Your opinion of Universal Eclectic Wicca

[seapearls]

Do you think this could be the tradition for eclectic wiccans? Are there any who claim this tradition that can speak for it?

http://www.witchvox.com/trads/trad_uew.html

[CaitrionaMorgaine]

My significant other started studying UEW before the founder started doing one on one classes. He said that from what he got through it's a very interesting concept and is hoping to continue study one day when he has the time.

Avalon's Blessings, ~Rhiannon

[Ben Gruagach]

I've read two of their books, "All One Wicca" and "333." They are definitely a tradition that is openly eclectic and yet solidly Wiccan. They also encourage a healthy skepticism.

I'm sure it would be a good sect for those who are drawn to it. Personally, I'm not inclined to join them even though I am firmly eclectic and also firmly Wiccan.

One of my problems with them is the name of the tradition (and I know, that's sort of silly, but hear me out.) They call it "Universal Eclectic Wicca" which to me implies they want it to be a single one-size-fits-all Wicca. That just sounds too close to one-true-way-religion thinking for me to be comfortable with it.

Now my exposure to this sect has been through those two books and the things I've read (messageboard postings, etc.) by the author, Kaatryn MacMorgan. Perhaps it's because everything I've seen about the sect was written by this one person, but it comes across very much as that one person's spiritual path (with her preferences, biases, failings, etc.) rather than what I would consider a more mature sect which is clearly made up of a good selection of writings by different authors within that sect. Things that you can learn about Gardnerian Wicca, for instance, have the benefit of multiple authors you can read (Gerald Gardner, Doreen Valiente, Janet & Stewart Farrar, Patricia Crowther, Deb Lipp, etc.) and get a more inclusive and more accurate picture of the tradition than you could get from just one author. Perhaps there is more stuff out there on UEW that is written by people other than Kaatryn MacMorgan, but I haven't seen it.

I'm afraid I've been a bit turned off by the tradition too because of the things I've read Kaatryn post on messageboards on the internet. To be blunt, she seems to have quite an ego and feels quite free to publicly put down those she feels are worthy of her ire. Some of the things she berated others for struck me as rather odd too because she herself was guilty of those things (according to what I've read in her own books.)

The book "333" is supposed to be a more advanced book used within the tradition to teach initiates from what the book says in its introduction. I really hope that the people using it to lead study groups are exercising their skeptical and critical faculties to question all the statements made because there seemed to me to be quite a few worth questioning. I also found that book in particular to be challenging to read because it needed an editor. Some of the essays seemed to be more about trying to impress the reader with how superior the author was when if you knew much about the topic at hand you'd realize she only had a very basic grasp of the concepts herself and maybe wasn't all that solid about what she was trying to sell the reader. So I guess I'd say the book could be good to get intermediate to advanced Wiccan students talking, but that a lot of that discussion should be about challenging the statements the author made. Taking anything in "333" at face value as true would make me feel rather uneasy.

The previous book, "All One Wicca," at least has the benefit of being reviewed by more people and therefore is a bit more polished than "333." I don't have quite as many reservations about it as I do about "333."

Perhaps the UEW tradition has grown past the personality of Kaatryn MacMorgan -- I really hope it does as any tradition or sect must grow to be more than just a cult of personality if it is going to survive. As a Wiccan sect it has promise. If I were in the tradition myself, I'd be lobbying the organization for a name change to excise that one-true-way implication. I'd also encourage the organization to focus on producing more than just one representative for the sect in public. Kaatryn has done some good work in getting the sect started but she needs to learn that the sect is greater than she is. She needs to share the podium with other elders in her tradition. Hopefully that will help her to learn the lesson of humility (one of the harder lessons in the Charge of the Goddess) which seems to be a bit of a problem for her at least in her interactions on the internet.

[seapearls]

Wow Ben what a response. I understand what you are saying about their name and only seeing the one author. Since you seem to know a lot about them maybe you should contact them and tell them what you think although you wouldn't join them, you could atleast inform them of what people are thinking about the name and her. Maybe that will make them think a little. Thanks for your input.

[Ben Gruagach]

Wow Ben what a response. I understand what you are saying about their name and only seeing the one author. Since you seem to know a lot about them maybe you should contact them and tell them what you think although you wouldn't join them, you could atleast inform them of what people are thinking about the name and her. Maybe that will make them think a little. Thanks for your input.

I understand what you're saying but to be honest I'm not sure it's worth my effort. There are lots of different Wiccan sects out there and UEW is just one of them. I would be more inclined to make those efforts to improve a particular sect if I were actually involved with them as an initiate.

The way that Kaatryn "debates" on the internet makes me seriously doubt she'd be open to any sort of external constructive criticism anyways. It is likely I'd just be talking to a brick wall.

I do think the sect has a lot of promise though. It's good to see sects embracing the idea of eclecticism and skepticism. They just need to keep strengthening their good points and work to correct their weaknesses, like any overreliance on a single public spokesperson.

[WhiteRavenBran]

Yes, Kaatryn appears to be the guard dog on a message board that I was on before I started snooping around on MW - she was always quick to correct anyone (or criticize them) and she wasn't very nice about it either. But I'm sure she's really quite a lovely person irl.

As far as the tradition goes, I agree with Ben about it being good that there is a tradition that embraces the eclectic side of things (even though the phrase eclectic tradition almost seems like an oxymoron, but that's neither here nor there).

[Nemesis Descending]

Do you think this could be the tradition for eclectic wiccans? Are there any who claim this tradition that can speak for it?

http://www.witchvox.com/trads/trad_uew.html

No offense intended towards anyone, but personally I think that the idea of THE TRADITION for eclectics is a bit of an oxymoron.

That aside, I read the book associated with the system, and I've read some of the remarks from its author. I agree with the comment made already that she seems a bit full of herself (and having read her book, I see no grounds for it).

But, I will also admit that I'm not fond of this type of material in general. To me it's the "Pull it out of your *** Wicca" variety, and I've never been able to respect that very much. Yeah, I know, it's my problem. :imout:

In Her service,
Nemesis Descending

[Rain Gnosis]

If I remember correctly, Kaatryn was a member on this board but left in a huff after almost getting banned.

Personally I've seen her post on several boards to similar effect, and that's enough to make me avoid any of her writings.

[Aidron]

Never heard of it, but it sounds like an oxymoron. "Universal" and "eclectic" simply do not belong together, and while I prefer to remain eclectic I also find it a bit unusual that someone would attempt to create an eclectic tradition.

Seeing as how this does not interest me in the least and given how I am, I will probably never hear another word of this or the author for as long I as live.

[Ron]

Yes, Kaatryn appears to be the guard dog on a message board that I was on before I started snooping around on MW - she was always quick to correct anyone (or criticize them) and she wasn't very nice about it either. But I'm sure she's really quite a lovely person irl.
Chère Sister,

It is my opinion that many persons who are uninformed about certain spiritual matters can anger those who think themselves more informed. Most often, the persons angered act only in good faith and mean no trouble. I say this, only because I sympathize with how Kaatryn may have felt.

Peace and Love.

[Elderbush]

I'm one and I don't think it is a tradition for everyone who is eclectic. One thing that will dissuade many people is that there is a high degree of scholarship and dedication required in order to complete the lessons. A wide range of books and other materials are assigned and these must be considered and discussed. There are numerous essays that have to be done. Many people may not want to do the work involved. I'm very confindent that I am getting a very sound education about Wicca so this is something I like.

Kat is a strong willed individual whom I respect. Sometimes she is blunt. I don't have a problem with that. UEW suits me but like I said it isn't for everyone.

[MorningDove030202]

I agree about the name.... I don't thing any tradition eclectic or not should be "universal". If you can do the online class without joining then you might want to check it out as an educational option.... There are other eclectic traditions, and it's not an oxymoron because even eclectic wiccans deserve to have an organization with clergy and training to belong to if they so choose, and eclectic makes sence because it's hard to find two Wiccans who belive the same way. I mean if I was waiting around to start a group of all people who had Athena as their patron (for example) I would be all by myself for a very long time.

BTW, Correllian Wicca is eclectic too.

Dove

[Alkhemia]

Ugh I will probably regret posting about this, but.....

I was a member of UEW (actually, CFFN) for a little bit and I must say that I was thoroughly unimpressed with the membership, the curriculum and the general structure of the group. I want to make it clear that I left on good terms and I know that CFFN has re-structured to address why CFFN simply was not working for many folks.

I've read Kaatryn's books and seen her on Beliefnet. I honestly do not think very highly of her books, but I believe she is sincere about the Craft. Kaatryn can be off-putting due to her confrontational style and brusque manner - she tends not to suffer fools gladly. However, I think that behind her bravado lies a lot of misinformation masquerading as "scholarship." As an example, her webpage about ancient Greek rituals is laughably bad and quite hypocritical considering how she takes others to task for their lack of scholarship. I have found a lot of misinformation emanating from her posts on Beliefnet and I remain skeptical about her knowledge regarding Witchcraft traditions other than her own. Frankly, I feel that she overestimates her own knowledge of, and importance in, the contemporary witchcraft movement.

UEW and/or CFFN isn't bad, but I just didn't find it particularly useful or illuminating.


Alkhemia

[Elderbush]

To each his own. :)

[Rain Gnosis]

It is my opinion that many persons who are uninformed about certain spiritual matters can anger those who think themselves more informed. Most often, the persons angered act only in good faith and mean no trouble. I say this, only because I sympathize with how Kaatryn may have felt..

I must respectfully disagree. Certainly there is no fault in being angry, but I do feel if one makes the commitment to teach others and lead a community, this carries a special responsibility. Helping does not include belittling people and ripping their forum posts and beliefs to shreds, or hurling personal insults. There is a way to help "inform" people (and I'm not sure I like the term informed - so much of spirituality is personal that I find it hard to imagine anyone can inform others on what to believe and how to practice), and it isn't by having no concern for their feelings and putting argument and ego before sharing and learning.

If one can't teach others without ripping their students' words to shreds as a matter of course, I don't believe they should be teaching.

[Elderbush]

Gracious, that has never happened to me! I would most definately find myself a more compatible teacher if it ever did - unless of course my paper deserved it. I'm afraid I have written a few very bad papers in my life that deserved to be shredded.

I don't think anyone can be all things to all people. Some people have very fragile egos that cannot tolerate criticism. Those would do well to find themselves a teacher that can give them very gentle handling. Others are made of sterner stuff. We find the teacher we need or such has been my personal experience.

[Bix]

Does anybody have anything more to input about this group? It's intrigued me.

[Greyharp]

Like Elderbush, I'm a member of UEW and have been for about 18 months now. I have to admit that I have had nothing to do with Kaatryn myself and that I've noticed she really does take a back seat in the organisation, so much so that she is largely invisible. I can't comment on what has happend prior to my involvement, but the organisation is not large and is probably only now growing past the point where one person needs must hold the reins.

I think the recurring objection to the name is largely because of a misunderstanding of the intention behind the use of the term "Universal". To quote the UEW website:

Universalism is a religious belief that allows for the existance of truth in a multitude of places.

Whether you consider the term inappropriate, unfortunate or plain misleading, it is not used to suggest one brand of Wicca for all, and is in fact suggesting something quite the opposite of Ben's "single one-size-fits-all Wicca".

No offense intended towards anyone, but personally I think that the idea of THE TRADITION for eclectics is a bit of an oxymoron.

On the face of it, I would agree, however I think you'd be hard put to find a Wiccan tradition that isn't eclectic in it's beliefs and practices, especially if you take a modernist stance when it comes to the origins of Wicca (as opposed to an ancient religionist stance). And if that's the case, Gardner's Wica is eclectic (but that's another story :) )

Again, to quote the UEW website:

Eclectism is the practice of taking from many places. In UEW, we have a habit of saying "Whatever Works!" What we encourage is experimentation and exploration towards those things in your religious life that work and letting go of those things that don't.

While UEW acknowledges its eclectic nature, it also believes that to be defined as "Wiccan", a religion must have a set of common characteristics, the belief in a

god/force/power/whatever that is either genderless, both genders or manifests as a male/female polarity that we agree to call "the Lord and Lady

the upholding of the Wiccan Rede, a form of the Law of Return, seeking attunement with Divinity, etc. The usual stuff. :)

I have been very happy with my involvement with UEW, the people I have come into contact with and my experiences with their teaching arm, the CFFN. I have found the study course more challenging than any other I have come across and have enjoyed pumping out 2000 word essays and analytical book reports of titles such as Gardner's Witchcraft Today, Murray's The Witch-Cult in Western Europe and Frazer's The Golden Bough, amongst others. It's not everybody's cup of tea, but then it's not meant to be.

[shuvanilu]

One thing that really bothered me about Wicca 333, is how adamantly she writes against soft-polytheism. Now, she has every right to have a hard-poly view, of course. What bothers me is that she claims to have a trad that is universal and eclectic, yet she puts people down if they don't believe as she does. I thought the whole idea of universalism and eclecticism allowed for many viewpoints being valid.---shuvanilu

[Elderbush]

I think that one has to separate out Kaat's personal opinions and beliefs, which as you point out, she has every right to have (as do we all) and the UEW tradition itself. She does have very strong views about polytheism. There are also members of UEW however that are soft polytheists. The difference is that they haven't written books.

[RainInanna]

My opinion hasn't changed in nearly 2 years. Hypocrisy is not a valued trait in a group leader. To me it doesn't make any sense to say "the tradition is good as long as you disregard the beliefs of it's creator". If the tradition isn't based on her beliefs, then what is it based on? If universalism is the idea that truth is found in many places, how can you rip people apart publicly and viciously for having different beliefs? IMHO an elder/leader holds themselves to higher standards. And I'm sure no one on this forum, either when I posted above 2 years ago or now, would consider me "fragile".

[Elderbush]

I expect that you didn't know that UEW began 37 years ago, so Kaat is hardly the creator. I am sorry that you do not hold Kaat in high regard and if you wish, you can continue to feel the same way about UEW and the rest of us because of it.

[RainInanna]

I am sorry that you do not hold Kaat in high regard and if you wish, you can continue to feel the same way about UEW and the rest of us because of it.

My feelings regarding yourself or others members of UEW have nothing to do with why I'm not UEW and don't like that particular person. Similarly I don't dislike everyone who follows a path different than my own. For example I'm not Thelemic because I don't agree with Crowley; that does not automatically mean I dislike all Thelemites.

[Greyharp]

Well that was tricky of you RainInanna, I went to reply to your post with a quote, but while I was doing so, you'd edited it and completely changed what you originally said - shame.

Never mind. Lets just say that Gardner's penchant for whipping bound and naked young women hasn't put thousands of us off the idea of being Wiccan. Once again, I haven't witnessed the behaviour you're talking about, so I can't comment and I do agree that those in a position of leadership need to hold "themselves to higher standards".

But I have not seen the idea that we should "rip people apart publicly and viciously for having different beliefs" put forward as a UEW belief or ideal, by anyone within the organisation. UEW has come out of a tradition that pre-dates Kaatryn and as it currently stands, unless I'm mistaken, is not under the control of a single individual. There is certainly no guru worship happening that I'm aware of and UEW would have no trouble surviving if Kaatryn wasn't part of it.

[RainInanna]

Well that was tricky of you RainInanna, I went to reply to your post with a quote, but while I was doing so, you'd edited it and completely changed what you originally said - shame.

Apologies for that, if I could remember what I wrote the first time I'd write it again for you. Unfortunately I changed it because I didn't feel it was as coherent or meaningful as it could be. I tend to do that as my thought process works while I type, and did not realize someone was already responding to the first post.

Lets just say that Gardner's penchant for whipping bound and naked young women hasn't put thousands of us off the idea of being Wiccan.

Quite true. That might suggest most consider those reasonable parts of Wicca, even if they don't practice those acts. Hard for me to say, since I don't see a problem with them.

This makes me wonder about how several Wiccans also dislike Gavin & Yvonne Frost for alleged charges and therefore vehemently advise against their teachings and books. Or those who don't like Anton LaVey's Christian bashing and therefore are not LaVeyan Satanists. Or those who think Crowley is a bit maniacal and therefore avoid Thelema. Or even those who do actually dislike Gardner's practices and therefore aren't Wiccan. At some point one chooses criteria for themselves. Hypocrisy happens to be a deal-breaker for me. So my opinion stands, though certainly it is not meant to try to change yours.

[Greyharp]

Apologies for that, if I could remember what I wrote the first time I'd write it again for you. Unfortunately I changed it because I didn't feel it was as coherent or meaningful as it could be. I tend to do that as my thought process works while I type, and did not realize someone was already responding to the first post.

No worries RainInanna, I actually still had it on the screen, but there wasn't any point in replying to a post that no longer existed. I edit my posts all the time, I can't help myself, the Virgo in me forces me to. :)

I'm not suggesting that you aren't right, just that I haven't witnessed what you have. What little I have seen of Kaatryn on message boards, she says little and is friendly when she does post. We can only make judgements from our own experiences, as you and I have both done. There is always two sides to every story and I just hope that people reading this thread don't write off UEW because some people have had negative experiences with one member of the organisation (admittedly a rather public member :) )

[Elderbush]

I don't know Rain, your posts trouble me probably because I don't dislike a tradition because of run ins with an individual that belongs to it and I feel that is what you are doing. Rather than judge the tradition on it's merits, you are judging the tradition on your feelings about an individual. To me that is a shame. It just doesn't strike me as a sound way to decide things like that but as you say there are many people who do judge a tradition on their interaction with one individual or the beliefs of an individual, no matter if they are shared by those within the tradition or not.

Ed. to add: Like Greyharp I have not had your experiences with her and have no intention of trying to change your mind about her.

[RainInanna]

I edit my posts all the time, I can't help myself, the Virgo in me forces me to.

I think I need to think more and talk less somedays. Or at least type slower - apparently my fingers work at 120wpm but my brain doesn't :D

There is always two sides to every story and I just hope that people reading this thread don't write off UEW because some people have had negative experiences with one member of the organisation

Right, so glad we can both share opinions so others get to see both views. :ballonsmi

[Greyharp]

Right, so glad we can both share opinions so others get to see both views. :ballonsmi

Yay! Come on everybody - group hug!!!! :huddle:

[Elderbush]

LOL Yay for the group hug, Greyharp! It's rainy and miserable here today and hugging seems like a very good idea. :)

[shuvanilu]

I'll take some o' that! _pounce_

[KeaErisdottir]

I expect that you didn't know that UEW began 37 years ago, so Kaat is hardly the creator. I am sorry that you do not hold Kaat in high regard and if you wish, you can continue to feel the same way about UEW and the rest of us because of it.

I do not believe that this statement is accurate. My research into the background of this group has shown that while what we know as UEW now certain has some foundations that go back to years around Watergate, which is when Jayne Tomas would had to have been initiated into Gardnerian Wicca by Herman Slater(or his associates), that she was most likely a Scientologist before that, and tied up in some serious weirdness between the Scientologists and The Processeans.

All other information says that after the problems developed between Slater and the LI Line folks, and the subsequent un-Gardinerian-ing that occured, that Silver Chalice was founded in Westchester County, NY. It operated there out of a communal property of some sort, until the mid to late 80s, until a large number of the people involved started dying from AIDS. UEW and CUEW appear sometime after this.

MacMorgan's own writings confirm at least part of this history, as well as at least one website. The rest comes from research done to find out who Jayne Tomas actually was, since MacMorgan, at one point, attempted to use Tomas' status as a Gardnerian as a selling point what she was doing. Tomas' status as a Gardnerian, through no fault of her own, is questionable.

[Elderbush]

Well, since I don't think that you'll be seeing the tradition's historical material, this is one that you just have to speculate about.

[KeaErisdottir]

Well, since I don't think that you'll be seeing the tradition's historical material, this is one that you just have to speculate about.

If the tradition's historical material cannot be examined by outside sources, and Kaatryn MacMorgan has described a different history, then the 37 year claim is automatically suspect.

[Greyharp]

I must admit I don't give a stuff about UEW's history or lineage, suspect in KeaErisdottir's eyes or not, I like what it is now and if feels right for me.

[Greyharp]

I just had another thought that amused me. I don't like the US president, but that doesn't mean I judge every American by him, or even their society and culture.

[RainInanna]

George Bush didn't create the United States of America, and he doesn't teach people how to follow the religion of USA. A religion is much more than what country you happen to be born in.

[KeaErisdottir]

I just had another thought that amused me. I don't like the US president, but that doesn't mean I judge every American by him, or even their society and culture.

A stunningly irrelevant argument.

[Greyharp]

A stunningly irrelevant argument.

Is it?

During this thread we have seen a group of people judged by the actions of its most "public" figure. My "stunningly irrelevant argument" was giving an example of the same thing, hardly what I would call irrelevant.

It also should've been obvious by the way I phrased my statement that I was not being entirely serious, maybe just a tad ironic. Why do so many pagans take themselves way too seriously and lack that wonderful ingredient that makes life such a wonderful thing - a sense of humour.

It's not difficult to read the intent of a person's words. I think the earlier thread I'm troubled by 'Wicca' has some valid observations to make about the discussions on this sub-board.

[Greyharp]

George Bush didn't create the United States of America, and he doesn't teach people how to follow the religion of USA. A religion is much more than what country you happen to be born in.

I don't remember learning in English at school that an analogy had to be exact in all respects. Splitting hairs is probably more unproductive to a conversation than poor analogy.

*Big sigh* I was in no way trying to suggest that Bush was in any respects a religious figure, it really doesn't take a lot of grey matter to work that out.

[RainInanna]

I think the examples I mentioned earlier (LaVeyan Satanism, Thelema, and Wicca as taught by the Frosts) are much more apt analogies, and could provide for an interesting discussion regarding religions and religious figures. If your analogy was meant in humour, I apologize for examining it at all.

[KeaErisdottir]

Is it?

During this thread we have seen a group of people judged by the actions of its most "public" figure. My "stunningly irrelevant argument" was giving an example of the same thing, hardly what I would call irrelevant.

Only someone with too much Polyanna running in their psyche would blow off the reality that Americans are frequently judged by our most public figures. Large portions of the world are, in fact, crying out against not only Bushism, but also the antics of our media and public figures. It is something that we, as Americans, live with everyday.

You are judged by your associates and associations. People put these things on resumes to show prospective employers that they are 'connected', 'well rounded', or simply to impress. People put on pentacles and all manner of weird jewelry to show others that they are pagan/wiccan/whatever.

So yes, it isn't fair, but it is something you learn to live with as part of belonging to something.

[Greyharp]

Well then it seems my analogy wasn't irrelevant after all, for you have grasped my point exactly.

[Stormcat]

What little I have seen of Kaatryn on message boards, she says little and is friendly when she does post. We can only make judgements from our own experiences, as you and I have both done. There is always two sides to every story and I just hope that people reading this thread don't write off UEW because some people have had negative experiences with one member of the organisation (admittedly a rather public member :) )


My own experience of her is not an entirely pleasant one, for the most part, and I'd have to agree with some of the initial posts in this thread regarding McMorgan's personality. She could be kind, yes, when she wished.

After reading through her book on CUEW, All One Wicca, I'd have to say that there is at least one, very key, component of Wicca missing from it, and only referenced in the book as part of the glossary. Beyond that, I have no trouble with the tradition itself, though the title is somewhat misleading. We are not, obviously, all one.

[Greyharp]

...reading through her book on CUEW, All One Wicca...the title is somewhat misleading. We are not, obviously, all one.

I think the book's title is a (subtle?) reference to the fact that there has to be certain basics in place before we can call our religious practice "Wicca", otherwise we're practicing something else entirely. It's not a suggestion that Wicca is one big happy family or a identical in all its various forms. Well, that's how I read it.

[SailleSeeker]

*is probably crazy for dredging up an old thread*

Another UEWie here.

As Elderbush and Greyharp have said, it's not a trad for everybody.

Two things have come to the top of my mind as I've read through the thread...

I joined UEW at 18 because I wanted my Wiccan education to be founded in factual history (or at least the pursuit of trying to discover and learn the factual history) alongside mythic history, to approach eclecticism in an ethical and respectful way, and to be accessible to me through distance learning. I found all three of these things, and I have not been disappointed in any of them. I have felt very supported in my studies and in the (very widespread) internet community our trad has developed. UEW meets my needs and more - I can still understand how it wouldn't float everybody's boat.

Second, I think it's extremely important to emphasize that UEW isn't "The Kaat Tradition." I admire, respect, and (dare I say it) like Kaat from the little that I've known her on the net; though her personality can rub people the wrong way, I've learned a lot through her, and a lot of that learning is due to the responses that she's given me that have made me think. I would say that Kaat is the reason that the trad is alive today; UEW owes a lot to her. However, I don't see her or anyone else in the trad wanting it to be only a soapbox for her. We are encouraged to write and do other projects to benefit the Pagan community; in fact, such projects are the focus of attaining one's 3rd Circle degree.
Part of the reason why Kaat seems so vocal compared to the rest of us is that, with the patterns of growth in the trad, it's only been relatively recently that we've had lots of 2nd and 3rd Circlers who are working on such projects. I think it's safe to say that UEW will be seen as a trad represented by a group of voices rather than perceived as being represented by only one in the future.

So... er... okay, done with my soapbox.

[moonmorgan]

I haven't conversed with her so can't say anything about her but have read the online information and like the ideas and writings a lot. I don't have any interest in subscribing to ANY tradition as that's just not me but I do incorporate some of UEW's writings in my personal practice.