Define Wiccan, Witch, Wizard

[MystIc_WolF]

Ok, I'm sure something like this has already been done, but I thought I'd do something a bit more direct and stick it at the top of this area. Basically I was wondering what people's definitions of the three words in the thread title are (Wiccan, Witch, Wizard). I guess I'll start.

Wiccan: A person who follows the religion of Wicca, which may or may not include some form of magical practices, usually in the form of energy work. I also consider modern Wicca to be influenced by witchcraft and druidry.

Witch: A person who doesn't have to be a member of any specific religion. Practices low magic (spells charms etc, that are connected to daily life), has some knowledge of herbology to the point of being able to use herbs to heal, make incense, etc, a knowledge and proficient use of at least one method of divination (tarot, I Ching, Tea Leaves, etc). I believe that there can be wiccan witches, but wicca and witchcraft are not one and the same.

Wizard: One who is not associated with any religion (meaning religion has no influence of the person's practices, a witch very well might be influenced by their religion, and generally are.). Works with high magic (spirit summonings, etc), generally a member of a group such as the Golden Dawn, or similar group, that could be considered a Wicard's guild.

[Findarto]

Just a question, wouldn't a wiccan also be able to summon spirits ?

[VroomBroom]

I agree with you that witchcraft and wicca are not one in the same.

[Aidron]

Wiccan: An individual which adheres to one sect or tradition within wicca or general wiccan ideals. There are many wiccans, each with their own unique adaptations and techniques, but above all they have very general qualities in common, such as adhering to the wiccan rede, an appreciation or worship of both a god and a goddess, so forth and so on. They concern themselves with nature and attuning themself with the cosmos. They may or may not practice magic of any or all kinds.

Witch: An individual which practices their own craft while treading through life with wisdom. Their crafts may include but are not limited to divination, spellcraft, astral projection, psychometry, potion brewing, talisman crafting, herbology, and the like. They are not beholden to any religion or spiritual path, and may not follow any spiritual inclinations. They practice magic of all varieties, from simplistic sympathetic magic such as candle magic to impressive mental talents like telepathy or telekinesis.

Wizard: An individual which focuses more on ceremonial or ritualistic magics and may or may not follow a spiritual path.

[MystIc_WolF]

Raven Windsong, you just hit on exactly what I was trying to get at with my definitions. In my experience, a witch does work with the mental arts (telepathy, astral projection, etc), but does not generally work with "high magic" or ceremonial/ritualistic magic. Also, I do believe that witches work with spirits/ghosts/etc, but more to gain council and advice from them, whereas a wizard generally works with spirits to have them do things for him/her (It seems to me as though, like witch, wizard is not a gender specific term).

[Aidron]

Raven Windsong, you just hit on exactly what I was trying to get at with my definitions. In my experience, a witch does work with the mental arts (telepathy, astral projection, etc), but does not generally work with "high magic" or ceremonial/ritualistic magic. Also, I do believe that witches work with spirits/ghosts/etc, but more to gain council and advice from them, whereas a wizard generally works with spirits to have them do things for him/her (It seems to me as though, like witch, wizard is not a gender specific term).


You completely misinterpreted my definitions, apparently.

Witches, in my opinion can and 'do' work with 'high magic' as you put it. I find the labels such as low and high magic degrading, so I myself never use them. As for anyone whom refers to themself as a wizard, there is nothing they can do which I cannot. :lol: Well, except maybe math, and then I'll throw in the towel.

Labeling magics in terms of high and low as always seem rather offensive and rude to me. All magics are important and have their uses, and to label anything beyond simply magic in this sense seems a bit silly to me.

As for the spirit issue, I respectfully disagree. Anyone who 'summons' anything and bids it to do things for it is not a wizard, but a fool and simply asking for it. Disrespect anything, person, spirit, or animal and it will come back to bite you in the magical ass eventually, I promise you that.

Witches do not only work with spirits, entities, and the like for counsel, at least this witch doesn't. I have worked with them in 'unison'. I do not refer to them as 'spirits' normally, as a spirit could be anything and unless you are specific, who knows what you may stir, call, or conjure up. If I am working with angels, I refer to them as such. If I am working with the fae, I refer to them as such, so forth and so on.

[Ben Trismegistus]

Out of curiosity, do people actually refer to themselves with the term "wizard"?

[aida]

Raven WindSong said it all. But as for witch and wizard... I think they're pretty much the same. I think witch refers more to a woman, whereas wizard to a man. Although the word 'wizard' brings into my mind a man with purple cloak and black dragon. :D

[~*Ginger*~]

Out of curiosity, do people actually refer to themselves with the term "wizard"?
There are times I call my feller 'my wizard', but it's an up close and personal thing. ;)

[MystIc_WolF]

Thanks for the clarification Raven Windsong, I'm relatively new to this stuff (I only started studying at the end of last school year) so I guess really the main reason I started this thread was to help myself get the definitions of these three terms straight, and in that respect all of your answers have helped immensely. However, a further question: Aren't witch and wizard gender nuetral (meaning they aren't specific to any gender)? My understanding was that a witch could be male or female, and same with a wizard? or is wizard the male equivalent of witch?

[midnightreflections]

I pretty much agree with what Ravensong said but as a trad witch I thought Id add what the word witch means to me personally as me and most in my trad, and the differances between wicca and some trad witches. As we do tend to only refer to non-wiccan witches as witches, just as a way of knowing what each other is reffering to

There is no equivalent to the Wiccan rede. Only Intent matters
Witchcraft is still a secretive religion – certain things are never written down. .
Witches often consult the ancestors –those who have gone before and offerings may be made to them. But they arn not Gods
Witches keep a Grimoire, which means Book Of Learning. This is not the actual name of the book, which is kept secret. Rituals, updates to rituals and matter concerning the religion are kept with the book. Matters relating to magick are kept in a separate book and a grimoire is not a form of diary
Witches do not call the Watchtowers, however they may call upon guardians-who are simple a spirit the witch feels comfortable with. Possibly an ancestor or spirit guide. Not all witches use them.
Belief in the Homeland-the home of the Gods such as Mount Olympia for Greek Gods.
The Gods are not omnipotent, omniscient or omnipresent.
The word hedgewitch has different meanings. In traditional witchcraft it is a Shamanic type witch-they practice spirit flights and journey to the other world. They can call back the souls of those about to die and communicate with the dead.

[Aidron]

I have never thought of wizard or witch as being gender specific, and in fact if anyone ever calls me a wizard I'm going to beat them upside the head with my broom. :p

An... interesting definition, midnight. However, as a witch myself, almost everything you said does not reflect me.

Witchcraft to me is not a religion, as a religion is built upon a doctrine and general ideals or philosophies. Witchcraft, to me, is much like sewing, a craft, nothing more.

I consult and work with my ancestors, and have known those who are not witches that do the same. However, I also consult and work with divinity in variou aspects.

I do not keep a grimoire as per your definition. My grimoire, or book of shadows, I refer to it as both, contains rituals, information, my dreams, a journal, so forth and so on. There is no other name I refer to it as, so it does not have a secret name.

I do in fact call and work with the guardians of the watchtowers and the watchtowers themself.

A belief in a homeland is not something I obtained from witchcraft, because as I said to me witchcraft is just that, a craft, an art. I gain my spiritual affilitations elsewhere.

Hedgewitches to me have always been a loose term, much like a kitchen witch. They prefer to remain simplistic in nature most of the time, working closely with the earth, herbs and so forth. They do not necessarily call spirits, commune with the dead or take spiritual 'flights'.

[DebLipp]

Wiccan: An individual which adheres to one sect or tradition within wicca or general wiccan ideals. There are many wiccans, each with their own unique adaptations and techniques, but above all they have very general qualities in common, such as adhering to the wiccan rede
Not all Wiccans follow the rede. It is probably true that almost everyone who became a Wiccan post-1990 does.

[DebLipp]

The distinctions I see being formed on the web nowadays between Witch and Wiccan in the ways identified here are quite useful and I am in favor of them! But it behooves us to remember that these are quite recent distinctions. When modern Wicca started, the words Wicca and Witch were considered synonymous by Wiccans (although some witches came forward and said they were not Wiccan). In fact, many Wiccans were merely using the word as "cover," as a polite way of avoiding the nasty W word.

In the "old days" (oh, say pre-1985 or 1990) it was common in Wicca that only an initiate would be referred to as a Witch. As things got more popular and public, and more and more people learned out of books, one might identify people who followed Wiccan ways, but who were not initiated in any tradition, as Wiccan, but not Witches.

Now we are in a position where every website I see makes a concerted effort to distinguish between practitioners of witchcraft and followers of the Wiccan religion. This is a very useful distinction, but it is important to remember that the distinction is fairly new and the kinks are still being worked out.

The simplest definition of Wicca is "Neopagan Witchcraft." This includes the religion (Neopaganism), the craft, and the word origin, all in a two-word phrase.

[Aidron]

Not all Wiccans follow the rede. It is probably true that almost everyone who became a Wiccan post-1990 does.


The rede is a critical part of the wiccan faith, so I'd like to see someone explain how they are wiccan yet do not follow something inherent within the faith. It would be interesting to say the very least.

[DebLipp]

The rede is a critical part of the wiccan faith, so I'd like to see someone explain how they are wiccan yet do not follow something inherent within the faith. It would be interesting to say the very least.
First you would have to support that it is a critical part of the Wiccan faith. What makes you think that?

[Aidron]

The distinctions I see being formed on the web nowadays between Witch and Wiccan in the ways identified here are quite useful and I am in favor of them! But it behooves us to remember that these are quite recent distinctions. When modern Wicca started, the words Wicca and Witch were considered synonymous by Wiccans (although some witches came forward and said they were not Wiccan). In fact, many Wiccans were merely using the word as "cover," as a polite way of avoiding the nasty W word.

In the "old days" (oh, say pre-1985 or 1990) it was common in Wicca that only an initiate would be referred to as a Witch. As things got more popular and public, and more and more people learned out of books, one might identify people who followed Wiccan ways, but who were not initiated in any tradition, as Wiccan, but not Witches.

Now we are in a position where every website I see makes a concerted effort to distinguish between practitioners of witchcraft and followers of the Wiccan religion. This is a very useful distinction, but it is important to remember that the distinction is fairly new and the kinks are still being worked out.

The simplest definition of Wicca is "Neopagan Witchcraft." This includes the religion (Neopaganism), the craft, and the word origin, all in a two-word phrase.


It is fairly new because wicca is fairly new. While it may or may not be true (I'm not debating this as it's not the point I'm trying to make) that only those initiated formally were refered to as witches, that to me does not hold water in terms of which to refer to whom as what, since wicca is rather new and people existed long before wicca and were labeled by others or themself witches.

[Aidron]

First you would have to support that it is a critical part of the Wiccan faith. What makes you think that?


Well, I will leave it simply at "it is the wiccan rede." :lol:

That's as far as I will go into it, as this thread is really all about the definitions, not necessarily historical fact or fiction so I won't take it off topic and drone on about history and this and that boring you all to pieces.

[Lunacie]

This is a very interesting discussion. I was under the impression that the term most commonly used was "ceremonial magician" rather than "wizard". But maybe I'm reading too much fiction. :)

[tensen]

Raven Windsong, you just hit on exactly what I was trying to get at with my definitions. In my experience, a witch does work with the mental arts (telepathy, astral projection, etc), but does not generally work with "high magic" or ceremonial/ritualistic magic. Also, I do believe that witches work with spirits/ghosts/etc, but more to gain council and advice from them, whereas a wizard generally works with spirits to have them do things for him/her (It seems to me as though, like witch, wizard is not a gender specific term).

I would have to disagree with the ceremonial magic. There are traditions of Wicca that do practice that. Some of the British Traditionalists do, and it was at one point an easy way to tell the difference betwene a Gardnarian and Alexandrian. And both of those traditions would likely call themselves a witch.

[DebLipp]

Well, I will leave it simply at "it is the wiccan rede." :lol:

Just because someone calls it that doesn't make it so. Gavin and Yvonne Frost wrote a book called "The Witches' Bible" and that doesn't make it a bible -- or something that all Witches follow. :goodgrief

[Aidron]

Just because someone calls it that doesn't make it so. Gavin and Yvonne Frost wrote a book called "The Witches' Bible" and that doesn't make it a bible -- or something that all Witches follow. :goodgrief


A pity that you take things far too seriously. It was meant as a joke.

In any event, some wiccans may prefer not to follow the wiccan rede, which is fine, but I would not consider them wiccans from my point of view, which shouldn't matter to them since it is only my opinion, and thus there is no real issue at stake here.

[tensen]

Just because someone calls it that doesn't make it so. Gavin and Yvonne Frost wrote a book called "The Witches' Bible" and that doesn't make it a bible -- or something that all Witches follow. :goodgrief

True very true.
Although I also don't understand why folks want don't accept the wiccan rede. After all by definition it is friendly advice, not law. But that also questions whether you are denying it applies to you... or denying you ever heard it. Since I can hear advice and chose not to follow it. I accept Do Unto Others as you wish done unto you. That doesn't mean I still won't seriously thrash someone that is being a jerk. I accepted it.. just chose to accept the concequenses.


Now getting back to accepting the Wiccan Rede.. Um, are we talking about the 8 words? Or the Rede of the Wiccae? If it is 8 words, you basically have to accept it if you've read just about any paganism book in the past few years. This just means you heard it, and aren't denying that you heard it. Defining it as part of your faith. Well, it is known in writing that the way of the words wasn't how it was originally written in the first of the Gardnarian type group of books. It has changed. In fact recently it has changed even more, so you need to define which form of it you are saying is part of your faith, which makes it hard to even state all traditions follow that.

An' ye harm none, do what ye will.
An ye harm none, do what ye will.
and it harm none, do as you will

Those do not have exactly the same meanings.

But in any case, it seems to be specifically via the British traditionalist Wiccan paths that came from Gardnarian or had a basis after that. Several other British Traditionalist paths don't seem to have had it in their teachings, at least in the accessable forms.

[DebLipp]

A pity that you take things far too seriously. It was meant as a joke.Sorry, I didn't think you meant it as a joke. But ask anyone, I have no sense of humor at all. ;)

In any event, some wiccans may prefer not to follow the wiccan rede, which is fine, but I would not consider them wiccans from my point of view, which shouldn't matter to them since it is only my opinion, and thus there is no real issue at stake here.
Gosh, for over twenty years I thought I was a Wiccan, and I thought all the people I taught were Wiccans, and now I find out I'm wrong? Too bad I don't have a sense of humor, otherwise that would be really darn funny!! :D

[aefentid]

Wiccan : A modern religion of witchcraft formed in the Mid-Twentieth Century.Now I'm not a Wiccan so I might be wrong but I would define the core of Wicca as; belief in a god and a goddess,having a circle based ritual structure, and as an experiential religion.

Witchcraft : Generally defined as a practice and not a religion ,although some witches do define their form of witchcraft as a religion.Witches generally practice either folk magic or a mixture of both folk magic and ceremonial magic .Witches can be any religion or no religion and some forms of witchcraft are tied directly to specific cultures and/or religions .

Wizard : I've never heard anyone refer to themselves as a wizard outside of books like Harry Potter.

[tensen]

A pity that you take things far too seriously. It was meant as a joke.

In any event, some wiccans may prefer not to follow the wiccan rede, which is fine, but I would not consider them wiccans from my point of view, which shouldn't matter to them since it is only my opinion, and thus there is no real issue at stake here.

That okay. Since I noticed the eccletic tag there. It is likely that many of those you don't consider Wiccans, probably don't accept you as one either. :)


Note, I personally don't care. I follow the Path fo the Dreamseeker... and if you put a plate of food in front of me, I'm your pal :)

[DebLipp]

True very true.
Although I also don't understand why folks want don't accept the wiccan rede. After all by definition it is friendly advice, not law.
I'm not denying that I heard it, I haven't lived in a cave these past few years, and I own a couple of books. I'm denying that it's intrinsic to Wicca and that people who don't accept it as part of their tradition are by definition not Wiccan.

As friendly advise, fine. My mom gives me friendly advise all the time but being her daughter doesn't depend on whether or not I embrace that advise.

The Wiccan rede doesn't appear in the oldest Wiccan materials, it isn't passed in all Wiccan traditions. Just because it has seen print in lots of books on Wicca doesn't make it canonical. Some Wiccans follow the rede. Some Wiccans go skyclad. Some Wiccans use a crystal to represent Spirit. But NONE of these things are testing points, proving or disproving whether or not you are really Wiccan.

[tensen]

I'm not denying that I heard it, I haven't lived in a cave these past few years, and I own a couple of books. I'm denying that it's intrinsic to Wicca and that people who don't accept it as part of their tradition are by definition not Wiccan.

As friendly advise, fine. My mom gives me friendly advise all the time but being her daughter doesn't depend on whether or not I embrace that advise.

The Wiccan rede doesn't appear in the oldest Wiccan materials, it isn't passed in all Wiccan traditions. Just because it has seen print in lots of books on Wicca doesn't make it canonical. Some Wiccans follow the rede. Some Wiccans go skyclad. Some Wiccans use a crystal to represent Spirit. But NONE of these things are testing points, proving or disproving whether or not you are really Wiccan.

This is true... and you didn't quote the parts of my responce that stated I didn't accepted it as a testing point for Wicca. I guess you were expecting a fight from reading the first paragraph.

[tensen]

Oops. I reread and I can see where there may be a misunderstanding for those treading strongly on what was written.

I used the wording of accept as in hearing it. Since it is advice.
Whether it is part of your tradition or not, it is solely advice.
If I go and do harm, fine. I can think about it and still do it... even with accepting that as part of my tradition. It is advice to think about.

Even if it was part of the Wiccan traditions from the beginning of time, it is advice. Hard to define that as the sole tenent of your faith. (And I'd like to see someone prove it was part of the Gardnarian Tradition from the start. Or part of the 1734 Tradition at all.)

Now if you want to make a grouping to try and define what is wicca.. I think we'd have to start by seperating that out a bit... hmm, letsee how about this grouping:

British Traditionalist
Traditional Style
Eclectic Wicca
Neo-Wicca

The last two might be grouped together. But we'll seperate them out for the moment in this discussion.

[DebLipp]

Okay, I'm not going to quote here. I come from the Old Days (teehe) of e-lists, where extensive quoting was frowned upon, so I try to trim quotes down to the most pertinent portions. I think of that as netiquette, and I didn't mean to misrepresent you.

Believe it or not, I'm not looking for a fight, I'm just trying to be very clear, and I get rather...firm...when I'm trying to be clear. It was Raven Windsong who originally said the rede was a testing point, but I'm not trying to pick a fight with Raven either.

There are only two theories as to the origins of Wicca. One is that it is genuinely old, a survival of of some kind. (How old and of what sort is another question.) The other theory is that it started with Gardner.

All I'm saying is that neither Gardnerianism, nor any other tradition dating from that period, nor any purported pre-Gardner Wicca, uses the rede as original source material. So Neo-Wiccans might consider the rede a testing point, but I don't see that it can truly be that. I think we agree about that.

Now if you want to make a grouping to try and define what is wicca.. I think we'd have to start by seperating that out a bit... hmm, letsee how about this grouping:

British Traditionalist
Traditional Style
Eclectic Wicca
Neo-Wicca

The last two might be grouped together. But we'll seperate them out for the moment in this discussion.
Okay, not sure that I understand what you mean by distinguishing Eclectic Wicca from Neo-Wicca, but I'm very interested.

Some people (me for one) use "British Traditionalist" to mean Gardnerian, Alexandrian, Georgian, et al. But others use the same phrase to mean pre-Gardnerian or lateral to Gardnerian (Pentagram Club).

There are Neo-Traditionalists. Often these are groups that started out as eclectics but developed a sense of their own tradition that really worked, codified it, and a tradition was born. Others were schism from British Traditions that modified the original tradition, gave it a new name, and moved forward that way. I think either or both is what you mean by traditional style?

[midnightreflections]

mmm interesting discussions....havne't had chance to read it all properly but just wanted to say i love a good debate


I think the trouble with such words as witch is that it can be defined a million and one ways!

But I am a pre Gardernian Traditional Shamanic Style Witch is one big mouthful to say all the time! However I have study things not in the public domain (via the witchcraft museum which gerald gardner helped found and other materials) and the trouble is I've seen things that would surprise a lot of wiccans, just as I've seen things that surprise christians about paganism in general and I think in a way we could do with a universally accepted defiantion and new words to define the bits in the confusion......and its about time people got together and properly documented what history we do have that isn't still oath bound (Don't even get me started on that subject-I have a burning passion to sit down with what I've seen on it and properly document it if only I could get the people who owned it to let me)

Right I'm stopping before I get carried away, anyway I might not be on this board much in the next few weeks so probably won't be around to reply to any replies to this post- but if anyone wants to ask me or say anything feel free to mail

[tensen]

From my viewpoint.. but easily broken down further.. I just tried to provide a easier way to group the beliefs.

I utilize British Traditionalist to recognize Gardnerian, Alexandrian, Georgian... as well as those that were lateral. Those that schismed from British Traditionalist are still in this category. I'm chosing to group this together because I think that we might be able to readily find some way to define them... if not, we'd have to break it down further, and there isn't a commonly accepted term for those groupings.

Traditionalist would be those that have either based their type on the visible for of British Traditionalism (aka, based off of published books) and strived to recreate that concept without directly being initiated by folks that were originally British Traditionlists. Or have created a complete tradition and passed it on intact to their members.

For at least the point here, I set aside a possibility of Neo-Wicca and Eclectic Wicca. One being those who chose the take the chose your own path style. And those that, teach a semi-traditional style, but do not indeed pass on an intact tradition to any of their members. It might be possible to break these down further, depending on where exactly this goes.

[schadenfreude]

*would just like to say that most of you are making an excellent point and I'm truly enjoying this discussion without adding my two cents heh*

[KithicEclipse]

Ok forgive me for not knowing how to use the quotes yet but Tensen. You said " True very true.
Although I also don't understand why folks want don't accept the wiccan rede. After all by definition it is friendly advice, not law." ..
Now corect me if im wrong but i was under the impression that, Though i havent memorised is, The Wiccan Rede began " Abide the wiccan LAW we must." Iam i wrong?

[tensen]

Ok forgive me for not knowing how to use the quotes yet but Tensen. You said " True very true.
Although I also don't understand why folks want don't accept the wiccan rede. After all by definition it is friendly advice, not law." ..
Now corect me if im wrong but i was under the impression that, Though i havent memorised is, The Wiccan Rede began " Abide the wiccan LAW we must." Iam i wrong?

I'll respond back to that.
First of all what do you consider to be the Wiccan Rede?
Second.. Rede means advice. So if it is law, that is contradictory... it would be called Wiccan Law :)
And it was "wiccan LAWS", not law. So, do you define the laws as each of those verse that came afterwards? or something else?

The closest to law you have were the ordains. Ordain in this case was, to issue an order. But 1) they didn't arrive in Gardnerian Traditions until after Gardner needed to keep some sort of order, it seems to have been used to justify behavior. 2) Even more diverse through traditions, and basically not utilized in any form by most non-traditional groups.

[DebLipp]

Ok forgive me for not knowing how to use the quotes yet but Tensen. You said " True very true.
Although I also don't understand why folks want don't accept the wiccan rede. After all by definition it is friendly advice, not law." ..
Now corect me if im wrong but i was under the impression that, Though i havent memorised is, The Wiccan Rede began " Abide the wiccan LAW we must." Iam i wrong?
At the bottom of every post, next to "Reply" you can click "Reply w/Quote." :)

The Wiccan Rede is "An it Harm None, Do What Ye Will." Later on, someone wrote a lengthy poem called "The Wiccan Rede," beginning as you say. But the poem is not the Rede.

[Ben Trismegistus]

Now we are in a position where every website I see makes a concerted effort to distinguish between practitioners of witchcraft and followers of the Wiccan religion. This is a very useful distinction, but it is important to remember that the distinction is fairly new and the kinks are still being worked out.
That's true. Here's the distinction that I make.

"Witchcraft" is the act itself. It's the process of thaumaturgical magic. It's a secular, wordly act that CAN be connected to a theology, but doesn't necessarily have to be.

"Wicca" is the theology, the belief system, as well as the loose organization of rites and rituals that goes with it. In many (most?) cases, the rites of Wicca encorporate the practice of Witchcraft, but they don't necessarily have to.

Through these distinctions, it's possible for someone to be a witch but not Wiccan, Wiccan but not a witch, or both Wiccan *and* a witch.

"Wizard", in my opinion, is a silly word used by sci-fi fans. The term I've heard used for practitioners of high magic is simply "magician".

As far as the Rede goes, I think there's a growing movement in the Wiccan community to view the Rede not so much as a RULE, but as a guideline. For instance, no one ever takes the phrase "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" as absolutely binding - not in the way that some Wiccans interpret the Rede. This movement (of which I am a member) is also uncomfortable at the idea that the only reason to be good to others is fear of punishment. In my opinion, this is far too simplistic a morality.

[turtlerain46]

Personally I'm absolutly against trying to define others and putting them into categories, like "oh so your wiccan", ect. Although I think that in the end it is up to the individual to not only decide what they are (witch, ect) but also what that word means to them. Afterall I'm sure if you ask say a babtist, they would have a million things they would say they were, (babtist, freewill babtist, christian, saved, ect), but if you were to ask them what they would call any pagan, they would reply (with majority of cases) that we are all devil-worshipers. Although I have not yet met a pagan who would call themself a devil worshipper. By the same token I've met many wiccans who call themselves witches. So I think we're really talking about something that can not be defined as simply as two plus two is four. Definitly one of those things I feel are totally on the individual, Lots-of-luck and prosperity

[Kalika]

Wiccan: A person who can be many things that are generally associated with ritual, high, and low magick, as well as with the occult. Generally follow a specific path.

Witch: A man or a woman who is a pratitioner of the occult, generally believes in a Goddes (and/or a God), and does not follow a specific path.

Wizard: I don't acknowledge this... to me it is a term used in books...
Witch is all encompassing for male and female.

[squieguy]

i thought that if you were wicca, then you were a witch?!? well any way... i was woundering what people thought about who these people are?

[MystIc_WolF]

First of all, that second question isn't exactly the best to ask, seeing as "these people" are the exact same people that are members of this board, reading this thread, most are normal people just like you and me. As for your first question, no, just because you are wiccan doesn't make you a witch. There are witches who are wiccan, but, contrary to what the christian church might want you to think there are witches that are members of every religion. I've talked to jewish witches, catholic witches, even one or two christian and agnostic witches, and I'm sure there are Islamic witches, and witches who are members of just about every religion that are witches.

[JWill0ws]

Thanks to everyone who has posted. It is helping me to clarify a few things, along with other threads and the books I am reading!!

[Kalika]

i thought that if you were wicca, then you were a witch?!? well any way... i was woundering what people thought about who these people are?

What do you mean by "these people who are"?

But no, as others have said, just because you are a Wiccan does not mean that you are a witch, and vice versa.

I consider myself a witch, not a Wiccan, because I don't believe some of the Wiccan idealogies. Personal choice. That does not mean that I worship the Xtian devil, or anything like that, or that I hate Xtians, or any other religion... there are no negatives to my point of view regarding this matter- others may not feel the same way.
Just that I believe in magic, and a goddess, and I follow my own path. :) Now... if you want to lump me into a category, go ahead, but that doesn't necessarily make what you (in the broadest sense of the term mind you) think true.

Make sense?

No offense intended.

Blessed Be.