pagan...wiccan.....witch...*sigh* [Archive] - MysticWicks Online Pagan Community and Spiritual Sanctuary

StormChaser

January 8th, 2002, 02:28 AM

*raises hand* First I'd like to say that I'd like not to get bashed for my view points or what I'm about to say. I wrote this not long ago and it details very acurately MY outlook as well as MY understanding and information I have researched and found to be a decent way of solving the whole issue of pagan, wiccan and witch.

So if your of the many who like to get uppity at my posts and beat my brains into a wall.. kindly refrain from being overly brutal.
Thanks.
~~~~~~~~~~~

Pagan:
Latin root: Pagani, people of the feilds, the unconverted.
meaning*by websters*an irriligious person
a non christian, muslim, or jew.
a heathan
an idol worshipper,
non-converted.

Now, personally I don't put much faith in websters dictionary because it is biased and written by many an ignorant and ill educated person. So all things stated regarding Pagan relate directly to taking the definitions and appling them to the words origin.
Moving onward: During times of campaigning for Christ, it just wasn't worth it to missionaries to high tail it into the middle of the countryside to preach the good word of the Lord to people who believed in the land and lived their spirituality.. in other words people who they were simply not going to win over.

Were these, unconverted, unconvertables heathens? Yep. They
"went against the church" knowingly or not they did. So that makes them heathens.

Were they non christian muslim or jews.. you figure it out.

idol worshippers: they didn't worship anything, or they revered the elementals that they worked with and possibly olde deities. Considering that to idol worship means to believe in or pay homage to false deities, and that the definition of "false" is completely personal, I suppose they were. But everone is to someone else an idol worshipper. Big whoopa.

Irriligious? We can't say what they were. But Pagans of today, save perhaps athiests and some agnostics, might disagree vehmently! Irreligious is to lack faith, spirituality or piety. In it's most basic form.. loving of the self and belief in oneself can beconsidered having faith, spirituality and piety. Not many people think so low of themselves as to lack those qualities. So to this I say websters dictionary staff needs to get a clue.

~~~
Now on to Witch.
This is entirely dependent upon whether you mean
Wicce *pronounced Witch* meaning one thing or another.
I've heard two definitions of the root word.
One meaning life, the other meaning wise\wise woman.
In one definition Witch stems from the ancients who were healers or life tenders who respected and lived in harmony with all life.

The other refers to the women who scared patriarchal society so badly that men were willing to hunt, torture, burn and hang their own mothers, sisters, and daughters, and even each other.
These were the women(and some men) pre-science who had knowlege of the earth, it's uses, how to heal others. But also had the power to bring new life into the world. Women who were revered so highly that neither a wedding nor a funeral could be considered official unless one was present.

All this information stems from readings and the history channel.

Either way you shake it. Witch stems from a magic*k*al meaning. Someone who works with the powers of the elements around them. Who has an understanding and compassion for life. But a Witch can be said to be a person who uses Magic*K*

~Wiccan
Wiccan once again stems from Wicce. But Wiccans seem to be a branch of Witch that because it has left it's magic*k* work behind can be said to be a separate and ALMOST completely unrelated craft of it's own.

Wiccans are nature "worshippers" and deity "worshippers" alike. They are far more "religious" in the typical aspect. Having a set of traditions and ways unique to themselves or to a group much like that of more "common" faiths. While the act of worshipping may be called Magic*k* or said to contain magic*k*, it may also simply be called sacred or a hallowed act. There tend to be tenents of faith commonly shared by Wiccans and a trend to pray to Gods and Goddesses and recognize their myths as being truth or gospel than fairy tale and folklore.

There are other branches of Paganism similar to Wicca that do not follow the same tenents.

Branches such as the Dianics and the Asatru have frequently stated that while they are not entirely un-wiccan, they would not go so far as to say that they were in fact a branch of wicca as they do not believe in, for example, a prime tenent among wiccans, the three-fold law.

It is possible to be all of these things stated, or just two, or just one as they are by definition of their members *those who call themselves as such* not synomymous.

~Storm Chaser

Theres

January 8th, 2002, 02:55 AM

well, Wiccan and witch are not entirely interchangable. not all witches are Wiccan. and i also wouldn't say that Dianic witches or the Asatru are 'branches' of Wicca. entirely different Pagan paths.

Heathen means, literally, people of the heath. it had little to do with going against the church or not.
in the old days stuff reached the big cosmopolitan cities much faster than it reached the people of the countryside. the difference was often centuries. politics, economics, fashion, and certainly religion took awhile to take hold in the small villages of the country (or 'heath'). so when Christianity was first taking hold in Europe, it reached the big cities fairly rapidly. the early 'converts' called those unconverted people 'heathens', which they were.

and idol worshippers weren't irreligious by definition. after all they worshipped their 'idols' ('false' or otherwise), they weren't 'idle worshippers'.

StormChaser

January 8th, 2002, 05:09 PM

Originally posted by Greenman
well, Wiccan and witch are not entirely interchangable. not all witches are Wiccan. and i also wouldn't say that Dianic witches or the Asatru are 'branches' of Wicca. entirely different Pagan paths.

I said exactly that. I said they are not interchangable ie: synonymous. Though they are slightly related.

I also said that Dianics and Asatru may be considered\assumed to be branches of wicca because of their similarities but they are not and are infact paths separate to themselves.

Heathen means, literally, people of the heath. it had little to do with going against the church or not.
[/QOUTE]

By literally I assume you mean Heath's latin root. This being the case your definitiion only goes further to illustrate my point that Wicce\Witches are people who were not converted, but still religious in the ways prior to christianities existance and spreading. Your point also illustrates again why there were so many "witches" or "wicce" left regardless of christianitys popularilty through power.

[Quote] and idol worshippers weren't irreligious by definition. after all they worshipped their 'idols' ('false' or otherwise), they weren't 'idle worshippers'.

I did not say that Idol worshippers were irreligious. I said that in definition of Pagan as stated by the dictionary irreligious is used to define Pagan. I also stated the Dictionary has several problems within it do to the hands writing it.

They worshipped "Idols" or "False Deities". The term "False Deity" stemmed from the Christian Bible. So there for the very terms Idol Worshipper and False Deities stem from the belief, and hommage paid to deities other than the Christian Deity*s*.

It could be said they were then "Idle" worshippers in that, to the eyes of those who believed their deities to be false, their hommage was equivelent to screaming for help at a deaf person.

~Storm Chaser

Myst

January 8th, 2002, 05:22 PM

Originally posted by StormChaser
So if your of the many who like to get uppity at my posts and beat my brains into a wall.. kindly refrain from being overly brutal.

I think that was meant for me *giggle*

Originally posted by StormChaser
a Witch can be said to be a person who uses Magic*K*

Yup. (and for the record, I agreed with what you said about Pagan too but I forgot to quote it and now I'm too lazy to do it)

On Wicca - I think there's a few threads around here about what people think it is. You said "branch of Witch", which is your opinion and all fine and good, but I'd call it "branch of Paganism", not Witch. Being as Witch doesn't have religion and I consider it under Paganism, and Wiccans have religion, and are under Paganism... I wouldn't say Wiccans "lost their magick", but that by and large Wicca is about religion that might supplement with magick, whereas Witchcraft is using magick regardless of religion.

uhm basically I'm rambling and I think you see my point but it doesn't really matter. You know what I mean.

I enjoyed what you've shared tho - I love to see someone think carefully about it like you have. As long as people have reasoning or thought behind their terminology or beliefs I'm all for it.

Back to your regularly scheduled MW...

Theres

January 8th, 2002, 06:46 PM

StormChaser,
a little sensitive aren't we?
i was not 'bashing' you, arguing with you, or really even dissagreeing with you. in fact, my post wasn't aimed at you at all!
i was merely trying to clarify the definition for MysticTwilight.
jeeeez!

Yvonne Belisle

January 9th, 2002, 02:54 PM

Well by all the definitions given I am most definitly what I thougt I was a witch or pagan but not a wiccan. Always nice to get a little confermation on that stuff :)

SpikesPet5150

January 9th, 2002, 04:27 PM

Actually... Parker Brothers make Ouija boards.....the little plastic ones.

I've seen *real* Ouija boards before... very thick, old wood, porcelin planchette.. very cool looking.

I would consider Wiccan's pagan, but I wouldn't say that all witches are Wiccan, or all Wiccans are witches. So basically, I agree with what everyone else says. :) Gee, I'm so agreeable.
~Bree

Lunamoth

January 9th, 2002, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by Chibi-Fallon
And the only dumb question is “Do we go outside for a tornado drill?” a kid in my homeroom asked that once. The teacher said he could if he wanted to.

:lol: *snort* I laughed out loud at that one!

kittiepoetrygod

January 9th, 2002, 07:51 PM

Stepping in here: my opinion.
Pagan - Non Christian, Muslim, Or Jew related religion.
Witch- Person who uses magic/k and/or prayer to further themselves along down their spiritual path.
Wiccan - A person who is Gardnerian or Alexandrian.

IMO, most "wiccans" out their are Witches, w/o the Gardnerian or Alexandrian training. Once you get down to it, after those to, you can't get any farther down. Its the bottom of the list. Nothing left to see. RIght above it it is Witchcraft ... Right down from that is Asatru (sp?) and Dianic Witches are. Wiccans, Aasatru, and Dianic Witches are a few examples of ""deminations of Paganism. Wicca does not by any means encompass them. Sorry, its just a pet peeve of mine when people classify those and other Pagan denominations under Wicca.

Girl with the Boyfriend: No offence, but if he thinks inanimate objects can do something, theres prolly something wrong with his head.

Myst

January 9th, 2002, 10:44 PM

Can we stop bickering back and forth now? Please? Thanks. Ok then.

StormChaser

January 9th, 2002, 10:51 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by StormChaser
[B]

Didn't say you were bashing at all. Nor did I say that your post was aimed *though it is possible for that to be assumed as such considering your wording looked similar to paraphrasing* All I was doing was restating, verifying and agreeing to a great degree. I hardly see that as being sensative or overly so.

To Kittie:
This is not meant to be offensive or at all slandering. Simply meant to provide a slightly different point of view with a bit more information failed to be provided within the confines of your definitions.
"]Originally posted by kittiepoetrygod [/i]
[B]Stepping in here: my opinion.
Pagan - Non Christian, Muslim, Or Jew related religion.
Witch- Person who uses magic/k and/or prayer to further themselves along down their spiritual path.
Wiccan - A person who is Gardnerian or Alexandrian. "

This is Not an opinion. Many a Wiccan is a solitary practitioner who has nothing whatsoever to do with the teachings of Garndarian or Alexandrian trads. In addition to that there are many other trads, some having influence from alexandrian and garnarian beliefs, but also having folk and family traditions tied within them. I was raised in such a trad. Your definitions is very black and white where all too many variations are present for such a defition to be remotely acurate. A Wiccan I would say is still better defined as a believer in philisophical mythos as some form of truth to which they are personally beholden and follows a certain criteria of belief and practice as defined withing, at least for wiccans living in the United States, by official government sanctioned\recognized documents provided by a council of Wiccans which has been largely agreed upon by the majority if not all Wiccans.

Witch: . A prayer can be said to be a wish, a hope, a "mental push" *ie a girl looks at a hot guy and thinks as if trying to engrain it into his head "look at me.. i'm so into you.. come talk to me" she may be a good christian girl.. I doubt she'd call that magick, though by our definition it could be construde as that), or an actual recipe conjoined with traditional prayer.

Asatru and Dianics: No they are not wiccans, though they have similarities. Because of those similarites: IE belief in mythos people commonly make the mistake that these two are Wiccan branches. They are in fact not at all synonymous with either the terms Wiccan or Witch. Though they can be, and are classified as a branch of Paganism. They have their own set of beliefs and doctrine and though not formally recognized they are seemingly unanimously held by the community of people who associate themselves, or rather, label themselves as either. There other traditions, communities, and individuals who also have belief in pagan mythos but do not identify with Wicca.

~Storm Chaser

PS: Myst: Not directed at anyone in particular.

Myst

January 9th, 2002, 11:13 PM

Originally posted by StormChaser
This is Not an opinion. Many a Wiccan is a solitary practitioner who has nothing whatsoever to do with the teachings of Garndarian or Alexandrian trads.

Actually it is an opinion. Many a person calls themself Wiccan when they have nothing to do with those trads. That doesn't mean they are Wiccan by kittie's definition, or mine. I know a few people who call themselves Wiccan who I don't feel are Wiccan at all.

Calling oneself a Wiccan doesn't make that person a Wiccan.

I think there's already a few threads on that debate.

Raindancer

January 10th, 2002, 03:43 AM

I'm coming late into this and can't get into detail because of time, but of everyone, I probably agree with Stormchaser most.

Wicca was Gardnerian in the beginning, then Alexandrian as well later on. Now I think that it could be applied to anyone who subscribes to its core beliefs as embodied in The Rede, which is where you find the 3 Fold Law, and the statement "An it harm none do as ye will." This is applicable to Solitary Eclectics such as myself, as much as Gardnerians and the other traditions.

Wiccans are witches, but not all witches are Wiccan. As has been said, Wicca is a religion. A witch is someone who feels connected with nature, and works within nature in some way. They may or may not use Magick, or manipulate the energies they find in nature or within themselves, but they strive to live in harmony with the world around them. They might be a pagan witch, they may be a Buddhist witch, they may be a Christian witch, even an atheist witch. The religion is a separate issue.

Wicca takes this connection with nature, and adds a spiritual element that is not necessary for witchcraft. How that is expressed varies widely from one tradition to another, and from one person to another.

I sort of know someone who is Asatru, and from what he says, its based on the Norse Gods and Goddesses, and organised into "Hearths" kind households not necessarily based on being related by blood or marriage. They seem to have a fair amount of structure while retaining a fair amount of autonomy. They don't necessarily subscribe to the Rede. They say they are Heathen as in the sense of country folk in worship of the Norse Deities as they understand that to be.

Dianic Wicca as I understand it may subscribe to the Rede, but whereas what is now mainstream Wicca focusses on balance on worshipping both Male and Female aspects of the Divine, God and Goddess, Dianic Wicca focusses primarily or soley on the Female Aspect or Goddess. Some may feel that they aren't part of Wicca as a result, some do. I have my thoughts on this as do many others, to me, the path toward connecting with Spirit is one each of us has to do for themselves. Whqt is important is that we arrive, not so much how we get there. In the process of the journey, I believe that we should try as hard as we can to avoid harm to others. Purely in my opinion, its just as wrong ro write off one half of the human race as it is to write off the other half. God, Goddess or Both, I believe that They love ALL Their children, which includes all things in the universe. We are all brothers and sisters and we are ALL children of the divine. That which oppresses my sister or brother oppresses me.

Anyway, I'm a Solitary Eclectic, which means that I don't follow any one tradition, but those things that feel right to me. Its my journey, and I have to follow what I feel works for me. Like Solitaries I know, I don't sit well with anyone telling me the "RIGHT WAY" so I don't belong tp a coven. Its what works for me, others like the feeling of belonging, or like the structure, or whatever. Gardnerians tend toward elaborate choreographed and scripted rituals, others like myself, keep it simple. To each his or her own. I try to respect all paths and only ask in return that they respect mine. I have done some Magick from time to time, but feel that it should be reserved as a last resort and only for a very good reason such as helping someone who is in desperate straits, but thats me, others like to use it often. I happen to feel a primary connection to a Goddess, Isis, many men through history have felt a real connection with Her, Others folow many, both Gods and Goddesses. Whatever floats your boat.
Thats all I have time for, I hjope it doesn't confuse you too much.
Blessings and Light
Raindancer

kittiepoetrygod

January 10th, 2002, 03:40 PM

Like myst said it is an opinion. Wicca started out as the teachings of various persons ... including Gardner, Sanders, Crowley, Valiente (know i spelled that one wrong). If anyone could just be Wiccan, i doubt there would be either a degree system or initations. The whole point of them is to limit the people that call themselves Wiccan to those that actually subscribe to Wiccan teachings as outlined by the above people.
And that also made Wicca a distinct term ... now it could mean almost anything under the sun .. and is often used to describe anything under the sun ... like calling Dianic Witchcraft Dianic Wicca. Its not Wicca, imo, because it started before Gardner. The reason people call it Wicca, imo, is because they have been mislead to beileve that Wicca is not the initating, heirical (know i spelled that wrong too) thing that it was in the begining!

(Edited to add)
Thats also, imo, the reason why there are alot of Wiccans that discriminate out there .. the original ideas have been changed to that of such people as SRW and SC, for two examples.

StormChaser

January 10th, 2002, 10:02 PM

My "not an opinion" really relates to the fact that since there is no perfectly accpetable definition of the terms, though many may come very very close to be exactly right, there will always be discrepancies.

Names, labels, adjectives, adverbs, are merely simplifications and generalizations we make to simplify what really has endless variables for being. What we all decide personally as our own beliefs as to what things are and aren't hardly matters in the grand scheme of things because they may be incredibley wrong from the "pure" point of viewing. In other words, what anyone defines as the meaning of a word, can be altered by the vision of another. A pure point of viewing would be a view that is not slanted by personal experience or prior teachings, one that is neither unaffected, or directly affected by that which is being defined.

And in that sense, we all may be wrong, and we all may be correct in our definitions.
And in that sense, like myst stated, it is an opinion that kittie was wrong in the eyes of others, it also an opinion that my "opinion" is an "opinion" because none of us are truly capable of seeing from a pure point of view. Then again.. maybe we are and we just have not come to that yet. Though I doubt anyone here would disagree when I say that we have not .. yet.

Maybe I should stop reading these philosophy books... Yipe!
~Storm Chaser

Myst

January 10th, 2002, 10:32 PM

Your Capricorn is showing. :D

Raindancer

January 10th, 2002, 11:06 PM

There are certain things that are human nature. One big thing is that we all ( all 7-8 Billion of us) will see things in a slightly different way. Even if we agree in the big things and little things, there will still be things we see differently. Its also in our nature for many of us to think our way is the right way and the others are wrong.

Trouble is that in a way we are right and at the same time, wrong. Rightness is a relative thing, as is wrongness. I'm sure we've all heard that before, so I won't expand on that. But as far as a "Pure"view is concerned, I don't think that there is one. The only pure thing is the essence of the thing itself. It is what it is, regardless of what we see or think. ALL viewpoints are our perceptions filtered through our senses, interpreted by our brains using what our experience and personal reality happens to be. At best, we can maybe come to some understandings of it, but we can never know it all 100%.

In that respect, if there are 1,000,000 people who believe in themselves as Wiccans, you will find that you will get just as many diffeent takes on it. So why worry about it? If each one of us has our own path, as we all do, then who cares if someone doesn't like it? We don't need the validation of others to tell us if we are searching for the divine in the "Right"way? We can get that from the Christians, we can get that from our parents, friends, enemies, but as Jimi Hendrix said in a song: "I'm the one who's gotta die when its time for me to die, So let me live my life the way I want to".

We're all here because we didn't toe the party line of the mainstream religions. I don't have to ask if we're all searching for some answers to this life, and to connect with Spirit. So given that we are all going to see things a little differently, and that in some ways all of us are going to be both right and wrong, I think we would be better off teaching and learning to and from each other, and forget about lables and categories. Those are artificial constructs to help us make sense of something that we can't grasp. They can be tools, they should not be yardsticks or litmus tests of right and wrong.

I consider myself Wicca because I broadly subscribe to the core beliefs, I don't think that the Law of Return is necessarily 3.0 to 1. It could be 2.5 or 1 or 6. Its a concept, not a formula. I prefer to let the Lord and Lady worry about it. Its occured to me that there are many ways for something to come back on you that can't be quantified but are just as costly Karma-wise. Some people might disagree with me, but thats our nature.

I think that we should back off from dictionary-type definitions and cooperate and share what we've worked out so far. Thats it for now...
Blessed Be
Raindancer

Myst

January 10th, 2002, 11:56 PM

*sigh*

Garnet

January 11th, 2002, 02:43 AM

Well said!

Theres

January 11th, 2002, 04:19 AM

i'm not sure what the point of a discussion board is if we all agree not to discuss anything.
what was that quote about the "unexamined life"?
but i agree with the bit about religion be un-calculable. that's one reason i hate the term 'belief system'. i put that in the same category as 'music business'. i'm aware of the realities of life, but in an ideal world those two words should NEVER be used together.

Dirah

January 12th, 2002, 08:49 PM

:wave:
Ahh! linguistics! Just today I saw a reference to a 'non-pagan witch' could someone please enlighten me here? I always thought that all witches were pagans, but I guess the plot thickens!
I have an ouija board in the house, so far so good although I do hear noises coming from the closet on occaision!

My husband (catholic) has been the christian spouse to die for, open minded, (if youre happy with youre spirituallity, then I am happy with youre spirituallity) gives me all the space I need , etc. but we never could get past that ouija board (he thinks that I got rid of it) but you know its not a religious thing, its because of those darn witchboard movies! I told him that was Hollywood but he still cant shake his fear, oh well....

Myst

January 12th, 2002, 09:14 PM

On whether Witches are Pagans, it depends who you ask. To me Pagans are part of a religion that is non Christian, Jewish, or Muslim. Witchcraft is often thought of as the practice of magick (usually folk magick, but not necessarily) which can be practed in conjunction with another religion such as Wicca. Wicca is part of Paganism. So if you were a Wiccan Witch you'd be Pagan. But if you were, say, a Witch who practices folk magick only without any religious basis you wouldn't be Pagan.

There is a great thread on what Paganism is here - http://www.mysticwicks.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10657

Here is one on eclectic Wicca and what Wicca is - http://www.mysticwicks.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=11834

AradiaSupernova

January 13th, 2002, 12:43 AM

I have to disagree with the "you aren't wiccan if you aren't gardenarian or alexandrian" that is BULL! :(

Raindancer

January 13th, 2002, 05:17 AM

I think that we get a certain confusion because people need to name things. We know who we are, but the only overall name that we all fit under is one that we were given, not what we gave ourselves.

Because those who gave us the name little understood us, its not something that is always clear. I think that maybe it would be a good thing to replace pagan, which was originally a kind of putdown that the Christianised City Slickers gave to their country cousins, with our own word for "US".

How many people know that in their OWN language, the Welsh aren't Welsh? It stems from the Saxon word for strangers. But the Saxons won, and the Cymri became the Welsh. I think that it would be an important step toward recaliming our own identity as a people, to come up with our own name for US.

Its useful to note that the non-pagan religions stem from the same source. They are all patriarchal monotheisms, or they would like to think of themselves as such, but between the angels, Jesus, Virgin Mary, Houris, Saints and so on, heaven is a very crowded place and thats not even counting all the souls of dead people.

Nevertheless, what pagan religions seem to have in common is a recognition of both male and female aspects of deity, whether it be as aspects of one deity, or more than one deity, a true polytheism. To go on about it being a truer mirror of how nature operates than patriarchal monotheism would be singing to the choir. But whether it be Wicca, Asatru, Hinduisim or what, thats the common thread.

Any thoughts about replacing "Pagan" with something else? Or do people feel that its not necessary or this late in the game, possible to change? I remember the 70s and people pushing for the use of "Ms" instead of Miss or Mrs.. It took a little while to become accepted, but now, its a standard form of address. Change is awkward at first, but todays change is tomorrow's tradition.

If people of the God/dess decided that we should find a name that we give ourselves to replace the one we were given, what do you think we might use? Any ideas?
Blessings and Light
Raindancer
Unrepentant ornery kitchen witch Wiccan Eclectic Solitary, Non Gardnerian/Alexandrian, but Wiccan *G* nevertheless

Myst

January 13th, 2002, 09:10 AM

Raindancer : no one *here* uses Pagan as fundies do. The debate on whether you should just change words to change meaning has been going around MW for awhile. Yes words have meaning - the meaning people attribute to them. I'm not going to go on there because that one is already raging around MW somewhere - particularily in the "womyn" threads.

AradiaSupernova

January 13th, 2002, 12:49 PM

Well Myst, if you look back at kittpoetrygod's first post for this topic, it says that the defintion of a Wiccan is anyone who is Gardenarian or Alexandrian.

Myst

January 13th, 2002, 02:32 PM

Ah. Now I see it. Sorry I didn't see anyone else say that; I thought you were responding to me since I said it in a different thread, and I was thinking uhmmm why did you answer here lol

*sits down*

AradiaSupernova

January 13th, 2002, 03:08 PM

hehehe. its ok Myth :) But I totally disagree with that statement. I'm Wiccan and I don't follow a specific path. I'm eclectic. If that makes me a non-wiccan..heh. We've got PROBLEMS.

Raindancer

January 13th, 2002, 10:52 PM

My point of view, is that its like school kids arguing "I'm Wiccan""No you're NOT, I'M Wiccan< You can't be Wiccan" etc. Its really divisive and not at all productive to waste our energy ( as a community) worrying about definitions. Even among people who follow the same tradition, there are variations and this is as it should be. Its a spiritual quest, I'm much more interested in what my fellow questers have learned and experienced in their lives. Its good that we are different, it means that we have something unique that the others haven't experienced. The beauty is in sharing and helping each other along. I would like to see dialogue that does that, that brings us together, not in the sense of being the same, but in the sense of truly knowing and sharing the variety of our common differences. In sharing and helping each other discover something new, we are exploring our own reality, in a sense, with many minds, seeing things we couldn't have otherwise.

Raindancer

flar7

January 14th, 2002, 02:03 AM

I have a female friend/relative(sorta) who is a witch and xtian.
She has no difficulties with the two. So she would be a non
pagan witch. She only does the healing stuff, no harmful spells
that I know of. But her house is weird...

Theres

January 14th, 2002, 02:12 AM

i've posted here (and i do believe) that a person can possibly be Christian witch (although obviously not Wiccan).
but there seems to be some rather fundamental conflicts that makes me wonder about their committment to Christianity.
for instance, how do they reconcile the issue of 'false prophets' and 'healers', and countless other descrepancies?
just curious.

flar7

January 14th, 2002, 02:18 AM

and realize that the bible was written by men and interpreted
into its present form. The kill the witch stuff actually refers to
poiseners. There is some interesting sites xtian about where
witchcraft comes from, and it aint the devil according to the one
I read. Will post if can find it, was about the dead sea scrolls and
stuff. very cool site.
Also, you can be a prophet and not be false. Healing? Isnt that
what Jesus did? Laying on of hands. Heck even remote healing
in one known instance. The centurions servant.
And although she is xtian, she doesnt evangelize or show her
faith about. Neither does she advertise her craft.

Myst

January 14th, 2002, 07:06 AM

Originally posted by Raindancer
Its good that we are different, it means that we have something unique that the others haven't experienced. The beauty is in sharing and helping each other along.

By discussing things here we *are* sharing ideas, thoughts, and points of view. Believe you me, my opinions of what Wicca is and who is Wiccan have changed since I came to MW and was able to discuss it with others as we are here.

Katzrina

January 14th, 2002, 09:49 PM

I agree that wiccans are pagan and that not all pagans are wiccan. I see wicca as one of the branches of the pagan religion.
I spent a long time reading into the different religions, before I found the one that I was most comfortable with. My family is all christian except myself and I've had to deal with the rejection of my choice of religion from my family. It took a while but they stopped trying to change my frame of thought and my beliefs.
they no longer see my home or anything in it as anything satanic!!!!!!
so I dont see why mates can't come to respect your things

lucidfire

January 14th, 2002, 11:11 PM

well I may be alone in this, but I'll share anyways;

the pagan thing is confusing; I think what is meant by saying anyone who's not Christian is a Pagan, is partly due to the fact that the word itself means "peasant." Christianity, and many other non-Pagan religions tend to have a patriarchal structure, where there's always the head religious guy and everyone just believes his interpretation of things.

My definition of a Witch always had to do with the Goddess and a structure similar to Wicca, where one recognizes both aspects but choses the Goddess in particular to make a covenant (for whatever reason). The Wiccan category is pretty basic to most, having the balance of deity; then again, there are some eastern religions which have the same balance of male and female but see a higher "All" balancing/binding force outside of an Archetype view of things, one being the Hare Krsna devotees; in some sense, I guess they could be considered Wiccan, except their rituals aren't the same; then is it simply the ritual that does it, the invocation of the elements, casting the circle and such? I think it's confusing things like that which cause people to use the word "Pagan," which in some way symbolizes the balance of god, goddess, and All (reguardless of which you prefer).

any ideas about that?

Katzrina

January 14th, 2002, 11:28 PM

you have a better way of saying the things I'm thinking. So I agree with you.

I tend to get distracted by someone or something.

like the cats!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Myst

January 16th, 2002, 05:37 AM

Originally posted by lucidfire
The Wiccan category is pretty basic to most, having the balance of deity; then again, there are some eastern religions which have the same balance of male and female but see a higher "All" balancing/binding force outside of an Archetype view of things, one being the Hare Krsna devotees; in some sense, I guess they could be considered Wiccan, except their rituals aren't the same;

No, I wouldn't call them, being as Wicca to me has more to it then just a male and female deity. :)

Garnet

January 16th, 2002, 04:07 PM

There's been a flap recently here in Wisconsin since a Wiccan has been made a chaplain in the prison system. (!)
On Public Radio there is a local-interest show 'At Ten' which plays every week night. On each show, two subjects are covered in depth, with the host interviewing 1 or 2 people about that subject. All sorts of stuff is covered; legislative redistricting, making marijuana legal for medical purposes, etc.
Last night, one of the subjects was the "Wiccan religion' with a specific focus on the chaplain issue.
One of the persons interviewed was Reverand Marie Johann, who described herself as ' a witch who's a Wiccan priestess' (at the local 'Wiccan church', which I'd never heard of!).
She & Gene Keillor (Im not sure about the spelling) described their faith, dispelling some common myths (that we're all Satanists, etc.), & describing the Rede & the Law of Three.
Rev. Johann (that's how she was introduced) said there were "many branches of Wicca; Alexandrian. Gardnerian, Celtic, Dianic, & many others'. She said she started ministering to Wiccans in prison as a volunteer (she's not the chaplain), and goes in her "Priestess dress" (long black robes & a cape). Mr.
Keillor is a former prisoner who talked about being able to practice his faith while incarcerated.
It was interesting, especially since Rev. Johann used the terms 'witch' & 'Wiccan' interchangeably.
Huh? Oh, the chaplain wasn't on. Her name is Jamie Witch (It was explained that it used to be Welch).
Neither Rev. Johann nor Mr. Keillor mentioned subscribing to any certain path, & didn't attribute any to Chaplain Witch.
Amazing what you can hear on public radio.

Living well is the best revege.

Raindancer

January 17th, 2002, 01:54 AM

Without cutting and pasting all the quotes:

One big difference between Wicca and the Hare Krishna's is we don't proselytise, and Wiccans may follow a variety of Gods and Goddesses, while they are very much into Krishna. We don't tell people which deity to follow. I don't know about them enough to say, but I don't think they connect with nature in the same way either. Also, Hares don't practice Magick. Similar in some ways, but not us.

Just as all Wiccans are pagans but not all pagans are Wiccans, likewise with Wiccans and Witches. Not all Witches are Wiccan. Wicca has a specific Rede, including The Law of Threefold Return, än it harm none, do as ye will. Not all Witches subscribe to the Rede. A witch is someone who connects with nature, and may use nature in some way to work what Wiccans call Magick as opposed to "Magic" which is illusion. Using the energies in nature, and in our minds, like firewalking, doesn't require a religion, but only a certain mental capacity and discipline. Wicca added religion to witchcraft, but its not all of witchcraft. Especially when you talk about Ceremonial Wicca. Natural witchcraft goes back thousands of years, it didn't necessarily involve a spcific deity, but rather recognising forces in nature, as well as human emotions.and performing spelss, making potions, etc, to affect them in some way. I'm reading a book by Buckland on Gypsy Magick, and he says that for some tribes, they do it, but religion doesn't enter into it. I think that blurring the distinctions between witchcraft and Wiccan witchcraft, is not a good thing. Its ignorance, as much as the ignorance that Christians in many cases have about us, and we should dispell it wherever we see it. Thats my take, if I'm wrong, correct me.
Blessings and Chocolate ( MMMMM CHOCOLATE)
Raindancer

Myst

January 17th, 2002, 08:01 AM

Originally posted by Raindancer
Ceremonial Wicca.

I just found that term interesting. I think you mean Wicca practiced with a lot of ceremony, not with ceremonial magic?

Raindancer

January 18th, 2002, 06:13 AM

When I say Ceremonial Wicca, what I'm refering to are those rituals which are long, elaborate, choreographed, and scripted down to the last detail, rather than spontaneous,created on the spot ritual. . People wear elaborate costumes, possobly wear masks, and take parts as in a performance, and try very hard to get it letter perfect. Its a lot different from what you might expect from someone living in a little cottage out on the moors or whatever. Its highly organised, and focused on form. Like the difference between High Temple and a homemade ritual. Its Ceremonial Wicca because its Wicca, but its highly complex and stylised Wicca, its all about using detailed ritual to work whatever you want to do. Ceremonial Wicca.

Blessings
Raindancer

StormChaser

January 18th, 2002, 09:17 AM

Originally posted by Raindancer
My point of view, is that its like school kids arguing "I'm Wiccan""No you're NOT, I'M Wiccan< You can't be Wiccan" etc.

Raindancer

lol. I don't know where this debate has gone, I've been at school, but I read this and got a chuckle.

Not because I disagree but because I know exactly that scenario. Been in it many a time.

The problem with the words and the definitions as they stand, are that not everyone defines them the same, but they all use 3 words to categorize or label it seems. Wiccan, Witch, Pagan.

These 3 types aren't the only ones to disagree. Many a christian denomination disagrees church to church and even person to person on what a "good" christian is.. or a "right" christian *one who is christian the right way*. There are of course more examples but that will do.

One word definitions can hardly express matters of the soul. I think better questions to ask may be "What do you believe\ have faith in?", "How and what, if anything, do you practice religiously speaking?". We could of course take a poll for each meaning on mystic wicks and have the chosen definitions posted simply for reference here, so people can identify with less banter about what is and isn't correct.

When you come down to it, what you categorize yourself hardly matters. It's what you are, what you believe, and what you do that is going to strike up conversation, more so than your label. People are people, we aren't meant to fit in boxes, neither are our faiths.

StormChaser

January 18th, 2002, 09:28 AM

Originally posted by Raindancer
When I say Ceremonial Wicca, what I'm refering to are those rituals which are long, elaborate, choreographed, and scripted down to the last detail, rather than spontaneous,created on the spot ritual. . People wear elaborate costumes, possobly wear masks, and take parts as in a performance, and try very hard to get it letter perfect. Its a lot different from what you might expect from someone living in a little cottage out on the moors or whatever. Its highly organised, and focused on form. Like the difference between High Temple and a homemade ritual. Its Ceremonial Wicca because its Wicca, but its highly complex and stylised Wicca, its all about using detailed ritual to work whatever you want to do. Ceremonial Wicca.

Blessings
Raindancer

See this confuses me. I've seen Elsbeth and Nybors rituals. I have never been impressed. It has always felt incredibly phony.

however in the trad I grew up in, there was a patterned ceremony for the esbats. But it differed each time in minor ways during the set up of ritual. Some nights we called the quarters with one chant, other nights another, *the chants and songs vary grove to grove, coven to coven, within the trad.*, the words used to invite deity, and different diety were invited differently. The words in fact, for any of the rituals, are rarely if ever the same except for certain things, like the symbollic great right, and the timeing for everything was the same *not by minute, but that the order in which things were done was the same.. sweep circle, invite quarters..." all done in the same order each time. There's no act or getting things perfect really. By the time you priest or priestess a whole circle or grove, you know how things go, just as you know how to breath. It's natural. You know how things work, why they go that way. I don't know if that's ceremonial like you discribed. But it is very ceremony based.

~Storm

Xander67

January 18th, 2002, 10:19 AM

I think alot of people use terms just because they have heard the terms used and they probably never took the time to look up the meaning in the dictionary . They assumed they knew what the word meant because of the context in which the word was used in the sentense... :rolleyes:

example... we here alot of useage of the word "Occult" by the media in such a way that would lead one to believe it means something evil or forbidden.....

Actually, the word is synonomus to the words "hidden" "obscure" and was used to describe certian teachings that werent meant to be common knowledge at the time.. no where in the dictionary is there any reference or indication that the word means that it is evil , yet it is used that way, funny, I thought you had to go to school to be a journalist ;) .
Or mabey they dont have dictionaries in Journalism class :)

The word ritual is another casualty here,
all the word means is something that is repeated over and over again, like when you wake up you have your daily routine...

that is why rituals are so powerful!!!
when you perform a ritual under the prescribed conditions and in the propper state of consciousness, will, intent and so forth...
you are tapping into something that was created long ago, and "Carrying on that specific work (Continuing)"

we all know how poerful thoughtforms can get when they are "fed, and nurtured" get the idea?
and of course they work because the law says it does. (Universal laws)

and yeah, some rituals are elaborate, and others arent, but I will tell you this much...and my friend willow in philadelphia can back me on this....

a few words spoken from the heart over the light of a candle, with intent, emotion, and purpose... is far more powerfull than
an elaborate "Stage play ritual" where the participants dont understand what they are doing and or the purpose of certain "Props"

but hey, dont take my word for it, get a dictionary and look up the words Ritual and Occult, and then look at how the media uses it, and you will see what i am trying to say...

Find out for yourself! truth has more power if it is something you KNOW to be true rather than assume

Raindancer

January 18th, 2002, 04:33 PM

What I'm saying though, is that unlike what they tell you in the "Fundie" churches, there is no ONE WAY TM We all see things in different ways, and need different things. As long as they get us where we want to go, they aren't WRONG, or universally RIGHT, only one or the other for us.

Some of us are moved by what I call Ceremonial Ritual, and for them it really brings them out and helps them get into it. They love the ceremony, and it makes them feel real. Its not my thing, I'm into simple rituals, being a kitcheny witch, and for me, they are like having Mom and Dad over for a little visit, and spending a little quality time with Them.

It works for me, but for someone else, it won't. These things are obvious, that out of million different ways to reach connection with Spirit, all of them might be right and all of them might be wrong and the real Quest lies in finding which is which for us.

I don't know if getting hung up in rightness and wrongness and semantic tangles is a western thing or if people of all religions in all cultures have this problem, my knowledge of other cultures/religions is limited to those I had in Japan when I explored Nicheren Shoshu Buddhism. But at least in that case, the people I talked with then, would have said that I could be a Buddhist and a Wiccan at the same time.

Even though we may have gotten away from those religions that taught us that their way was the right one and others were in varying degrees, wrong, its useful to consider that the culture is imbued with that kind of mindset, and that unless we recognise that work to unlearn that kind of thinking, we risk carrying it into whatever religious path we choose.

Reality is not linear, its multileveled, because we who perceive it are all different, and because we are subjective, and want to find some kind of order and meaning in it, and because we are different, its impossible that any two realities will be exactly alike. Even among identical twins.

In a sense, when we try to describe what we see, and understand, what we believe to be true, when we attempt to convey to another, the reality we live in, we are all speaking different languages. The words may be the same, but each one carries with it different mental pictures, different experiences, different emotional baggage. The word "Home" for one may be the time of a Golden Age, where for another, a time of deepest Hell.

Given that, its not hard to see how we are treading in treacherous waters when we place great importance on defining ourselves and others with words. Its more difficult to do, but we need to be cautious in making judgements based on words and semantics, and take time to allow actions to speak for themselves. Or at least when we are discussing these things with one another, to try to explain what we mean when we use words like pagans, Wiccans, Witches and so on. As we've seen, our understandings of these words vary.

Thats one of the strengths of this forum too though, because it means that in the process of talking about it, we will be exposed to many more realities thanwe would have otherwise. Whats important is to avoid making value judgements about them except in as far as they personally work for us. Simple ritual is good for me, but I am all ears (eyes in this case) if someone who really likes ceremony wants to tell me about it, and why it moves the earth for them. I want to understand them and how it works for them, how they got to where they are. I really get into reading books by people talking about their personal searches and spiritual journeys. I have found many things in them that resonate with my own, and sometimes insights that I had never considered, but when I read them and consider them, pierce through like shining lights.

We often use words as a sort of intellectual shorthand. We say someone is Pagan, as if that explains everything. But as words for each of us carry different meanings, the pictures they paint should be suspect. They should be a mode of communication and exploration, that carefully used, should as much as is possible, given the limitations of our humanity and separateness of consciousness, allow us to have some degree of shared understanding. Shorthand is only useful when we can all read it.

So where is this leading? We should make every effort to not get bogged down in semantic differences, and work toward a clearer understanding of whats behind the words. My interests at present lie in learning about my fellow beings and their explorations, how they got to where they are, of course, while following my own path. I am really interested in knowing what is going on with others.

Life and reality is a tapestry, and my thread is one part of it, but only knowing about my thread wont help me see the whole tapestry, and my fondest wish would be that I one day be allowed to see the whole thing. It may never happen, but its a wish. Hope I haven't put everyone to sleep, I get going and , well, I don't do short.
Blessings and Light
Raindancer

Garnet

January 18th, 2002, 05:37 PM

I think I'm about to muddy the waters a bit more.
Ever read any works by Sarah Lyddon Morrison? ("The Modern Witch's Spellbook", etc.). Her work was my introduction to 'the Craft'. Her books are just collections of spells, curses, etc., which is actually a poor intro, though I didn't realize it until I started reading Cunningham, Silver Ravenwolf, etc., and realized "Whoa! This is a RELIGION!" If you get past the spells and read the bits of philosophy Morrison dribbles about, it's plain that although she does spellworking, she is a Christian.
A Christian who calls herself a witch. Very weird.
I agree w/ Xander67 about rituals. If you put too much effort into the trappings: costumes, props, staging, etc. that's all you focus on, because the 'stuff' can be so distracting. That is-at least in part-why I became disillusioned with 'mainstream' religion: too much focus on the pretty trappings (& the 'Give $$$$$' aspect). That's why I've been reluctant to check out the "Wiccan Church" I heard about on public radio.
When I do a 'formal' ritual, I try to use the proper colors (including what I wear, as long as it's comfortable), LOTS of candles (I like 'em), & music, but I find that most of mine are just a heartfelt "Hey, Mother-Goddess, I need a little help with..."
I plan to continue using witch, wiccan (& even Pagan) interchangeably, depending on what I think who ever I'm talking to will find easier to deal with (on the rare occasion I admit publicly to my path).
Blessed Be

Living well is the best revenge.

Raindancer

January 18th, 2002, 06:30 PM

As I said before, my rituals are simple. I use candles that are colored to symbolise certain things, I like incense, especially Frankincense and Myrhh, and some tools which I either made or found somewhere like a flea market or garage sale and looked good for the purpose, and have some symbolic objects I use to signify the quarters. Spells, and other magickal workings take up very little of my time and energy. I have done a few things from time to time, but save that for rea cases of need to help others for whom life has really hit the fan. As you say, its a religion.

But what I wanted to say in my last epic saga, was that for some people, Ceremonial Ritual with all the trappings isn't a distraction, it puts them into a frame of mind that works for them. I think that its a mistake to put it down, because for some people it does work, but merely to recognise that it doesn't for others, and that while it may be what we might call Wicca as much as what some Solitary Kitchen Witch in New Zealand does when he has a visit with Mom and Dad, and a little Family time, NEITHER of them are the WHOLE story, only part.

We can be misled in thinking that what Gardnerians or Alexandrians, New Forest, or whatever individual tradition does defines Wicca. Wicca is more complex than that, in large part because it is so individual and there isn't some ULTRA ARCH HIGH AND MIGHTY HIGH PRIEST/ESS who tells everyone the RIGHT WAY TM. God and Goddess made us free to find our way to Them in our best way, and only care that we make it to the party. I think we should kep it that way and celebrate our difference and uniqueness and learn from each other ( as we are doing here) and not fall into the trap of trying to force ourthinking into a straightjacket born of a need to define a right and wrong way. If Ceremony and Trappings works for someone, it would be presumptuous of me to put them down. All I ask is the courtesy of reciprocation.

Blessings
Raindancer

PS I like this Blue much better :-).

Myst

January 18th, 2002, 06:38 PM

Originally posted by Raindancer
...Ceremonial Wicca

The short answer being yes.

Originally posted by StormChaser
When you come down to it, what you categorize yourself hardly matters. It's what you are, what you believe, and what you do that is going to strike up conversation, more so than your label.

That's exactly it. People have to keep in mind the separation of LABELS and BELIEFS. When I say Wicca to me means this this and this, I'm not saying what someone else practices has to fit into that paradigm for them to have a valid belief. What I *am* saying is that I wouldn't use the label Wicca on them necessarily. I'd call them Pagan maybe, but not Wiccan, because Wicca to me means certain things.

It's not an insult, and it's not a judgement as some people are so quick to believe and scream about. It's merely discussion over different terms and what they mean.

Garnet

January 18th, 2002, 07:55 PM

I'm sorry.
I didn't mean to sound high & mighty. I meant that a lot of 'extra' trappings don't work for me. In a place with a lot of 'stuff' I find I'm just a tourist, gawking around & wondering "What's the symbolism behind those?" "Why do they use this thing?" "What in blazes is THAT?!?" Overwhelming curiosity...common nosiness...attention span deficiency...who knows? It just distracts me from why I'm there. That-in part- is why I'm a solitary. I can do what I need to w/o having to explain my focus doohickeys, etc. (yeah, & I have no patience, either.)
If I give you my last Guinness, will you forgive me? :wah2:

Living well is the best revenge

Theres

January 18th, 2002, 08:03 PM

i will!
i can be bought, and cheap too!

Garnet

January 18th, 2002, 09:11 PM

Your signatuer is from 'The Prisoner', right?
I love that show...'You are number 6..." I have the entire series on tape.
Very cool. :boing: :boing: :boing:

Living well is the Best revenge.

Raindancer

January 18th, 2002, 09:18 PM

Hey Garnet no sweat... you can keep your Guinness ( unless you REALLY want to give it, in which case, far be it from me to refuse LOL) Nobody is being high and mighty, its all part of the process of trying to get across what we mean. I've participated in a few group rituals though I prefer solitary or maybe one other close friend. Í would probably feel the same way being at one of those grand productions. I would feel awkward and wondering what I should do, and if given a piece to do, would be more worried about screwing it up than anything else. I'm a participant by nature not a spectator, and religion isn't a spectator sport for me. If I couldn't be all the way in the moment, I wouldn't want to be there.

But thats because you or I haven't gotten into that way of worship and like someone who is learning to drive, we would be too intent on staying alive to pay much attention to the scenery or the joy of driving. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist, just that we aren't familiar with it enough to get into the feeling that its supposed to give. I'm sure that people who have been doing it for 20 years and could do the mechanics in their sleep, would tell us that its a joyous and wonderful experience. But thats because they can just do it.

A friend who is a long-time devotee of Isis, suggested that I join The Fellowship of Isis, as Isis is my Goddess, She told about it, how nice the rituals were, they also have a website, and I checked it out, too much elaborate ritual for me, but for her and, and I presume, for others, its great. Maybe I should try it sometime when I have lots of time to learn all the bits and pieces, and get to the part where you stop worrying about it and just do it, I don't know, but I guess if some people didn't find some kind of fulfillment in it, they wouldn't do it.

Blessed Be
Raindancer
PS
Greenman, what part of Oregon are you in? I've been there several times and like the place quite a lot, though the inhabitants of certain parts of Oregon with the webbed feet and gills can be a little offputting :-) I especially like Ashland and miss white water rafting thereabouts. A big plug for Noah's World of Water rafting company, if they're still around. The ultimate adrenalin rush... :-)
RD

Garnet

January 19th, 2002, 06:49 AM

Hey-I found a Christian-Wicca site. I posted about it in a seperate thread here in 'Just Talk'.
Christian-Wicca. What is the world coming to?
:eek: :confused: :bug:

Living well is the best revenge.

Myst

January 19th, 2002, 10:41 AM

What is the world coming to?

Oh I don't know, a place where people can feel comfortable in combining whatever beliefs they want to without being persecuted and judged..? Is that such a bad thing?

Xander67

January 19th, 2002, 11:35 AM

hey, :D

they might be on to something ;)

Raindancer

January 19th, 2002, 05:14 PM

Christian Wicca...Hmmmm At first glance, it seems strange, but maybe not when you think about it. If each of us focusses on or feels with working through a particular God or Goddess and the particular energies they represent, why can't someone feel comfortable working with Jesus? I guess a person might. I don't, but I can see where a person could.

But I think that for it to work within the framework of Wicca, they would have to focus on Jesus as a being/deity, and not all the other Christian Church/Bible stuff that goes with it. There is a great deal of difference between the idea of Jesus and his teachings/ideals and how they are manifested in the Christian Churches overall. So, yeah, I can see how a person might do that,. At the same time, I don't know that it makes them necessarily Christian per se. Probably, more like those people who belong to groups like Jews For Jesus, who aren't really accepted by either. In the medieval times they would have been burned as heretics.

The basic priciples of Wicca ( Harm none, Three Fold law) are sufficiently broad that they are compatible with the ideals of most religions, and I don't see a real problem with ChristoWiccans except in that the particular deity they choose to go through pushes a lot of peoples buttons. Also, the religions associated with the Judeo/Christian/Islamic tradition, are notoriously intolerant of other beliefs. I guess the bottom line lies in how they do it. It wouldn't be my thing, but it makes a kind of sense.
Blessings
Raindancer

Garnet

January 19th, 2002, 08:11 PM

You're right.
I just thought it was...well, the 'founder' seems to be trying to fit in bits & pieces from so many different paths: Wicca, witchcraft, paganism, Christianity, Judaism, Gnosticism, & I forget what else.
I do wish her well, because I've been trying to stir Wicca & Judaism into a faith that fits me perfectly. (Apparently there are lots of Jews trying to do this, judging by the Jewitch site).
It's just that-IMO, anyway, if you add a lot of 'stuff': rituals, props, traditions, etc. etc. to make as many people as possible happy, there's no 'big picture'. A lot of people will be happy w/ one or two details or aspects, but few will be comfortable with the whole package.
*sigh* I don't know if I'm making myself understood.
Most religions started as something very personal to the founder/s, then attracted like-minded people. The Rev. Nancy Starz&Moon (& the other names she calls herself throughout her site) seems to be trying to attract as many people as possible w/o making her faith personal or even meaningful.
I do wish her well. Goddess knows she'll need good luck. I think her attempt to mix Christianity, Wicca, & Paganism is going to piss off the religious far right more than your garden-variety Pagan/ Wiccan/ Witch.
Blessed Be & Shalom

Living well is the best revenge.

Raindancer

January 19th, 2002, 09:17 PM

Ya know, Garnet, I think that when you try to create something that pleases everyone, you get something that in the end will please nobody, least of all you. Remember the definition of a camel? A horse designed by a committee? As you say, there's no BIG PICYURE.

My personal feeling is that its a mistake to try to please everyone. I think its preferable to respect others right to find what pleases them, and not get all stressed if what they come up with is really different from what you believe. I think that a really troublesome legacy of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic belief culture, is the feeling that beliefs that are different from yours attempts to invalidate your beliefs. That they represent a threat that must be opposed and quashed.

One big plus that paganism adds to the picture, at least in its ideals, is the idea that we should respect all other beliefs, and avoid a Win-Lose outlook when we consider their respective validity. There is no ONE WAY TM. But many of us get our buttons pushed when someone mentions the "C"word, and all the bad experiences we've had with that religion rise to the surface, and many of us give about as much respect as we get ( None)

Personally, I think that if Jesus knew what was going to be done in his name, he would have stuck to carpentry. You shouldn't blame the man for what his followers did. The founding teachings and ideals aren't much different from what we believe, but when they got power, the mindset of the time led to stomping out the competition.

I've actually just read a book involving the worship of Isis in the Graeco-Roman World, called "Isis in the Ancient World" by R.E. Witt. It partly involves the interaction between the Isaic religion, and the early forms of Christianity as they co-existed and competed in the first few centuries of the Common Era. It makes intereseting reading. Being Isaic, I found myself wondering what things might have been like if Saul of Tarsus ( St. Paul) had been run over by a chariot as a child, as he is the one credited with creating Christianity as we know it.

Where Isis was very accomodating with regard to other Gods and Goddesses, being very ecumenical, the mindset of Christianity of the time was that it was a spiritual war, and paganism and especially Isis, was THE ENEMY. In the process of having to coexist though, much of the Isaic religion was subsumed into Christianity, but the competition had to be crushed. Maybe it was so because they were the minority religion for a time, or maybe because their Judaic roots had at the center a God who couldn't tolerate competition, or other beliefs.

There's a cautionary tale in this though, we as pagans/Witches/Wiccans etc. which has been called the fastest growing religion in America, should not forget our tolerant ways should we ever become the majority. There should be an example of acceptance and respect for others as we want for ourselves. Considering the small mindedness we often meet, thats no small feat, but we should try our best to not fall into the same mindset. How we get to Spirit is not as important as that we all find a way to get there.

Don't try to please everyone with some kind of Super Religion, give people space and let them please themselves.
Blessings
Raindancer