary is still a Wiccan. It is a frame of mind and a lifestyle which dictates who and what we are. By living a life in the Wiccan way, one becomes a Wiccan.

[Dawa Lhamo]

So, if we're going to accept that juliaki's examples are off-base because there's no one here like that, then we need to accept that the solitaries' examples are off-base because there's no one here like that. The limits we apply to one must apply to all to keep this a fair conversation. If we're going to talk about people who aren't here and now, then we need to be honest about that. (Though I think it's important to remember that the extremes are NOT necessarily representative of the "sides" they're on.) I guess that means you've made your decision; we are going to include arguments involving those who are not present on this board. And that's fine; I just wish we were honest about that from the beginning.

It seems like it's already been agreed that no one really has the power or authority to prohibit others from calling themselves Wiccan. Mostly, I've seen BTWs argue that they should be able to believe and express that belief that so and so isn't Wiccan. I'll grant that there are the power-hungry out there, but this seems to be the only position you all are arguing against. I suppose that's easier than arguing against someone who tries to use rational thought.

Should I have to accept in my mind that all people who claim the name Wiccan are actually Wiccans? No. Unless you want to restrain me and make me watch crazy movies to Beethoven music (ZOMG), there's really no way to enforce it. I can accept that people call themselves Wiccan even when they don't appear, to me, to be Wiccan. Because they can call themselves the Easter Bunny for all I can do about it.

Freedom of thought means that Person A can believe that they're Wiccan and Person B can believe that Person A is deluded, Freedom of speech means that they can express their beliefs. So long as they're not trying to control the other, WHAT, exactly is the problem? I will agree that those who try to control others are wrong. But you all seem to be lumping Person B in with those who would seek to control others and condemning them altogether.

But of course, I'm just a power-hungry tightwad, what do I know?

Tashi delek!
Dawa Lhamo

PS: I really don't know why I'm drawn into this conversation, it's like a train wreck or something...:awilly: Heck, personally, I'm fine with believing that 5-minute Wiccan over here might really be Wiccan... but I'm not going to condemn those who believe otherwise, and I'm not going to claim that, just because their belief contradicts mine, that they're seeking to control me or others. I believe in equality, but I don't think everyone's the same.

[Lunacie]

The Thirteen Principles was a good effort to come up with something that all Wiccans could agree on as a core for the religion. But it didn't work. I've posted in another thread here on MW what another group of us has put together as Core Beliefs and Practices, but not everyone agrees with those either. This is what I love about the religion of Wicca - the lack of endless dogma - but it's also frustrating and causes endless arguments because I think something is important and you say "not so much." And vice versa.

Some Wiccans feel the Wiccan Rede is very important, some not so important, some think it's rubbish. Then there's how important working skyclad is, how important the Great Rite is, and on and on and on. Since there is no set dogma other than Gardner's BOS which was only intended to record what his group thought was important, not to be a rule book for Wicca as a whole... since there is no heirarchy to interpret that original BOS or give messages from the gods...

stops to laugh because there are so many gods and so many messages and most of them are much too personal to share with all Wiccans everywhere as the one and only truth :lol:

Ah well, I've lost my train of thought. Maybe I'll get back on at the next station. ;)

[Lunacie]

I guess that means you've made your decision; we are going to include arguments involving those who are not present on this board. And that's fine; I just wish we were honest about that from the beginning.


I'm sorry you're not enjoying this discussion as much as I have been. I think it has stayed way more civil than most discussions on this topic generally manage to do, and we've discussed our personal philosophies as well as other philosophies we have encountered. We're talking about the really big picture here. And I don't think any of us have blamed another poster for something that someone else who isn't posting here may have said somewhere else. If anything, we're asking "Do agree with this philosophy, and if so, why? Because this is why I don't agree with it." I think it's been a great discussion.

[Dawa Lhamo]

I'm sorry you're not enjoying this discussion as much as I have been. I think it has stayed way more civil than most discussions on this topic generally manage to do, and we've discussed our personal philosophies as well as other philosophies we have encountered. We're talking about the really big picture here. And I don't think any of us have blamed another poster for something that someone else who isn't posting here may have said somewhere else. If anything, we're asking "Do agree with this philosophy, and if so, why? Because this is why I don't agree with it." I think it's been a great discussion.No, it's been civil. Amazingly so. However it still seems to me that people are lumping together the idea of believing something or even expressing something and dictating something. We all seem agreed that controlling others and trying to dictate them is wrong, so my question is then why aren't we moving on to something else, some new points to debate over? I dunno, maybe it's just me... ^_^

Tashi delek!
Dawa Lhamo

[Greybird]

Not having the energy to catch up on 30+ pages, lemme just say that you may not be able to be a XXXXXX-ian Wiccan, but you can certainly be a Wiccan. Unless, of course, the XXXXXX-ian Wiccans speak for all of us, or claim exclusive rights to the word 'Wiccan'.

[Lunacie]

I'm of the opinion that all religions are elitist to one level or another, because the gods figure out who stays in what religion....can't get more selective than that. ;)

I've talked with someone else online who really does think the gods care about what rituals we use to worship them, and what names we call ourselves. Me, not so much. I'm sure it's important to them that we honor them with rituals, and they care about the personal relationships we have with them... but I think it's not as important exactly what rituals we perform as that we are performing some kind of rituals to honor them. They probably don't care if we call ourselves Wiccan or neo-Wiccan or Holy High Fluffies. If the gods had any preference they'd probably want us to call ourselves "Cerridwenites" or something with their names in it, eh?

The gods do figure out who is connecting with them and who is honoring them, but do they really care who is in which particular religion? :huh:

[Lunacie]

Dawa, there are a lot of nuances to this, and we are not really dwelling on just one of them. If you don't like this discussion, no one is making you read this thread. The rest of us are interested in this, okay?

[lednevir]

this is funny because Murfreesboro TN has a free entertainment newspaper with a section 'the witches courner' in the last issue someone wrote that you are not a witch unless you are solitary because you are following someone else and a witch is about being yourself. Just one persons opinion not mine but I thought it was a interesting one
bb

[Lunacie]

That may be because Witches and Wiccans are not the same thing. Many Wiccans practice witchcraft. Witches, however, may follow many different religions, or none at all.

[Ben Gruagach]

However it still seems to me that people are lumping together the idea of believing something or even expressing something and dictating something. We all seem agreed that controlling others and trying to dictate them is wrong, so my question is then why aren't we moving on to something else, some new points to debate over?

This is the core of the problem for many people but we have discussed quite a bit more in this thread than just that issue.

There are a lot of people who clearly don't understand the distinction between believing something versus knowing something based on objective and verifiable fact, who don't know how to express their opinion without dictating it as the One True Way. To me, the fact that there are people who gnash their teeth over "fluffy bunnies" still indicates the distinctions have not been made clear.

If this part of the discussion is too uncomfortable there are lots of other ideas that have been expressed in this thread that might draw your interest. And there's nothing wrong with leaving this thread altogether. Trust me -- the topics in this thread will come up again in other threads too!

[Dawa Lhamo]

Wow, I must have really misrepresented myself. The problem isn't that I'm bored or disinterested, but rather the opposite: I've become too interested, too impassioned, beyond the point of reason or rationality. That was what I meant to express with my post script: PS: I really don't know why I'm drawn into this conversation, it's like a train wreck or something...:awilly: Heck, personally, I'm fine with believing that 5-minute Wiccan over here might really be Wiccan... but I'm not going to condemn those who believe otherwise, and I'm not going to claim that, just because their belief contradicts mine, that they're seeking to control me or others. I believe in equality, but I don't think everyone's the same. It makes no sense that I'd be so concerned with this issue, since I personally don't have much to invest in it. Yet I've been taking it personally. That's why I don't know why I'm still in this conversation. Because rationally, I should have not been much a part of it in the first place. I don't know why I'm so interested in it. (I wouldn't use the crazy "awilly" smily if I weren't interested... ^_^ )

I guess that means you've made your decision; we are going to include arguments involving those who are not present on this board. And that's fine; I just wish we were honest about that from the beginning. The reason I quoted my own self here was to avoid getting too personal. There were a few recent posts that this was specifically addressing, and I wanted to respond to the ideas therein, but I felt that if I directly addressed them, then it would seem as if I were attacking them. So, I decided that I'd turn my frustration around back on myself. I didn't mean to imply that this whole thread didn't have merit. However, the particular part of my own post that I had quoted before had never been answered. I had wanted to know if we were going to confine ourselves to the people on the