When Do We Draw The Line?

[CaitrionaMorgaine]

There is a great deal of freedom within Paganism to make your path your own, but where do we draw the line? Let's say you consider yourself Wiccan. If you take out coven initiation, ritual scourging and change the elemental correspondence directions....are you really Wiccan anymore? Wicca is a tradition bound path. At what point are we changing too much? Where does Eclectic Wicca stop being Wicca?

Blessings, ~Rhiannon

[LadyTrinity]

I don't think there will ever be a line. People believe in what suits them. I guess it tends to turn into a whole other perspective of things. I don't think there is anything wrong with extending your beliefs of wicca as long as no one goes crazy like scrafices babies or some dumb sh!t thing like that.
Maybe some day there will be a line drawn? Until then I have no idea :hrmm:

[Njorun Alma]

In my opinion eclectic Wicca stops being Wicca when you do not believe in and follow the Wiccan Rede anymore.
Wiccanism as I am familiar with it isn't something strict.
Most Wiccans I know practice Wicca the same way I do.
We read about a lot of different traditions and paths, we choose or pantheons as we please and see fit, and we adopt a lot of ritual work from other paths.
But we're still Wiccans.
We still abide within the Wiccan "law" and we still believe in it.

That's my opinion.

[Taliesyn]

Wicca. I hear that word and I think of the wind. I see the moon through the branches of a tree late at night. I hear laughter.
When I was 18, I met my first "traditionalist" Wiccan. he was an Alexandrian who went on to tell me he would give me a "real" inniation, even though I had already been trained and inniated in the Druidic tradition of Wicca. He was into the High Magic, and the dark gods, and all that stuff. We became friends, but he never stopped offering, to "help me out".
When I look at Wicca of the past 10 years or so, I see a trend away from dogma and restriction. I don't see this as bad. I remember being told to folow your heart was the most important thing about Wicca, and that a personal relationship with the Gods was all that mattered.

This is what I see as the defining points of our religion:
The Rede.
The Sabbats, but I have a thought about them I am not quite ready to share.
an abiding love of the earth
A connection to the Goddess and God.

the best Pagan rituals I have ever been to were at Festivals- where folks of all paths come together to worship in a spirit of community and peace.

sorry if that seems like a rant- it isn't meant to.

[nomadicdragon]

There is a great deal of freedom within Paganism to make your path your own, but where do we draw the line? Let's say you consider yourself Wiccan. If you take out coven initiation, ritual scourging and change the elemental correspondence directions....are you really Wiccan anymore? Wicca is a tradition bound path. At what point are we changing too much? Where does Eclectic Wicca stop being Wicca?

Blessings, ~Rhiannon


I think there's a difference between paganism and Wicca..

Wicca is an "organized religion" of sorts that requires you follow tradition.. where's paganism has many paths that you are not necessarily required to adhere to completely.. Paganism is a very large umbrella covering many religions..

[Morgandria]

I think there's a difference between paganism and Wicca..

Wicca is an "organized religion" of sorts that requires you follow tradition.. where's paganism has many paths that you are not necessarily required to adhere to completely.. Paganism is a very large umbrella covering many religions..

That's exactly the point being made, tho. When does Wicca stop being Wicca, and simply become Paganism? I, for example, like Wicca. I do many things similar to what Wiccans do. But I am not initiated into any tradition, so I do not claim to be a Wiccan. I am instead an Irish pagan with leanings towards Wicca.

Not everyone does this. There are many people who are practicing what they call Wicca, and yet by the original definition it isn't Wicca at all. The "line", as it were - the edge and limit of that definition - is being picked up and stretched around by many ecclectics who want the definition of Wicca to become "Do what feels right to you".
Personally, I find this dissatisfying.

A Mystery religion doen't mean make up your own path, so it's a mystery to everyone else what you're doing. I am being rather tongue-in-cheek there, but it's something I feel deeply about.

If you want to be ecclectic, that's fine! Just don't call it Wicca. It's Ecclectic Paganism.
-M.

[Branwyn]

A Mystery religion doen't mean make up your own path, so it's a mystery to everyone else what you're doing. I am being rather tongue-in-cheek there, but it's something I feel deeply about.

If you want to be ecclectic, that's fine! Just don't call it Wicca. It's Ecclectic Paganism.
-M.

I think the 'problem' lies in the fact that there are many books out there professing to teach "Wicca". A lot of people read these books and therefore think they are practicing "Wicca" when they aren't. (No offense to anybody who has done this, honest!)

They don't realize that the religion of Wicca is an oathbound, initiatory tradition, and if one hasn't gone through the initiations (not dedications, they are two different things), they cannot be Wiccan, by the definition of the ones who started the religion and made the rules in the first place. (Underlined text for emphasis only.)

I think there is also a trend that sees words such as "Ecclectic Pagan" as somehow 'less desirable than' "Wiccan", and (IME) there seems to be a general disdain for people who choose to call themselves "Ecclectic Pagan". Again, IME, it seems that if one describes oneself as "Ecclectic Pagan", the attitude is "What? You can't pick a Path and settle down?" As if it's anybody else's business WHAT one is or is not, or does or does not do.

I have a serious question for people. First, please understand that I'm not flaming, or attempting to flame anybody. I know that this is a sore spot, and have seen heated debates come from discussions like this (ie, what's is Wicca).

The question is: Why do you think you are Wiccan? Why not Asaratu? Why not Siberean Shaman? Why not Strega? There are books on the market that define/describe/teach all of those religions too. Why is it ok to say "I'm Wiccan because I've read 20 books" (or however many, and I'm NOT getting down on anybody for reading books, it's how most of the people I know came to be pagan), but not ok to say, "I'm a Strega Witch because I've read books on Strega Witchcraft"?


Branwyn,
throwing her 2 cents into the hat

[Phae Talon]

That's exactly the point being made, tho. When does Wicca stop being Wicca, and simply become Paganism? I, for example, like Wicca. I do many things similar to what Wiccans do. But I am not initiated into any tradition, so I do not claim to be a Wiccan. I am instead an Irish pagan with leanings towards Wicca.

Not everyone does this. There are many people who are practicing what they call Wicca, and yet by the original definition it isn't Wicca at all. The "line", as it were - the edge and limit of that definition - is being picked up and stretched around by many ecclectics who want the definition of Wicca to become "Do what feels right to you".
Personally, I find this dissatisfying.

A Mystery religion doen't mean make up your own path, so it's a mystery to everyone else what you're doing. I am being rather tongue-in-cheek there, but it's something I feel deeply about.

If you want to be ecclectic, that's fine! Just don't call it Wicca. It's Ecclectic Paganism.
-M.

A lot of the Wiccans that I know only will say that Eclectic Wicca IS a tradition with specific guidelines just like any other trad. They don't see the 'do whatever feels right' crowd as Wiccan at all.

Not being Wiccan, myself, I couldn't tell you where the line is or should be ... but I definitely think that a lot of people clinging to the label Wiccan even though their practice only very slightly resembles Wicca, do so out of fear. Wiccan is a safe label for a lot of people. You don't have to go about explaining yourself too thoroughly because many people know the basics of Wicca ... and just like it is hard to step away from Christianity because it doesn't fit, it can also be hard to step away from the safety of Wicca into uncharted territory where there will be no one but yourself and your gods defining your path.

That is my take on it, anyway.

--Phae

[nighstar]

I think there is also a trend that sees words such as "Ecclectic Pagan" as somehow 'less desirable than' "Wiccan", and (IME) there seems to be a general disdain for people who choose to call themselves "Ecclectic Pagan". Again, IME, it seems that if one describes oneself as "Ecclectic Pagan", the attitude is "What? You can't pick a Path and settle down?" As if it's anybody else's business WHAT one is or is not, or does or does not do.

*nods fervently* i agree :ack:

*just had to say that and will now wonder off in silence but will continue following the thread*

[Peri]

I agree with you! When I was young and new to Paganism, I called myself Wiccan for a while, basically by default. Most of the readily-available reading material was about Wicca, and Wicca was the most widespread/easily accessible branch of Paganism that I could see, so that's what I aligned myself with even though I subconsciously knew I was not very Wiccan.
And I have a feeling that's common for a lot of young/new Pagans.

Now that I'm further along on my path, I think of myself as a Unitarian Universalist Pagan and am being trained in Green Witchcraft (magical and medicinal herbalism, natural healing, plant spirit communication, etc.)

[Desdemona]

From all the books I have read, classes I have taken, and "offically recognized" covens I have studied with, this is the conclusion I have come to.

If you follow the Wiccan Rede, observe the Sabbats and the Esbats, believe in a Lord and a Lady, the sanctity of Mother Earth and the Sacred Elements, then you can safely call yourself a Wiccan. To say that you can't be Wiccan unless someone with a fancy robe and a degree initiates you sounds a lot like dogma to me.

Gardner himself saw that the coven he was initiated into was dying out. That is why he wrote books about it--to spread the word. Now you are going to tell me that the only way to be Wiccan is to seek out these esoteric groups and be initiated? With a fundamentalist, exclusionary, dogmatic attitude like that, perhaps "real" Wicca should do what it did before Gardner got a hold of it. Die out. I KNOW the initiary trads are p*ssed about Wicca not being exclusive. I'm thinking, maybe that's just too bad and they should get over it already. If you want to belong to something exclusive that makes you feel better about yourself by keeping others out, join a yacht or country club. If you have a great religion and want to keep it great, share it. It worked for Hinduism and Christianity.

Now, when you get people who don't follow the Rede, don't believe in a God and a Goddess (like Fiona on Mad Mad House--she is an atheist!) don't believe in the Sabbats or don't give a flying toot about the earth, think they can do ANY old thing the want and call it Wicca, then that is where I, me personally, draw the line.

[Taliesyn]

what she said!

[Arinya]

If you follow the Wiccan Rede, observe the Sabbats and the Esbats, believe in a Lord and a Lady, the sanctity of Mother Earth and the Sacred Elements, then you can safely call yourself a Wiccan.

I am not Wiccan, although when I was first starting out I proclaimed myself a Wiccan because I thought reading a few books, buying some incense, and lighting some pretty candles, would make me Wiccan. Thinking back, I didn't think I was Wiccan. I wasn't practicing any of what I read. I claimed it because I wanted to be a part of something! I wanted to have what I saw Christians that went to church had (community wise), Hindu's had, the Buddhists had, all these religions had something that I had never had. A community, a connection to like minded individuals. Something to call myself that others would nod and recognize and take me by the hand and welcome me into their lives.

I now recognize that as a common want, and I feel that is why many people claim to be Wiccan early on. To call yourself an Eccletic Pagan doesn't really connect you to anyone (although it does I now know) in the way that claiming to be a Wiccan does.

So, to end this, I agree with Desdemona. If you believe in the esstentials of Wicca she listed, then you have the right to call yourself Wiccan. I would however like to add that as a Wiccan you should probably have some desire to be initiated into a coven eventually, or properly trained when the time comes.

[Kaylara]

Being mostly Gardnerian Wiccan myself, I figured I should put my two cents in here. There is presently a trend I see where people do whatever feels right. That's fine, but it's not Wicca. I think that you have to reach a certain level of knowledge on the subject before you can go around doing what feels right. Otherwise, you will not know why something feels right, nor the consequences and reprocussions of your actions and changes.

Yes, traditionals limit who joins their little "clubs". And with good reason. Every new person who joins a particular group changes the group dynamics. (read, group mind, energy flow, etc.) Also, the traditions require that you work for your religion, there are no free rides, you work your ass off. Also, traditional Wiccans put a lot of time and energy into training the people who they've initiated. They don't want to waste their time on someone who will not take it seriously, or quit when it gets too hard. So yeah, I totally agree with that. If you're not willing to do the work, then don't bother applying. It's that simple.

As for all Wiccans being defined as someone who follows "The Wiccan Rede". I'm sorry, but no. The Rede is a guideline, not a rule. It's nice poetry, and a nice thought, but you can't go through life with out harming anything. That's an impossible standard to try to live up to. You can minimize the impact you have, but still you will be harming something or someone else. Magickally, I'll defend as much as possible, but if someone or something screws with me, you can bet your sweet bippy that I will fight back. Does that make me less of a Wiccan? I think not.

I don't buy this watered down Wicca crap. Sorry, but if it's that watered down, it can hardly be called Wicca anymore. If you want to start your own little club, feel free. No one is stopping you. But don't call it Wicca. Some of us have worked our butts off to get where we are, and it's not right for people to just label themselves Wiccan without having to have any knowledge on the subject. If you're interested and willing to work for what knowledge you will gain, then I applaud you. I respect people who don't expect everything to be given to them on a silver platter. Wicca doesn't equal easy. If you think it is, you're deluding yourself. There is a ton of hard work that goes into being Wiccan, and to call anything that comes along or feels right Wicca, is not practicing the religion.

I'm sorry if this comes off as callous or snotty, but I think if you are going to practice a religion and call yourself a follower of a particular named path, that you should have some knowledge of it. Doing otherwise means that you are not practicing that named path.

[Morr]

Kay, dont take the bunny fluff type people who do the Wicca thing just cause its "cool" and cause its the closest thing that comes to "Charmed", personally.
Those people arent like you - they dont stay within the religion for long.

Seeing as I'm personally shifting AWAY from Wicca. All I can say is that its been a great starting point. It taught me a lot. I've been an Eclectic Wiccan for 5 years now. And I too worked my butt off to understand & learn what I need to learn. I resent the fact that others here say that being an Eclectic Wiccan ISNT a real Wiccan. Why should I limit myself to any specific tradition if I can mix both (or more) point of views, yet keep the basis they all keep - Which make them all Wiccan Traditions?

And oh my god, yesterday was the FIRST time i heard of that scrouge thing... i never used that, and whoever thinks that makes me LESS of a Wiccan, can go to the local S&M club (sorry if anyone uses it, i dont mean to offend anyone).

anyways... off to work & school...

[CaitrionaMorgaine]

I started this mess, I suppose I ought to share what I think. Much of this is taken from the essay "In Defense of Eclecticism" on my webpage, which should be linked in my profile.

Generally speaking, most consider the sects of British/English Traditional Wicca the traditional ones: Gardnerian, Alexandrian, Kingstone, Majestic, Georgian, ect. Many consider the following to fall under the traditional title as well: Welsh, Celtic, Norse, and Santeria. When I think of traditional Wicca, it is the British sects that come to mind.

The eclectic branches include Feminists, Wiccan Shamanism, Kitchen Witches, Radical Faeries, and many solitary practitioners.

Original or Traditional Wicca adhered to the following: One God and One Goddess (Aradia and Cernunnos), All ritual was to be done skyclad, the circle is to be cast 3 times, scourging and binding was a part of initiation and ritual. There were many other tenets and practices that defined traditional Wicca, but those are a few.

I was a bit surprised the you had never heard of scourging, Morr. However, in retrospect, most of the books on the market today have a tendency to gloss over the "not so nice" aspects of traditionalism in favor of reaching more people. It amazes me how little of the history of Wicca people seem to know these days.

Traditional Wicca generally also adheres to the following tenets, setting it apart from Eclecticism.

Wicca is Traditional: So saying, there are certain ways of doing things. These teachings are to be passed down from teacher to student - after they are initiated into the tradition.

Wicca is Initiatory: In Traditional Wicca you must be initiated into the practice and through the various degrees by someone who is deemed a priest or priestess and was initiated into the tradition by persons of a traceable linage back through the history of the tradition. Originally, one could not initiate oneself into Wicca. Part of the purpose of this initiation is to aid in the continuation of the tradition unchanged, as well as the binding of the person and their energy to that particular tradition.

However, the true purpose of any religious initiation is to bring about a spiritual awakening within the initiate, no matter if that initiation is into a tradition or a self initiation.

Wicca is Oathbound: When you are initiated into a tradition, you take oaths or swear allegiance to uphold the secrets, teachings, and responsibilities of that tradition and group. These oaths that one takes binds them forever to that group and tradition.

Wicca is Mystery Based: Wiccan Mysteries are revelations that manifest during the course of ones life. These mysteries are not specific nor are they the same for everyone. Usually, mysteries are revealed to a person as a benefit of becoming a member of a tradition.

Wicca has Priesthood: In Wicca there is a structure for the group. There is a hierarchy in the priesthood. The High Priest and Priestess run the group and ritual. There are lesser Priests and Priestesses who conduct circle business and act as mentors, and then there are dedicants - those new to the group. Obtaining the title of Priest/Priestess was something that took time, years of study, and the proof of knowledge.

(There is a rant on my site about Titles as well, if you're interested in my ranting)

These are the things that make Wicca—they define the practice. When Gardner established these guidelines, if one were to call themselves Wiccan or were to practice Wicca, they had to follow these guidelines. Anything else was not Wicca. Period.

Eclecticism, on the other hand, doesn’t usually have such set guidelines. An eclectic uses and combines rituals and techniques from a variety of traditions, sources and cultures.

The path of the Eclectic encourages and allows freedom to pick and choose, to tailor the path to the individual that tradition bound persons may not have (or at least not to the same extent). Being Eclectic requires that you remain open to new experiences and ideas, be tolerant of other ways, and develop a feel for what works and what doesn’t. The greatest challenge facing an Eclectic is to learn the basics of what works for them and then create from what seems chaotic because of all the options, a way or doing things that fulfills their spiritual needs.

Although I am now a member of a tradition, I was Eclectic for many years. I find that it is one of the hardest paths to follow, and today it is one of the most popular. Within my tradition, I have certain requirements of knowledge expected/gained for each degree. There is no such expectation of an Eclectic, since the degree system is all but absent.

Above I stated that most Eclectics are not concerned with the degree system; however there are some eclectic covens that operate in a system very similar. However, there are those that don’t use a system of degrees, and other who have made their own.

I think it is important to note that the tradition based path is not for everyone, and in no way should anyone feel it is the “one right way.” There is no one universal truth when it comes to a path. Each person is different, and such is each path.

I personally find that there is much to be learned in both paths, but they are not the same. They demand different things of those walking them. Neither is without sacrifice of some kind. I think that in general, to consider yourself Wiccan you need to adhere to the guidelines I've listed above. If you can't/won't do that...then call yourself an Eclectic Pagan. There is nothing wrong with that.

As stated before, there are reasons traditions don't just allow everyone in who wants to join. I have learned that in my role as Members Advisor for my trad. Even reading through the introduction lessons I can see some who probably have no idea what they're getting into...some who will meld well with the group mind, and others who have things to overcome before they are ready.

I would be very bothered to hear someone going around and suddenly saying they were a member of my trad, after being self initiated and not undergoing a course of study as outlined. Because I've dedicated hours of my life and my soul to this path. Even though my path is not that of Wicca, we share many ideals.

I applaud you Kaylara. I stand with you on this one, and it is nice to see I am not the only one.

As for my thoughts on the Rede, I've got an essay on that too.

Blessings, ~Rhiannon

[Njorun Alma]

I have read through all the posts since mine and I respect them, but at the same time I am torn.
I call myself an eclectic Wiccan.
Reason: among the paths I have sougth and the books I've read, the online esseys and the free-online lessons I've taken, Wiccanism appealed to me the most.

I identify with the word Wicca and it's suppoused meaning: to bend and/or shape.
I follow the Wiccan rede, I celebrate Sabbats and Esbats, believe in the Lord and the Lady, the sanctity of Mother Earth and the Sacred Elements.
The eclectic part is the fact that I am still not 100% about which pantheons that suits me the best and that I have a number of maybe 3-5 witches in the area of whom I know 2 and none of them are Wiccan, and as far as I know, there are no Wiccan covens in the province at all.
Which basically means that, according to some people, I cannot be a Wiccan because I live in the wrong place.
In order to follow a path I feel is right and to use a word I can fully identify with, I have to move away from my town and my home woud have to be where a good coven is.
And that just doesn't sound right to me.

Blessings,

[Morr]

I have read through all the posts since mine and I respect them, but at the same time I am torn.
I call myself an eclectic Wiccan.
Reason: among the paths I have sougth and the books I've read, the online esseys and the free-online lessons I've taken, Wiccanism appealed to me the most.

I identify with the word Wicca and it's suppoused meaning: to bend and/or shape.
I follow the Wiccan rede, I celebrate Sabbats and Esbats, believe in the Lord and the Lady, the sanctity of Mother Earth and the Sacred Elements.
The eclectic part is the fact that I am still not 100% about which pantheons that suits me the best and that I have a number of maybe 3-5 witches in the area of whom I know 2 and none of them are Wiccan, and as far as I know, there are no Wiccan covens in the province at all.
Which basically means that, according to some people, I cannot be a Wiccan because I live in the wrong place.
In order to follow a path I feel is right and to use a word I can fully identify with, I have to move away from my town and my home woud have to be where a good coven is.
And that just doesn't sound right to me.

Blessings,


i can totally relate to you.
I too resent the fact that some Wiccans only view you as a "true wiccan" if you are initiated into a Wiccan coven... These people who have the privilage of having covens in their areas, and who have other Wiccans of the same path to study with, simply take that for granted. They dont understand that in other countries & regions, there arent such covens, and if there should be any - they are not always the covens of the tradition youre most drawn to.

Here in Israel, there are 2 "serious" covens (ie. not teeny boppy "charmed" wannabe ones). But they are mostly composed of older people then me (I'm 22), who often either dont accept young people/Wiccans (no matter how much experience you have). These 2 covens are also not of the path I was interested in.
So just because im NOT fortunate enough to have just the right coven, in my area, athat will accept me & initiate me into their tradition - Then I'm not considered a Wiccan?

People who think that are down right rude & snobbish and themselves arent aware of what Wicca truely is.

[Desdemona]

I appreciate the imput and the rich history that the initiatory trad people have taken time to contribute. And I will try and respect it, as my earlier comments were a bit snotty, and bound to get snottier still, so I apologize in advance. (Does Starhawk know she's eclectic?)

But I don't worship human beings, and I don't worship pristesses. I honor the Lord and Lady. And, they didn't tell me I needed you people. They did tell me I need a teacher. So I got one.

You are right about one thing I perhaps didn't make clear. Wicca is hard work. It is VERY hard work, and it is the hardest thing I have ever done in my life. That is what makes it rewarding.

You are right about something else. It isn't for everybody. Not even Gardner's followers, they couldn't "hack it" either, apparently.

...The final revolt happened when he declared that the High Priestess should retire when he considered her too old. In 1957, Doreen Valiente and others members having had enough of the gospel according to Gardner, left and went their separate ways. source: http://www.controverscial.com/Gerald%20Brosseau%20Gardner.htm (http://)

He started a great thing, but he is not the thing.

We need more harmony among solitary, group, traditional, and eclectic branches of Wicca. None is any better than any other. In the end, we are all revering the same Powers That Be. How can we expect to get along with other groups if we allow fractures among ourselves?

Where did this sudden craze to have actual physical structures for worship begin? When I was training, I understood that the universe was my temple and that I needed no buildings to find deity. Now I hear so many High Priest/esses talking about actual temples and campuses and other physical places. What happened to "Let the stars be your canopy?"

Technically, I've worked my way through a traditional degree system, from Dedicant to Third Degree to Elder. Again, I must have been learning the wrong thing. So far as I know, titles are ephemera. We are all equals in the eyes of deity, so why create a hierarchy which might make some people feel somehow less than equal?source: http://www.witchvox.com/words/words_2004/e_aware04.html (http://)

It got bigger than him. It got bigger than the trads. I know that comes with a price. I know you don't think you should have to pay it. I know it would please you better if I called myself an electic pagan. I'm sorry, but I won't. We shall agree to disagree.

[Eowyn]

There is a great deal of freedom within Paganism to make your path your own, but where do we draw the line? Let's say you consider yourself Wiccan. If you take out coven initiation, ritual scourging and change the elemental correspondence directions....are you really Wiccan anymore? Wicca is a tradition bound path. At what point are we changing too much? Where does Eclectic Wicca stop being Wicca?

Blessings, ~Rhiannon

For me it's that anyone can be a wiccan as long as they remember and follow the basic "rules" such as the Rede, when they forget about that, I wouldnt call them Wiccans

[Desdemona]

Being mostly Gardnerian Wiccan myself, How can you mostly be? Are you inititiated or aren't you?

I figured I should put my two cents in here. There is presently a trend I see where people do whatever feels right. That's fine, but it's not Wicca. I think that you have to reach a certain level of knowledge on the subject before you can go around doing what feels right. Otherwise, you will not know why something feels right, nor the consequences and reprocussions of your actions and changes. I was taught that as well.

Yes, traditionals limit who joins their little "clubs". And with good reason. Every new person who joins a particular group changes the group dynamics. (read, group mind, energy flow, etc.) Also, the traditions require that you work for your religion, there are no free rides, you work your ass off. Also, traditional Wiccans put a lot of time and energy into training the people who they've initiated. They don't want to waste their time on someone who will not take it seriously, or quit when it gets too hard. So yeah, I totally agree with that. If you're not willing to do the work, then don't bother applying. It's that simple.I agree with you here. It is hard work and anyone looking for a free ride needs to go elsewhere. And if you want a good group, it has to mesh well and flow. I agree also. But what if you don't want/need/can't find a group?

As for all Wiccans being defined as someone who follows "The Wiccan Rede". I'm sorry, but no. The Rede is a guideline, not a rule.It was written by your Man's HP and approved by him! How can you accept part of his teachings and not others? Is that what you mean by being "mostly Gardnerian?" And yes, Kaylara, we know it's a guidline. You need to bring the level of the audience in your mind up a little. I don't think anyone here is a fluffy bunny.
It's nice poetry, and a nice thought, but you can't go through life with out harming anything. That's an impossible standard to try to live up to. You can minimize the impact you have, but still you will be harming something or someone else. Magickally, I'll defend as much as possible, but if someone or something screws with me, you can bet your sweet bippy that I will fight back. Does that make me less of a Wiccan? I think not.Actually it does. When you use magic to harm, you tear up your "Wicca card." You can still call yourself a witch, though.

I don't buy this watered down Wicca crap. Sorry, but if it's that watered down, it can hardly be called Wicca anymore. If you want to start your own little club, feel free. No one is stopping you. But don't call it Wicca. Some of us have worked our butts off to get where we are, and it's not right for people to just label themselves Wiccan without having to have any knowledge on the subject.I'm sorry, but this whole passage here just smacks of insecure elitism. Again, I ask you to bring the level of your argument up a notch, you are talking down. Most of the people you are talking to have studied extensively, even if it is on their own.
If you're interested and willing to work for what knowledge you will gain, then I applaud you.As long as it is in an approved coven?
I respect people who don't expect everything to be given to them on a silver platter. Wicca doesn't equal easy.Especially eclectic Wicca.
If you think it is, you're deluding yourself. There is a ton of hard work that goes into being Wiccan, and to call anything that comes along or feels right Wicca, is not practicing the religion. I'm sorry if this comes off as callous or snotty, but I think if you are going to practice a religion and call yourself a follower of a particular named path, that you should have some knowledge of it. Doing otherwise means that you are not practicing that named path.I agree, people shouldn't run around calling themselves Gardnerians. As for snotty, well, everyone gets snotty when people start protecting their own little turf. I wish we could all agree that our turf comes from the same place.

[Desdemona]

Kaylara, I couldn't have said it better myself.
Wicca is the Worship of the God and Goddess, nature, the universe, and all of the energy and beings in it. People who are wiccan try to attune themselves with nature and the cycles held therein, and live by the Wiccan Rede "an it harm none do what thou whilt." They practice magick, do spells and rituals to exact changes in their lives. This is a large branch of paganism, and the fastest growing religion in the world today.source: your webpage
http://whichwitchiswhich.tripod.com/id75.htm

[Phae Talon]

(Does Starhawk know she's eclectic?)

Actually, from what I understand, Starhawk is Feri (among other things, I'm sure).

--Phae

[Morgandria]

Starhawk has said herself she is not Wiccan, and the Reclaiming Tradition itself is not Wiccan either.

I wish I could say I was Wiccan. I want very badly to be a dedicant to an Alexandrian coven. It may or may not work out, and I might find that I am indeed not meant to be Wiccan. But I won't know until I try. My Alexandrian mentor, whom I am very fond of, pronounces ecclectic as one would cough up a hairball.

-M.

[Kaylara]

Kaylara, I couldn't have said it better myself.
source: your webpage
http://whichwitchiswhich.tripod.com/id75.htm
Heh... That was written several years ago. My views since then have changed a bit as my understanding has. (The only reason it's still up there is because I forgot my password for that account :P)

[Desdemona]

Starhawk has said herself she is not Wiccan, and the Reclaiming Tradition itself is not Wiccan either. Where? Do you have a link?
This is what I found.
"At that time in the late '60s, there wasn't much discussion of nature in Judaism, which is what I was raised on," Starhawk continues. "When someone started talking to me about the study of Wicca, where sexuality and nature are sacred, I thought 'Wow, this is it for me.' "

Starhawk learned the age-old beliefs and rituals of paganism; later, when the group she was studying with disintegrated, she pushed her beliefs on to the activist front.

A move to the Bay Area in 1975 furthered her growth.

"When I moved to the Bay Area, I found a thriving Wiccan community (and) I found people who thought feminist spirituality was political and who could teach me further about its involvement with politics," she says.
source:http://www.acts2.com/thebibletruth/Halloween_Passage_Into_Paganism.htm


I wish I could say I was Wiccan. I want very badly to be a dedicant to an Alexandrian coven. Why Alexandrian? It may or may not work out, and I might find that I am indeed not meant to be Wiccan. You are what you believe.
But I won't know until I try. My Alexandrian mentor, whom I am very fond of, pronounces ecclectic as one would cough up a hairball. Is that meant to impress us? Closed-minded, egotistical people don't impress me.

[Phae Talon]

Starhawk has said herself she is not Wiccan, and the Reclaiming Tradition itself is not Wiccan either.

-M.

Yeah, that sounds right to me ... I don't think that Feris consider themselves Wiccan either (Wicca is a fertility path, whereas Feri is an ecstatic path)

--Phae

[Desdemona]

Heh... That was written several years ago. My views since then have changed a bit as my understanding has. (The only reason it's still up there is because I forgot my password for that account :P)Haha, now THAT is funny!

Sorry to get on your case, Kay, it's just that one of the ways you can tell someone is a real Gardnerian is, well... they don't run around, proclaiming they are.

I think they are one of the old, pioneering traditions, and they have a lot of valid points. And, I don't think they are in any danger of being diluted. But I also don't think they, or the Alexandrians have a copyright to the word "Wicca," or, the truth, for that matter. I know that makes me unpopular, but I can live with that. Or can I? Do Wiccans follow the Rede, or don't they? :eyebrow:

[Ben Trismegistus]

Sorry to get on your case, Kay, it's just that one of the ways you can tell someone is a real Gardnerian is, well... they don't tell you they are. I know that doesn't make much sense, but it's true.
Desdemona, that's a load of crap, plain and simple.

Look, I can see that you've got a lot of anger regarding certain elements in the pagan community. But by making generalizations that anyone who belongs to an initiatory tradition is by definition closed-minded and exclusionary, you're sinking to the level of those you deride.

You are correct that closed-mindedness and elitism have no place in the Wiccan community. So why can't we just leave it at that, rather than pronounce that one tradition is open-minded and another is not? There are Gardnerians who believe that all eclectics are fluffy bunnies, and there are those that don't. There are Eclectics who believe that all Gardnerians are stuffy and elitist, and there are those that don't. You can't tar an entire tradition by the actions of a few of its members.

Now, to the question at hand. Bear with me.

Wicca has evolved a great deal since its inception. Wicca of the 1940s is rather different from Wicca of the 1950s (after the contributions of Doreen Valiente), and Wicca has continued to change and adapt since then. At that time, Wicca and Witchcraft were assumed to mean the same thing. In the past 15 years or so, the two terms have evolved separate definitions. Wicca as a religion really began to explode in the early 1980s as the Solitary Tradition became more and more defined.

So what is REAL Wicca?

There is no cut-and-dry answer to that question. These arguments always occur when people inevitably try to place a definition on something that is amorphous. The truth is that it's really a continuum. You can say for sure (within reason) what Traditional Gardnerian Wicca is, and you can say for sure what is NOT WICCA (for instance, Christianity). And everything in between you have to take at face value and decide whether it fits or not.

Personally, I agree with Morgandria & Rhiannon on this one, that if your religion falls TOO far away from what can be clearly defined as Wicca, then you're better off simply calling it something else. NOT because us "real" Wiccans don't want to be associated with you, but because it will alleviate confusion as to what you really do believe and practice. If a large group of people are calling themselves Wiccans, while their beliefs and practices have virtually nothing to do with one another's, the word itself ceases to have any meaning at all.

So here are MY opinions of what makes someone a Wiccan:

Polarity - Belief in the balance of the universe: God/Goddess, light/dark, as above/so below, etc.

Elemental Quarters - Four of them, earth, air, fire, water. There's some disagreement about what goes where, but the standard Wiccan setup is Air/East, Fire/South, Water/West, and Earth/North. You honor them during ritual, etc.

Ritual Elements - You cast a circle, at least sometimes. You use an athame, or something to represent an athame. You have an altar, with representations of the four elements and the God & Goddess of your choice. Etc.

Wheel of the Year - I don't know of any way you could be a Wiccan and not follow *some* version of the 8 sabbats. 2 Solstices, 2 Equinoxes, plus Imbolc (Brigid), Beltane, Lammas (Lughnassa), and Samhain.

And here are some things that are OPTIONAL but not NECESSARY:

Initiatory Rites - Yeah, it's a great thing if you go through Degree Initiations. Not because you become part of a secret club or something, but because they (like any large-scale rituals) deepen your understanding of the religion itself and of your own self. More Traditional traditions focus around Degree Rituals for a number of reasons - they help you mark your progress, and they help to clearly deliniate the line of when you know enough to call yourself a High Priestess and run your own coven. This, in my opinion, is especially important in a day and age when anyone can declare themselves a High Priestess and start a coven, regardless of their knowledge base. That said, you can be a Wiccan and never undergo an initiation. As Desdemona pointed out, if you were to restrict Wicca to only those who had undergone initiation rites, it would be a very small religion indeed. [NOTE: Do not confuse "initiation", a ceremony performed on you by a group, with "dedication", a ceremony performed on you by yourself, in order to dedicate yourself to a religion or deity.]

Wiccan Rede - I know this is a sticking point, but I don't care. The Wiccan Rede is not meant as a binding law, and it's not meant to be taken entirely literally. Yes, we should all try to live good lives and not cause harm if at all possible. But I put this in the OPTIONAL section as a response to those on this thread who have said that the ONLY requirement to being Wiccan is belief in the Wiccan Rede. In my opinion, that's a vast oversimplification of what is a very rich religion. It's like saying that the only thing you need to follow to be a Christian is "turn the other cheek".

Magical Work - There's some disagreement about this too. Personally, I think that if you're a Wiccan and you DON'T do some sort of magical work, you're missing out on a very rewarding part of the practice. But I don't see any reason why it's necessary to calling yourself a Wiccan, since that's primarily about the theology and the ritual practices.

So, those are MY guidelines. If you want to know my personal biases, I'm a member of an Eclectic Gardnerian Tradition -- NorthStar, an off-shoot of the Minoan Tradition, which is itself an off-shoot of British Traditionalism. My beliefs and practices lie on the traditional side, although we have worked in beliefs and practices from eclectic sources, such as Native American Shamanism and Eastern religions. I have been through two degree initiations (or, rather, one initiation and one elevation), and, by certain Gardnerian guidelines, could call myself a High Priest, although I'm uncomfortable doing that until I make it all the way through third degree and feel comfortable running my own coven.

Clear? Thoughts? Insults?

[Phae Talon]

Ben -

I think that is a very apt description. While I don't agree with ALL of the points, I think that most of them apply ... and very well. Glad to have a Trad Wiccan weigh in on this one.

--Phae

[CaitrionaMorgaine]

(Does Starhawk know she's eclectic?)

Wicca itself, by definition, is eclectic. A definition of eclectic, from the The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language - Fourth Edition:

1. Selecting or employing individual elements from a variety of sources, systems, or styles
2. Made up of or combining elements from a variety of sources

But that could be said for any spirituality, any religion. My tradition has undergone some changes with each person who contributes their experiences and thoughts. That's not a bad thing. I would much rather grow than stand still.

It got bigger than him. It got bigger than the trads. I know that comes with a price. I know you don't think you should have to pay it. I know it would please you better if I called myself an electic pagan. I'm sorry, but I won't. We shall agree to disagree.

It doesn't matter what pleases me. It matters what pleases you. But I think that we need to be aware of the thoughts of both sides. If we ignore everything but our own thoughts, then we have become no better than those who we consider "close minded." If I couldn't agree to disagree, then I would have never progressed spiritually. Actually, I really wouldn't have gotten far in life at all. *grin*

One thing I have noticed over the years is that there seems to be some hostility between Traditionalists and Eclectics over the two different approaches to spirituality. There are most definitely differences, but I think that there must be some common ground, and that neither is better than the other. What I think is missing for the two is the link that brings them together.

Perhaps it is the overlapping of ritual set up, or the fact that in its beginnings, Wicca was eclectic. Gardner borrowed from many sources, including the Golden Dawn and the Key of Solomon. Perhaps it is simply a respect for the wisdom that can be found in all paths.

I started this thread to see what people thought, perhaps to challenge them to figure it out for themselves. This was never meant to be a kind of trads vs eclectics thing. I apologize if I have upset anyone with this thread.

Blessings, ~Rhiannon

[Morgandria]

Why Alexandrian?


I'm very drawn to BTW. There is only one BTW coven in my area, which happens to be Alexandrian. I met my mentor many years ago online, got to know her IRL, and met her coven - it just happens to the one available to me locally. I'm also interested in Gardnerian and Blue Star tradition, but they aren't available here.

You are what you believe.

I find that statement to be untrue - else there would be a great number of Elvii, long-lost priests of Atlantis, and any number of otherplanar demi-gods and deities running around - there are lots of people who believe they are these things. I'm so glad we don't live in the Buffy universe.


Is that meant to impress us? Closed-minded, egotistical people don't impress me.

No, actually, I just find iit amusing. She has little respect for ecclecticism because she has seen the worst of it - people who cut and paste cultures together with no concept of what they are doing, those who have no respect for the practices they steal from. Not all ecclectics are that way, I'm sure, but the ones I've encountered in real life always seem to be in that vein.

You have already expressed to me with your tone and manner of posting that you have a strong dislike of people who hold an opinion that is contrary to your own. Why would I waste my time trying to impress someone like that? I'm sure you are a great person...I just don't agree with your views on Wicca. I'm happy to agree to disagree.

I'm sorry you find the opinions of BTW to be close-minded and egotistical. The witches I know of these traditions are bright, beautiful people who work hard and are deeply dedicated to their Craft - not egotistical, and not close-minded. It just bothers them to see people taking the Mysteries they have worked very hard to earn the rights to be initiated into and telling the world they're not important because as long as you do "X" you can be a Wiccan.

-M.

[Branwyn]

I don't want to quote any one person, due to the touchy nature of this topic, however, a comment was made about how those that think Wicca is an oathbound initiatory tradition are just elitist (or words to that effect).

Let me ask you a question, as a way of compairing this.

Say you graduated from High School, went on to University, worked your behind off, got your Bachelors degree, then went on to get your Master's degree. Lets say you were really ambitious, and went all the way to get a PhD. Now, you've worked for 8 to 15 years, studying, working a job to take care of the bills you were accrueing (just by living), racking up debt you will be paying off for the next 20 years in government guarenteed school loans, having no time for friends/family/life because you were REALLY focused on your goal.

Now, how would you like it if somebody wrote some books talking about your field of expertise. (For the sake of arguement, lets make your doctorate in Physics, and the book "I'm not really here" by Tim Allen, and other physics simplified for the common man type books.)

How would you like it if I started reading all these books, and decided that because I could quote chapter and verse of "I'm not really here" and "Physics for Dummies", I now have a doctorate in Physics, and go around telling people that. How much would you like it if I even went so far as to tell you (who've not stopped learning about the subject since you graduated head of your class) that you have no idea what you are talking about in the field of physics, because I read 20 books and know everything there is to know about physics? Wouldn't you feel upset that I was sitting here, trying to pass myself off as a Doctor in Physics, even calling myself that, yet I only have a High School Diploma? Wouldn't you be even more upset if I called you "exclusionary" or "elitist" if you told me that I had to get my Master's degree in Physics before you'd consider to take me seriously when I talk about physics?

In the above example, the word 'you' is general 'you' not meant at any one person in particular.

It was said by somebody that if people wanted to get scourged, they should just go play BDSM games. (Now, this is going to sound eletist, and I'm sorry, but there's no way not to sound that way.) If you didn't know about the binding and scourging being part of certain Traditional Wiccan rituals, it's because the "wiccan" books don't/can't tell everything that goes on in a coven. The rituals are oathbound. At best, what a person reads in the books on the market are 'outer court' material. Things that, if a coven held an open circle, would be common knowledge at the open circle. The books do not go into the full rituals, the 'inner court' teachings. Those things are for people who have been initiated, and who have reached a certain level of compentancy/degree. At worst, the writers are just making it up as they write, and are calling it Wicca. (And understand, I have NO problem with people 'making up' anything. If it works, go for it. It's just NOT Wicca.)

I really don't know why people seem to get so bent out of shape about this. If there are rules (made by the people who created the religion) put in place to say who's a member and who's not (let's take this out of the realm of paganism... the Roman Catholic Church says that in order to be RC, you MUST have been baptised in an RC church), no amount of claiming to be a member of the religion is going to do anything unless you actually did what was necessary to do to be part of that religion. I could say I'm a Baptist all I wanted to, that don't make it so.

Oh, just an FYI... I'm not Wiccan, I've never been initiated into a Wiccan coven. I *do* know a couple of initiated Wiccans, and have watched a tv documentary about witchraft and 'Wicca' (that showed a very little bit about the binding and scourging and what it's role was in the initiation). I have no personal ax to grind. And if I'm considered to be "elitist and close-minded" due to my saying a Rose is a Rose is a Rose and NOT a Carnation, then so be it.

Branwyn,
who's been called worse things then "elitist and closeminded" in her life

[Athena-Nadine]

I started this thread to see what people thought, perhaps to challenge them to figure it out for themselves. This was never meant to be a kind of trads vs eclectics thing. I apologize if I have upset anyone with this thread.

Blessings, ~Rhiannon
You have nothing to apologize for. I read through the thread and found it quite interesting, though I don't have much of an opinion on the Wiccan/Not Wiccan argument, since I am a Recon and quite obviously not Wiccan. :)

Offended or not, you've made many people think, and that's never a bad thing.

Speaking of lines, you've made me think of something. This current argument is very similar to the one about the gods Themselves. While I can only speak of the Olympians, I am certain it is the same for all of the Others as well. There is so much blatant misinformation out there about Them, and it seems that a lot of people will pick up a book, read a single paragraph (or even a sibgle sentence!) about a specific god and immediately change that god's attributes. These people will add attributes as they see fit, they will take others away, or even both. Then they will name their god by the name of an existing god. Yet by the time they are done, the god they insist is Artemis/Athene/Aphrodite/Appollon/Etc. is unrecognizable from Who S/He is and has always been. All of the thousands of years of the god's history is ignored; all of the god's culture is ignored, treated as if it is all inconsequential to Who the gods is, when it is that very culture and history that teaches us how the god relates with mortals, what the god stands for, how to properly show respect for the god, and on what terms the god will help a mortal and when. *...shakes head...*

If you have found a goddess of schoolwork, great. But don't run around calling Her Athene ignoring everything else that makes Her Who She is. Wisdom and knowledge are not even close to the same thing. She is also the goddess of crafts such as weaving, knitting, and needlework. Athene is also the goddess of war and strategy. And She is the Protector of Cities. Courage and fortitude in the face of adversity are valued by her above all things, as is honesty to oneself. She is not a gentle goddess. To ignore Her darker aspects is to turn Her into Something else entirely; it is to call another goddess by Her name.

So when is the line drawn? Why must people add or subtract things from Who the gods are? Why must people change Them to the point that They become unrecognizable? *...sighs...*

I apologize for the off topic response.

[Lunacie]

Brawnwyn, I can appreciate your analogy, but I don't think you can or should compare religion and university degrees. There may be some people who are very intelligent and know almost as much about Physics, but can't claim the title of Doctor because they haven't been taught by a professor and graduated from a college or university.

But what would you call someone who has read quite a bit about Wicca, and decided to dedicate themselves to that path? Are they Wiccan? Or do they only earn the right to call themselves Wiccan when they undergo an initiation? Should they only be called a "student of Wicca" until they have "graduated" to the level of being a High Priest/ess? Which again brings up the question of people who can't find a coven or teacher in their neighborhood.

[Phae Talon]

Brawnwyn, I can appreciate your analogy, but I don't think you can or should compare religion and university degrees. There may be some people who are very intelligent and know almost as much about Physics, but can't claim the title of Doctor because they haven't been taught by a professor and graduated from a college or university.

I don't know about that ... there have been a great many people who have passed themselves off as doctors because they read all the textbooks, practiced on what materials they could get their hands on, and never been to college or taught by a professor. Perhaps they are a very experienced and gifted healer ... are they a doctor? Are they worth less than a university trained doctor? I know a lot of people in the Pagan community trust midwives and herbalists more than conventional doctors (though, I am not talking physics here).

Just because some people don't believe that solitary eclectics are really Wiccan, but that doesn't necessarily make it so. I think that there are some base things that make a Wiccan, and I think that Wicca will continue to change over the years ... and I think much like Christianity has become, we will end up with a great many different denominations.

What I see in Branwyn's analogy is perhaps a bit more respect is needed in this issue. Newbies and Eclectics need to realize that there is more to becoming Wiccan than reading a handful of books, and Trads need to understand that solitaries are not worth less because they have to learn on their own.

And I think that a lot of people need to stop looking to everyone else for a value judgement of their path. If it is fufilling for you ... what does it matter if someone says it isn't 'real' because it differs from theirs ... we don't worry about it when Christians say it ...

I am sure that that is far more than two cents ... but there it is ;)

--Phae

[Bec_W]

Yeah, that sounds right to me ... I don't think that Feris consider themselves Wiccan either (Wicca is a fertility path, whereas Feri is an ecstatic path)

--Phae

(hopefully this hasn't already been replied to) No, Feri's don't concider themselves to be Wiccan, it seems to be more traditional witchcraft then anything.

[Phae Talon]

(hopefully this hasn't already been replied to) No, Feri's don't concider themselves to be Wiccan, it seems to be more traditional witchcraft then anything.

I admit that I don't know a lot about Feri, but I don't really see how they are similar to traditional witchcraft ... I am interested to talk about this some more, but I don't want to completely derail this thread ... perhaps we could move it to the Traditional Witchcraft thread in 'Paths'?

--Phae

[Bec_W]

I admit that I don't know a lot about Feri, but I don't really see how they are similar to traditional witchcraft ... I am interested to talk about this some more, but I don't want to completely derail this thread ... perhaps we could move it to the Traditional Witchcraft thread in 'Paths'?

--Phae

Now I've done it :lol: I'm not Feri, a good friend of mine is and having discussed it with her that's the impression I got. But of course I might have gotten the short end of the stick :twitch:

[Phae Talon]

Now I've done it :lol: I'm not Feri, a good friend of mine is and having discussed it with her that's the impression I got. But of course I might have gotten the short end of the stick :twitch:

I'm not Feri, or Wiccan either, and a friend of mine (a Discordian and Feri) tends to think on Feri as a Satanic or Left-hand path ... apparently Starhawk was initiated into Feri by a self-avowed devil worshipper. :ahhhh: So, I guess everyone has different veiws :whatgives ... most of what I know of them is from their trad description over on Witchvox.

--Phae

[Kadynas]

While I don't think the "do whatever you want" crowd has any claim to the title of "Wicca", as the same time I do think that there are certain "sub-groups", for lack of a better term, within Wicca that are valid... For example, I call myself (when I'm forced to label myself :lol: ) a Hellenic Wiccan... With the exception that I do not belong to a coven, I follow all the essential tenets of Wicca. However I follow only the Greek pantheon and try to stay as true to their ways as I can in this modern world. (ie: I don't sacrifice bulls to Zeus, neither will I worship Aphrodite as a "three-fold" goddess...) It's a very fine line, I guess...

There does seem to be a stigma against the term "eclectic pagan" but there really shouldn't be... to me that term means you're using what works for you, what gives you a genuine spiritual experience... It's not a /bad/ thing; it only becomes so when you try to take another path's name for your own.

[The High Queen of Faerie]

wicca, imo, is a religion, it's beliefs. it's not actions, it's not magick. true, magick is what makes me a witch, but it doesn't really have an impact on what i myself believe.

[MoonlightShadow]

First off, I'm not Wiccan. For a while I claimed myself to be an Eclectic Wiccan because I felt like I had to tag myself with a specific label. I'm quite content with "Pagan" or "Eclectic Pagan" nowadays.

From what I've seen, and I'm no scholar on the issue, but what I see is that Wicca is a religion with it's varying traditions, much like Christianity has its different forms. Just because you agree with a couple parts of the religion doesn't make you "Wiccan." I suppose that's like saying "I don't really believe in God, but I believe in a few of the commandments, so I'm Christian!"

On the other hand I think it's pretty tough to tell someone they must be initiated by another Wiccan to be Wiccan. If that's how it is, your religion is impossible because who initiated the first Wiccan? Did your Gods initiate the first Wiccan? If that is so, then why can't another person be initiated by them? If someone has their own view on this, feel free to share them with me.

This makes me think of a bit on the Daily Show. The joke is that someone says (basically) "If you don't believe in every aspect of the Catholic church, you should get out" ... "And therefore the role America's Catholics was reduced from 60 million..to three." (You'll have to excuse how rough that is..it's been a few days since I saw it :uhhuhuh: )

All in all, there seem to be gray areas. It's difficult to actually draw a line because this. Can any one of us actually make a clear-cut decision on what is and what is not Wicca? I think not. Neither way is really "right" and the in-between will simply be disputed.

[Desdemona]

I would just like to apologize to the group posting on this thread for calling them or anyone they know elitest and closed-minded. Ben is right. I should be assigning these characteristics to the subject, not the people. I get carried away, sometimes.

Desdemona, that's a load of crap, plain and simple.

Look, I can see that you've got a lot of anger regarding certain elements in the pagan community. But by making generalizations that anyone who belongs to an initiatory tradition is by definition closed-minded and exclusionary, you're sinking to the level of those you deride.
You are right. I am very angry. I'm on freaking fire. How many members does this website have now? Ten thousand?

A lot of these people coming here for answers, and wisdom. And one or two people on this board are going to tell them, "Tough. You don't live near a proper british coven, you're s.o.l., kid." What kind of message is that to be spreading with the reach this site has? That, to me, is a load of crap. Plain and simple.

All the articles I have read on the problems the Wiccan community has, have really glossed over them. I can see that now. And for the record, I do not call myself Wiccan. Yet. I've been studying with a Dianic Coven and the Federation of Circles and Solitaries over a period of two years. Now that I have interacted with "real" Wiccans on this thread, I question my own desire to belong to such a community. By encouraging me to just be Eclectic Pagan, they were offering me a way out of the bickering, the politics, the witchier-than-thou syndrome, and the deep division within this community. I'm sure I will be thanking all of you later. Keep up the good work. You're doing great.

[Njorun Alma]

*brings out Ben's checklist*

Polarity - Belief in the balance of the universe: God/Goddess, light/dark, as above/so below, etc. Yes... that's a part of my believes.

Elemental Quarters - yes, I do honour the Elemental quarters in my rituals, and meditations as well.

Ritual Elements - I have an altar, (right now it's not set up, my mother doesn't approve of my choice of religion) I cast a circle, I don't have an athame, but I use my index finger on my right hand instead. (I don't have the money to buy an athame right now, and again... my mother. An athame would be hard to explain for her) I have symbols for the four elements and the God and Goddess on my altar(when it's set). A feather of a crow and incence for air, a red candle for fire, a dish of salt and a clear quarts for earth and a beautiful, big seashell that was givven to me by my aunt after a trip to represent water.
And beautiful pictures of women and men to represent the lord and lady, plus a few other symbols.

Wheel of the Year - Samhain, Yule, Imbolc, Ostara, Beltane, Litha, Lammas and Mabon. Oh... and I celebrate the Esbats too... sometimes only by a cirtan meditation, but it depends on how much time I have.

OPTIONAL but not NECESSARY:

Initiatory Rites - No... I don't have any connection to a coven or larger group of Wiccans here.
There are quite a few new age dudes around, but I seriously doubt they can give me an Initiatory Rite.
Besides, I considter a specific event in my life as an Initiation by the Goddess herself.
Yell at me about it if you want to.

Wiccan Rede - I follow this with mind and heart. I try to all the time, although we all know it's impossible to walk through life without hurting anyone.

Magical Work - Yes... magickal work.
Not that much right now, because of a very long cold and some stress related illness which have prevented me from doing that much Magickal Work.

I read something about Wiccanism everyday.
Be it books, esseys, online information or posts in forums like these.
I spend more time on learning about Wiccanism and magick then I do studying my schoolwork.
Do not think that just because I am eclectic that I do not study hard, have my share of punches or that I am not true to the Wiccan religion.
I work just as hard as any initated Wiccan, except I don't have anyone to guide me, which i would love to have.
Don't think I'm not a member of a circle or coven because I have chosen to ignore that aspect of Wiccanism.
I just happen to live in a place where there are no other Wiccans except for one who is younger then me.
And I do not feel like quitting school and moving away to seek out a coven as of yet.

So... do I have the right to call myself Wiccan or do i have to move away from my home and seek out a coven to initiate me in order to be able to call myself Wiccan?

Edited to add:

Furthermore I agree with Desdemona, I don't think I want to be called Wiccan if Wiccans actually prove to be unable to see past their noses.

I realize now that all the Wiccans I have learned by, all the Wiccans I've met online who have taught me about dedication to the craft are eclectic , and guess what?
If all solitare Wiccans were unable to call themselves Wiccans, Wiccanism would be back in the sect stage and the amount of Wiccans would probably not even be half of what they are now.
And to remove the eclectic Wiccans of the equation as well... Wiccanims wouldn't be one of the fastest growing new religions.
Actually... I don't even think it would be a religion if we didn't have all these different branches.

Wnough ranting from me, have a nice day. :needcoffe

[Branwyn]

I am completely bemused and befuddled by the defensiveness and anger I see when discussing this topic. Not only here, but every where, every time this topic comes up.

I will post here a couple things, then I will no longer add to the negativity that surrounds and abounds in this topic.

1) A question I asked earlier never was answered by anybody, but it's relavent (yes, I know that nobody has to answer a question just because I ask it, but I think it's interesting that nobody wanted to take it on). There are books out there about Siberean Shamanism. And Strega Witchraft. And the OTO. Books that tell some parts of that Paths teachings and rituals. From what books are out there, one could cobble together a very nice Path that works for them, and call it "Strega" or "Siberean Shamanism" or "OTO" and yet they don't. Why not? Why is it only Wicca that everybody is trying to claim as their religion?

2) It has been stated in numerous conversations I've seen "Who initiated Gerald Gardner?" It doesn't matter who initiated Gerald Gardner. He made up the rules of the religion, including that it be passed down from member to member, that it be initiatory, that it include coven work, etc. It's apples and oranges. (BTW, from what I know of my Wicca history, Gerald Gardner had been initiated by Crowley in a Golden Dawn sect, but I could be VERY mistaken on this. DON'T quote me.)

The fact of the matter is that Gardner is the one who made the religion, made the rules, and got to set what they were. Now, does that mean that those rules still are valid 50-70 years later? Maybe, maybe not. But I'm not a follower of that Path, so it's not up to me to tell Wiccans that they need to change their rules to be more inclusionary. It would be WAY arrogant of me to do so.

3) The university example was made PRECISELY because of the people who have been able to read/learn and could get the degrees. When a person *WHO HAS NOT GONE THROUGH THE REQUISITE SCHOOL AND TAKEN THE REQUISITE COMPITANCY TESTS* has been found passing themselves off as a doctor (we'll say of medicine here), they are charged with criminal FRAUD and endangering lives and a whole slew of other crimes and get thrown into jail for a LONG time. (caps for emphasis only) We could make the case that the MD community is 'exclusionary' or 'elitist' or 'snobbish'. Is it that they are elitist or snobbish, or that they don't want people to get the wrong idea about them when some person who's had no training makes a major mistake and kills somebody?

4) Why is it that people see "eclectic paganism" as somehow less than any other label? What's WRONG with "eclectic paganism"? Or "Pagan"? Or any other name one wants to call oneselve? Why does it have to be "Wicca" or nothing? I know a good many "Eclectic Pagans" who are great people and who declare themselves proudly. They have built a Path that works wonderfully for themselves, and they aren't ashamed to say, "Yanno, I looked into Wicca and Strega and Asaratu and Celtic Reconstructionism and none of those had exactly what I was looking for. But I took elements from each, and made something that my dieties and I are happy with."

Does it matter what anybody else in the world thinks? Does it matter if some Gardnerian says the word "Eclectic" as if he's clearing out his throat? Heck, does it really matter to any of you what *I* think? After all, you don't know me IRL, I have no influence on you other than being a person behind a computer expressing her thoughts. If you don't like my thoughts, you don't have to let my words, my thoughts, and my views affect your worldview.

It's that easy.

Now, I'm exiting this thread. Have fun, y'all!

Branwyn

[Desdemona]

I am completely bemused and befuddled by the defensiveness and anger I see when discussing this topic. Not only here, but every where, every time this topic comes up.

I will post here a couple things, then I will no longer add to the negativity that surrounds and abounds in this topic.

1) A question I asked earlier never was answered by anybody, but it's relavent (yes, I know that nobody has to answer a question just because I ask it, but I think it's interesting that nobody wanted to take it on). There are books out there about Siberean Shamanism. And Strega Witchraft. And the OTO. Books that tell some parts of that Paths teachings and rituals. From what books are out there, one could cobble together a very nice Path that works for them, and call it "Strega" or "Siberean Shamanism" or "OTO" and yet they don't. Why not? Why is it only Wicca that everybody is trying to claim as their religion?See Ben's list. If you get baptized, believe in Christ as the Son, his father as the Amighty, the Holy Ghost, go to confession and communion, keep the commandents, but have to do all this in a tent, and get told you aren't Catholic because you don't go to a church, you would be mad too. No one is trying to change the rules, just the setting where they take place, often out of necessity. The scenario you describe is the "fluffy syndrome," which, if I hear one more time, I will scream. NO one is fighting for that scenario.
The fact of the matter is that Gardner is the one who made the religion, made the rules, and got to set what they were. Now, does that mean that those rules still are valid 50-70 years later? Maybe, maybe not. But I'm not a follower of that Path, so it's not up to me to tell Wiccans that they need to change their rules to be more inclusionary. It would be WAY arrogant of me to do so If you are not a follower of the path, then why do YOU care so much?
3) The university example was made PRECISELY because of the people who have been able to read/learn and could get the degrees. When a person *WHO HAS NOT GONE THROUGH THE REQUISITE SCHOOL AND TAKEN THE REQUISITE COMPITANCY TESTS* has been found passing themselves off as a doctor (we'll say of medicine here), they are charged with criminal FRAUD and endangering lives and a whole slew of other crimes and get thrown into jail for a LONG time. (caps for emphasis only) We could make the case that the MD community is 'exclusionary' or 'elitist' or 'snobbish'. Is it that they are elitist or snobbish, or that they don't want people to get the wrong idea about them when some person who's had no training makes a major mistake and kills somebody?That is the most disingenuous argument I have heard yet. You said it best. Apples and oranges.

4) Why is it that people see "eclectic paganism" as somehow less than any other label? What's WRONG with "eclectic paganism"? Or "Pagan"? Or any other name one wants to call oneselve? Why does it have to be "Wicca" or nothing? I know a good many "Eclectic Pagans" who are great people and who declare themselves proudly. They have built a Path that works wonderfully for themselves, and they aren't ashamed to say, "Yanno, I looked into Wicca and Strega and Asaratu and Celtic Reconstructionism and none of those had exactly what I was looking for. But I took elements from each, and made something that my dieties and I are happy with."If that worked for you, great!

Does it matter what anybody else in the world thinks? Does it matter if some Gardnerian says the word "Eclectic" as if he's clearing out his throat? Heck, does it really matter to any of you what *I* think? After all, you don't know me IRL, I have no influence on you other than being a person behind a computer expressing her thoughts. If you don't like my thoughts, you don't have to let my words, my thoughts, and my views affect your worldview.As I mentioned in my earlier post, you have a lot of people coming to this forum who are looking for guidance and community, usually because of where they live.

It's that easy.That doesn't really fix it, does it.

[Phae Talon]

That doesn't really fix it, does it.

Can I ask what you would like seen done to 'fix' it?

--Phae

[DebLipp]

You are right. I am very angry. I'm on freaking fire. How many members does this website have now? Ten thousand?

A lot of these people coming here for answers, and wisdom. And one or two people on this board are going to tell them, "Tough. You don't live near a proper british coven, you're s.o.l., kid." What kind of message is that to be spreading with the reach this site has? That, to me, is a load of crap. Plain and simple.

Desdemona, you make a good point. Fire is a powerful thing, and you can certainly use it to good effect.

OTOH, there are what? Ten thousand people here? And they come here asking questions, and half the time the answer they get is "whatever."

What should I do?
Whatever you feel.

What's the best way to work magic?
Whatever you feel is best.

How do I most effectively perform ritual?
However you want.

Is that helpful? Is it supportive? Is it the best we can provide to ten thousand seekers? When eclecticism is a conscious choice it can be a beautiful thing. When it's a dumbing down, I have to ask why people are assumed to be so f**king dumb.

Eclectic Wicca is certainly Wicca. Traditional Wicca is also certainly Wicca. What Traditionalism can contribute to even the most eclectic of Eclectics is the understanding that study is A Good Thing.™ Yes, choices about how ritual and magic are done are up to the individual, but they should be informed choices. Structure, such as in Traditionalism, provides information, it gives us a means by which we develop knowledge and (hopefully) wisdom. Structure is not the only possible means of learning this, but most people find it supportive.

It has been 30 years since the community as a whole has said you're SOL if you don't have a local traditionalist coven. It has been a long time since all but the most conservative Gardnerians or Alexandrians have believed that. Most Traditionalists go to festivals and/or otherwise participate in the community. Most of us are happy to learn from Eclectics, and exchange information freely (except oathbound information, obviously). Most of us celebrate the wisdom that many Eclectics bring to their work. On the other hand, lots of so-called Eclectics not only know nothing, but CELEBRATE their lack of knowledge (I say so-called because I don't see how you can be "eclectic"—which means to choose from many sources—if you don't understand your sources). They not only make it up as they go along, they don't care that finding out more might contribute to the quality of their rites, and they don't believe that improving their rites matters.

Wow! Wicca has scourging? Must be BDSM!

Isn't a statement like that sourced in assuming that the very minute you hear something for the first time, you are qualified to judge it?

Traditionalism asks people to slow down, to get the lay of the land, to learn about a thing before rejecting it. Lots of Eclectics work that way too, and find it empowers them.

[samiaminsane]

I just sat here reading this whole thread... which has now confused me even further. I have never quite known what to call myself. When I was younger, I was Wiccan. I was in the middle of joining a coven when that red blinking light in my mind went off. (you know, as in what are you doing? this doesn't fit you right why are you still here?) Traditional Wicca is not my thing, but I'm not saying it's wrong. That religion works perfectly for other individuals, it just didn't fit me right. I've never been good at following directions in their correct order, maybe that's the best explanation. I could go on forever about other reasons why, but I won't bore all of you with that nonsense. So now I call myself a variety of things, depending on who I'm talking to, because I've never quite figured out what to label myself. And why should I have to? I'm rambling aren't I? It just seems that people have different opinions on what each religion is, and I'm stuck somewhere in-between all of them. I haven't found the perfect pantheon to follow, nor have I stumbled across the right path. To most people, I do define myself as Wiccan. It's easier to say one word than to give an entire speech on my specific beliefs, especially to those who follow mainstream religions and wouldn't know what I was talking about anyways. (That's not in reference to anyone here at MW, but to my family, people I work with, friends, etc.) I guess you can call me an Eclectic Wiccan or is it Ecclectic? I see it spelled both ways everywhere, but I like Eclectic better, even if it is spelled wrong.

[Desdemona]

Desdemona, you make a good point. Fire is a powerful thing, and you can certainly use it to good effect.

OTOH, there are what? Ten thousand people here? And they come here asking questions, and half the time the answer they get is "whatever."

What should I do?
Whatever you feel.

What's the best way to work magic?
Whatever you feel is best.

How do I most effectively perform ritual?
However you want.

Is that helpful? Is it supportive? Is it the best we can provide to ten thousand seekers? When eclecticism is a conscious choice it can be a beautiful thing. When it's a dumbing down, I have to ask why people are assumed to be so f**king dumb.

Eclectic Wicca is certainly Wicca. Traditional Wicca is also certainly Wicca. What Traditionalism can contribute to even the most eclectic of Eclectics is the understanding that study is A Good Thing.™ Yes, choices about how ritual and magic are done are up to the individual, but they should be informed choices. Structure, such as in Traditionalism, provides information, it gives us a means by which we develop knowledge and (hopefully) wisdom. Structure is not the only possible means of learning this, but most people find it supportive.

It has been 30 years since the community as a whole has said you're SOL if you don't have a local traditionalist coven. It has been a long time since all but the most conservative Gardnerians or Alexandrians have believed that. Most Traditionalists go to festivals and/or otherwise participate in the community. Most of us are happy to learn from Eclectics, and exchange information freely (except oathbound information, obviously). Most of us celebrate the wisdom that many Eclectics bring to their work. On the other hand, lots of so-called Eclectics not only know nothing, but CELEBRATE their lack of knowledge (I say so-called because I don't see how you can be "eclectic"—which means to choose from many sources—if you don't understand your sources). They not only make it up as they go along, they don't care that finding out more might contribute to the quality of their rites, and they don't believe that improving their rites matters.

Wow! Wicca has scourging? Must be BDSM!

Isn't a statement like that sourced in assuming that the very minute you hear something for the first time, you are qualified to judge it?

Traditionalism asks people to slow down, to get the lay of the land, to learn about a thing before rejecting it. Lots of Eclectics work that way too, and find it empowers them.
Phae Talon, this fixes it. This is why I respect this Lady so much. I agree with everything she says in her post. It is, and has been what I have been taught. I agree that we can't tell people "whatever," and that gets said on this forum a lot, and I'm sure that is what started this thread in the first place. She has made sense out of this so eloquently for both sides, it would be superfluous to comment further, so I will happily bow out.

[DebLipp]

If you have studied your history, then you would know that Gardner's own coven couldn't stand his rules. They broke up and went their separate ways. So there was no one to hand rules down to. I guess the whole thing shouldn't have survived at all, we wouldn't be having this problem.

Not quite. In fact, Gardner's original coven is still intact and circling on a regular basis. The book Persuasions of the Witch's Craft, which is in anthropological study of Wicca, was based mostly on experience within that coven.

What actually happened was, in 1957, following a dispute between Doreen and Gerald, Doreen took about half the coven with her and started her own thing. That doesn't mean the original coven disbanded, it just got smaller. Gardner continued to thrive and had several covens going, performing initiations almost until the day he died.

BTW, the whole argument about university degrees vs. DIY doesn't really apply to Wicca per se, but to sub-sets. Not "am I Wiccan" but "am I a High Priest" or whatever. The argument really comes down to people who refer to themselves by titles, or who use the magic phrase "just as good as."

"My self-initiation is just as good as a Gardnerian initiation."

I've heard that sort of thing a lot, and the only answer to it is, what does "just as good as" mean? Does it mean, "as spiritually fulfilling?" If so, that can certainly be true. Traditional Wicca has never, and will never, claimed exclusive access to spiritual fulfillment. Does it mean "just as empowering"? Again, very likely. Does it mean, "I now know as much as a Gardnerian" (and often people imply or state outright that this is EXACTLY what it means)? If so, my only polite answer is "horsefeathers." A self-initiation is NOT a replacement for years of study and training.

The self-taught healer may indeed be better able to cure you than the doctor with the degree from Harvard. But the patient going for treatment has a right to know which is which.

[Ben Trismegistus]

Is that helpful? Is it supportive? Is it the best we can provide to ten thousand seekers? When eclecticism is a conscious choice it can be a beautiful thing. When it's a dumbing down, I have to ask why people are assumed to be so f**king dumb.

Eclectic Wicca is certainly Wicca. Traditional Wicca is also certainly Wicca. What Traditionalism can contribute to even the most eclectic of Eclectics is the understanding that study is A Good Thing.™ Yes, choices about how ritual and magic are done are up to the individual, but they should be informed choices. Structure, such as in Traditionalism, provides information, it gives us a means by which we develop knowledge and (hopefully) wisdom. Structure is not the only possible means of learning this, but most people find it supportive.
Brilliant, Deb. You really should write a book or something. ;)

It has been 30 years since the community as a whole has said you're SOL if you don't have a local traditionalist coven. It has been a long time since all but the most conservative Gardnerians or Alexandrians have believed that. Most Traditionalists go to festivals and/or otherwise participate in the community. Most of us are happy to learn from Eclectics, and exchange information freely (except oathbound information, obviously). Most of us celebrate the wisdom that many Eclectics bring to their work. On the other hand, lots of so-called Eclectics not only know nothing, but CELEBRATE their lack of knowledge (I say so-called because I don't see how you can be "eclectic"—which means to choose from many sources—if you don't understand your sources). They not only make it up as they go along, they don't care that finding out more might contribute to the quality of their rites, and they don't believe that improving their rites matters.
I want to add onto this a bit, since several people have responded positively to my previous post, and then gone on in the same breath to continue to rail against how Gardnerians are stuffy elitists.

Let me make this as clear as possible:

Any Traditionalist who tells you that you need to be initiated into a Traditional Coven to be a "Real" Wiccan is a jerk who is simply not worth wasting your emotional energy on.

Clear? Think of it this way -- there is a small but vocal minority of the Christian religion who believes that you need to be "born again" to achieve the Kingdom of Heaven. By their reasoning, anyone who is not born again is not a "real" Christian. But the vast majority of Christians think that those people are nuts. So why should it be any different for our community?

Here's another bold-faced pronouncement:

There are two large dangers threatening our community: Closed-mindedness and Ignorance.

Closed-mindedness: I'm not just talking about traditionalists who insists that it's their way or the highway. I'm talking about any pagan who is unwilling to learn from any other pagan. Anyone in our community who is not willing to at least hear out another person's viewpoint, regardless of what that viewpoint is. By setting themselves up in an us-against-them dichotomy, they become insular and bitter. No religion can grow without constant exposure to outside sources and challenges.

Ignorance: Call it fluffy bunny syndrome if you like, or just call it ignorance. Either way, this is about people acting as if they know what they're talking about, when in reality, they don't have a f***ing clue. Take a look at Deb Lipp's recommended reading list (http://www.mysticwicks.com/showthread.php?t=38189) in her forum in the Author's Circle. It's ok if you haven't read everything on this list - I certainly haven't - but you can't be an authority on Wicca and Witchcraft if you haven't read most of them. It's not enough to read a couple websites and pronounce yourself a High Priestess -- and yet, many people do. As dangerous as closed-mindedness can be to our community, the mass-market dumbing-down of our religion is getting to be a very serious problem. When people are still throwing around the phrase "Nine million Wiccans died during the Burning Times", it's a sign that there are a lot of pagans out there who simply don't know the basics of their own religion.

So, coming back to the original question (again), that's where I draw the line. If you're not ignorant, and you're not closed-minded, you're ok in my book.

[Lunacie]

3) The university example was made PRECISELY because of the people who have been able to read/learn and could get the degrees. When a person *WHO HAS NOT GONE THROUGH THE REQUISITE SCHOOL AND TAKEN THE REQUISITE COMPITANCY TESTS* has been found passing themselves off as a doctor (we'll say of medicine here), they are charged with criminal FRAUD and endangering lives and a whole slew of other crimes and get thrown into jail for a LONG time. (caps for emphasis only) We could make the case that the MD community is 'exclusionary' or 'elitist' or 'snobbish'. Is it that they are elitist or snobbish, or that they don't want people to get the wrong idea about them when some person who's had no training makes a major mistake and kills somebody?

Branwyn
Branwyn dear, I know you said you were exiting this thread, but I wonder if you would mind going back and rereading my other response to this comparison of a doctorate degree and following a religious path. I said I could see your point, but then I explained how I thought it was completely irrelevant. In essence I said I see a vast difference between someone passing themselves off as having gone through years of training to gain a doctorate degree (or having gone through years of training to become a Wiccan High Priest/ess) -- and simply dedicating themselves to a religious path and calling themselves a Wiccan. Someone without the proper training who calls themselves High Priestess can certainly do a lot of damage to a person emotionally and spiritually, but calling oneself a Wiccan does not mean they are claiming all that training and experience.

The difference is between being a medical student or follower of Wicca and being a medical doctor or a Wiccan High Priest/ess. Comparing a person following the Wiccan path with someone who falsely claims to be doctor is comparing apples to birdhouses. Just because they both hang in trees doesn't make them similar in any other way.

[Bec_W]

1) A question I asked earlier never was answered by anybody, but it's relavent (yes, I know that nobody has to answer a question just because I ask it, but I think it's interesting that nobody wanted to take it on). There are books out there about Siberean Shamanism. And Strega Witchraft. And the OTO. Books that tell some parts of that Paths teachings and rituals. From what books are out there, one could cobble together a very nice Path that works for them, and call it "Strega" or "Siberean Shamanism" or "OTO" and yet they don't. Why not? Why is it only Wicca that everybody is trying to claim as their religion?


Keep in mind this is only my opinion and is not meant to offend anyone.

It's at the core of human nature to want to belong, even people who don't belong to the mainstream want to belong to something. I think Wicca provides that home to a lot of people, it's easy to find information on and there are a lot of practitioners, therefore there's a community of sorts. I don't think there's that sense of community for solitaries within other pagan religions. So maybe the sense of community, the ease of access (to information) makes wicca more susepable (sp?) to change.

[Kadynas]

A self-initiation is NOT a replacement for years of study and training.

I agree with everything else you've said, but I would add to this particular part that just because someone is "self-initiated" doesn't mean that they /haven't/ put in years of study and training themselves... :)

[DebLipp]

I agree with everything else you've said, but I would add to this particular part that just because someone is "self-initiated" doesn't mean that they /haven't/ put in years of study and training themselves... :)

You're absolutely right. I should have cast that sentence in a way to include that possibility. But I did say the thing about the self-taught healer maybe being better qualified than the doctor. ;)

[Crystal_Raye]

I don't think there will ever be a line. People believe in what suits them. I guess it tends to turn into a whole other perspective of things. I don't think there is anything wrong with extending your beliefs of wicca as long as no one goes crazy like scrafices babies or some dumb sh!t thing like that.
Maybe some day there will be a line drawn? Until then I have no idea :hrmm:

My thoughts exactly.

[Karmendi]

I know if I open my big yap I'll get in trouble but I will say this, there are some ecletic wiccans who work just as hard as trad. Some do not have access to a coven and can't get intiation so we do it our selves, in my eyes there is nothing wrong with that.

[Lunacie]

I know if I open my big yap I'll get in trouble but I will say this, there are some ecletic wiccans who work just as hard as trad. Some do not have access to a coven and can't get intiation so we do it our selves, in my eyes there is nothing wrong with that.
I agree that there are some (probably many) Eclectic Wiccans who work just as hard as those who join a Trad and are taught and initiated. They are not the same, of course, but I do not think one is any more or less Wiccan than the other.

[frigga]

I know if I open my big yap I'll get in trouble but I will say this, there are some ecletic wiccans who work just as hard as trad. Some do not have access to a coven and can't get intiation so we do it our selves, in my eyes there is nothing wrong with that.
Couldn't agree more! I myself am isolated as far as our religion goes, slim pickins even if i was interested in a trad. And as far as Eclectic goes, I just think perhaps some are equally drawn to numerous trads or ethnicities, nothing wrong with that! But one does leave Wicca territory and enter Paganism when Core values, such as the Rede, and diety views are lost to the individual.

[Karmendi]

Couldn't agree more! I myself am isolated as far as our religion goes, slim pickins even if i was interested in a trad. And as far as Eclectic goes, I just think perhaps some are equally drawn to numerous trads or ethnicities, nothing wrong with that! But one does leave Wicca territory and enter Paganism when Core values, such as the Rede, and diety views are lost to the individual.

I agree Frigga. There is that line but in my eyes being in a trad isn't it. After you move away from core believes would be again in my eyes the line.

[savannahrose44]

Speaking as a non wiccan....Everything in this world grows and changes with time. Why should Wicca be excluded. Who says that in order for wicca to be wicca it has to be unchanging? It is in the nature of humans and all living things to grow and as many peole see Wicca as a living religon, why not let it grow too? Just my two cents. :)

[frigga]

Speaking as a non wiccan....Everything in this world grows and changes with time. Why should Wicca be excluded. Who says that in order for wicca to be wicca it has to be unchanging? It is in the nature of humans and all living things to grow and as many peole see Wicca as a living religon, why not let it grow too? Just my two cents. :)
Oh my yes! Things are always things changing and religion is one of those things. However, the things that define a religion should not. For instance, we'll take Christianity, that has changed through out the years but the core beliefs such as Love your neighbor, thou shalt not kill, Mine is the one true god....Etc. have not changed. Things grow with time, but like the blowing of the wind, the heart remains unchanged.

[Lunacie]

Oh my yes! Things are always things changing and religion is one of those things. However, the things that define a religion should not. For instance, we'll take Christianity, that has changed through out the years but the core beliefs such as Love your neighbor, thou shalt not kill, Mine is the one true god....Etc. have not changed. Things grow with time, but like the blowing of the wind, the heart remains unchanged.
Uh huh, pretty much what I was thinking.

[savannahrose44]

Oh my yes! Things are always things changing and religion is one of those things. However, the things that define a religion should not. For instance, we'll take Christianity, that has changed through out the years but the core beliefs such as Love your neighbor, thou shalt not kill, Mine is the one true god....Etc. have not changed. Things grow with time, but like the blowing of the wind, the heart remains unchanged.

I see what you're saying, and I agree to a point. Depending on what sect of christianity you are looking at things have changed. For example the Mormons used to not allow blacks in their church. They believed that they were the seed of Cain and a cursed people who came from the root of evil. That has since changed. They welcome them. Also there are many things that have changed in other christian churches. Sacrament. The bread and wine...wine is no longer used in many churches although the bible that they base their religous beliefs on states wine is to be used. There are other things, but that is beside the point. Yes the fundemental structure has not changed that much...but it has changed. Is change a bad thing? Not always. If there is something in a religon that doesn't sit well with an individual...goes against their core convictions...even though they agree with everything else...can they really be expected to practice it as it is? I don't think so it is this kind of attitude that turns me off to religous structure. Choosing not to participate or include certian aspects of Wicca, or adapting them to something you can live with doesn't change the core belief structure of Wicca.

[Ben Trismegistus]

I see what you're saying, and I agree to a point. Depending on what sect of christianity you are looking at things have changed. For example the Mormons used to not allow blacks in their church. They believed that they were the seed of Cain and a cursed people who came from the root of evil. That has since changed. They welcome them.Yes, but excluding blacks was hardly a defining point of the Mormon Church. So if there was a line to draw, that wasn't part of it. But you couldn't, for instance, declare yourself a polytheist and still call yourself Mormon.

Yes the fundemental structure has not changed that much...but it has changed.The fundamental structure? No, not really. The basis of the religion is still the same - it's the trappings that have changed.

I don't think so it is this kind of attitude that turns me off to religous structure. Choosing not to participate or include certian aspects of Wicca, or adapting them to something you can live with doesn't change the core belief structure of Wicca.Um, that's exactly what we've been saying. It's the CORE BELIEF STRUCTURE of Wicca that can't change and still be Wicca. Do what you like with the rest. If you want to call Water in the East and Air in the West, be my guest. If you want to cast circle with a toothbrush instead of an athame (provided you've got a good reason), more power to you. But there IS a line. And if you want to cross the line, fine - just don't call it Wicca.

That way, no one's choice is restricted at all.

[savannahrose44]

Yes, but excluding blacks was hardly a defining point of the Mormon Church. So if there was a line to draw, that wasn't part of it. But you couldn't, for instance, declare yourself a polytheist and still call yourself Mormon.

Actually it was a core peice to their religion. They believed that only the whites were chosen children of god and they were the only ones who were allowed to enter the kingdom of heaven as blacks could not worship in their temple. You see in order to make it to the mormon heaven you have to be married in their temple.

[Ben Trismegistus]

Actually it was a core peice to their religion. They believed that only the whites were chosen children of god and they were the only ones who were allowed to enter the kingdom of heaven as blacks could not worship in their temple. You see in order to make it to the mormon heaven you have to be married in their temple.
I still wouldn't call that a core belief. It's just racism. Nothing fundamentally changed in their religion when they started to allow blacks in.

[savannahrose44]

I still wouldn't call that a core belief. It's just racism. Nothing fundamentally changed in their religion when they started to allow blacks in.

If that's the way you see it so be it....I disagree as an ex-mormon.

[Ben Trismegistus]

If that's the way you see it so be it....I disagree as an ex-mormon.
OK, allow me to take another tack.

When the Mormons made this change, they did so as a unit. It was decided on a high level and passed down through all the congregations (or so I imagine).

That's very different from individuals changing the core beliefs of Wicca to suit themselves. If you had wanted to marry a black man as a Mormon, before they changed those rules, you would've been kicked out, right? You could've remained as some sort of Christian, but not as a Mormon.

[Empress Stillnight]

This is essentially a debate of orthodox (traditional, initiated Wicca) versus liberal (self-initiated, ecclectic Wicca) faith.

orthodox-Conforming to established doctrine,especially in religion.

liberal-one who is openminded or not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional, or established forms or ways.

I guess it would depend on which position you feel comfortable with, what your opinion will be about the definition of Wicca. I am not Wiccan in any sense, so I will not enter the debate. I HAVE exited a high control, authoritarian religion, though, and the only thing I caution is for orthodox thinkers and liberal thinkers alike to guard against that.

authoritarian- of , relating to, or favoirng blind submission to authority 2. of, relating to, or favoring a concentration of power in a leader or an elite not constitutionally responsible to the people.

[savannahrose44]

OK, allow me to take another tack.

When the Mormons made this change, they did so as a unit. It was decided on a high level and passed down through all the congregations (or so I imagine).

That's very different from individuals changing the core beliefs of Wicca to suit themselves. If you had wanted to marry a black man as a Mormon, before they changed those rules, you would've been kicked out, right? You could've remained as some sort of Christian, but not as a Mormon.

No I could have married him, but he would never be allowed to join.

[savannahrose44]

This is essentially a debate of orthodox (traditional, initiated Wicca) versus liberal (self-initiated, ecclectic Wicca) faith.

orthodox-Conforming to established doctrine,especially in religion.

liberal-one who is openminded or not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional, or established forms or ways.

I guess it would depend on which position you feel comfortable with, what your opinion will be about the definition of Wicca. I am not Wiccan in any sense, so I will not enter the debate. I HAVE exited a high control, authoritarian religion, though, and the only thing I caution is for orthodox thinkers and liberal thinkers alike to guard against that.

authoritarian- of , relating to, or favoirng blind submission to authority 2. of, relating to, or favoring a concentration of power in a leader or an elite not constitutionally responsible to the people.

I agree with you which is why I do not subscribe to said authoritarian beliefs. :kooky:

[Ben Trismegistus]

This is essentially a debate of orthodox (traditional, initiated Wicca) versus liberal (self-initiated, ecclectic Wicca) faith.
No that's not what this debate is about at all. We're discussing what does and does not qualify as Wicca, and how far one's beliefs can get from the core beliefs of Wicca before those beliefs can no longer be considered Wiccan. I think we've all established that there's no difference in legitimacy between Traditional, coven-centric Wicca and solitary eclectic Wicca.

authoritarian- of , relating to, or favoirng blind submission to authority 2. of, relating to, or favoring a concentration of power in a leader or an elite not constitutionally responsible to the people.
Thankfully, I don't believe there's any definition of Wicca which includes authoritarian.

[Semele]

It is in the nature of humans and all living things to grow and as many peole see Wicca as a living religon, why not let it grow too? Just my two cents. :)
But at some point it becomes something altogether different and has little or no resemblance to the original religion. The same thing has happened many times before...so they branch off and rename it so as to leave the original unscathed. It is not a bad thing to want your religion to be firm and unwavering. It is the rock some rely on when everything else is uncertain.

[savannahrose44]

But at some point it becomes something altogether different and has little or no resemblance to the original religion. The same thing has happened many times before...so they branch off and rename it so as to leave the original unscathed. It is not a bad thing to want your religion to be firm and unwavering. It is the rock some rely on when everything else is uncertain.

Is that not the purpose of calling oneself an eclectic wiccan?

[Ben Trismegistus]

Is that not the purpose of calling oneself an eclectic wiccan?
No, an Eclectic Wiccan is one who borrows elements from a number of different Wiccan traditions, as well as other outside Pagan beliefs like Eastern philosophies or African pantheons. But the result is still Wiccan. The core beliefs haven't changed, but some of the beliefs and practices have been altered and/or added to.

If, however, one was to call oneself an Eclectic Pagan, that's an entirely different story. Since Paganism is a nearly indefinable term, basically any set of non-Judeo-Christian-Muslim beliefs can conceivably fall under that header.

[savannahrose44]

No, an Eclectic Wiccan is one who borrows elements from a number of different Wiccan traditions, as well as other outside Pagan beliefs like Eastern philosophies or African pantheons. But the result is still Wiccan. The core beliefs haven't changed, but some of the beliefs and practices have been altered and/or added to.

If, however, one was to call oneself an Eclectic Pagan, that's an entirely different story. Since Paganism is a nearly indefinable term, basically any set of non-Judeo-Christian-Muslim beliefs can conceivably fall under that header.

*shruggs* I guess if they are that picky about it....

[Ben Trismegistus]

*shruggs* I guess if they are that picky about it....
That's picky? Yeah, I guess we're picky about it. I want for my religion to actually mean something, not simply be a word that can mean whatever the hell you want it to mean. But then, that's me.

[Semele]

That's picky? Yeah, I guess we're picky about it. I want for my religion to actually mean something, not simply be a word that can mean whatever the hell you want it to mean. But then, that's me.
But Ben, my awesome friend, her definition of the word can never change what it means to you. If I call a comb a dog, you will still know it is a comb...why not let me call it a dog and take it for a walk? ;)

[Ben Trismegistus]

But Ben, my awesome friend, her definition of the word can never change what it means to you. If I call a comb a dog, you wil