wicca as contd from christianity forum

coffee_cake

me wrote:

This reminds me of kids who inisist they're wiccan despite knowing nothing about the religion, and cry discrimination when people point out it's not an ancient religion.

Yes, I'm aware of what Wicca is and is not. It is not an umbrella term for "whatever I want to do relating to witchcraft", it is not an ancient religion (having been invented in the 50s by Gardner), whatever its influences may or may not have been. It is a neo-pagan religion, it is a mystery religion, etc. I've read the 161 laws (some of them are odd o.o ) and so on.
The term itself may or may not be derived from an old word for witchcraft, but the religion itself is not a synonym with all forms of witchcraft.

The reason I made this comment was because I have encountered a lot of people (mostly teens) on another forum that insist that they can do whatever they like and call it wicca, despite the fact so much of it is mystery and can only be revealed on initiation. They "relate" to Silver Ravenwolf (shudder) and co and generally spout a lot of drivel. For some reason, calling themselves ecclectic pagans is not an option.

And in case anyone wants to know why I mentioned this in the christian forum, it's because informing these "fluffs" as to the actual nature of wicca results in accusations of oppression, discrimination, and if we're especially lucky, mention of "the burning times". The same attitude, in my opinion, was being expressed by those who insisted something was science, and brought up discrimination when others pointed out it was not.

Well, now I've moved this to the pagan forum as requested - it's up to ye.

hairyheretic

bluewolf wrote:

Yes, I'm aware of what wicca is and is not. It is not an umbrella term for "whatever I want to do relating to witchcraft", it is not an ancient religion (having been invented in the 50s by Gardner), whatever its influences may or may not have been. It is a neo-pagan religion, it is a mystery religion, etc. I've read the 161 laws (some of them are odd o.o ) and so on.

How well then do you believe that it draws on or follows the roots?

Given the persecution activities of the established church, most especially during the middle ages, it would be hard for there to be any kind of uninterupted lineage from then till its re-emergence.

bluewolf wrote:

The reason I made this comment was because I have encountered a lot of people (mostly teens) on another forum that insist that they can do whatever they like and call it wicca, despite the fact so much of it is mystery and can only be revealed on initiation.

Not being wiccan myself, I'll let someone more knowledgeable comment on that, but I can see what you mean.

bluewolf wrote:

They "relate" to Silver Ravenwolf (shudder) and co and generally spout a lot of drivel. For some reason, calling themselves ecclectic pagans is not an option.

Maybe because TV hasn't made ecclectic pagan a "cool" word?

bluewolf wrote:

And in case anyone wants to know why I mentioned this in the christian forum, it's because informing these "fluffs" as to the actual nature of wicca results in accusations of oppression, discrimination, and if we're especially lucky, mention of "the burning times".

*nods* If someone has come to their interest in Wicca through MTV and Charmed, then they're not likely to know much of what the reality is. They can be taught though. In time, they will either mature and learn, or move on to something else.

bluewolf wrote:

The same attitude, in my opinion, was being expressed by those who insisted something was science, and brought up discrimination when others pointed out it was not.

I understand now where you're coming from.

bluewolf wrote:

Well, now I've moved this to the pagan forum as requested - it's up to ye.

*nods* Thanks for the explanation. As I said, I understand your view better now.

coffee_cake

hairyheretic wrote:

How well then do you believe that it draws on or follows the roots?

What roots?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/wic_hist.htm

Given the persecution activities of the established church, most especially during the middle ages, it would be hard for there to be any kind of uninterupted lineage from then till its re-emergence.

There is no lineage - it was invented by Gardner. Honestly. The Rede was written by either him or D. Valiente

John Coughlin researched the writings of Gerald Gardner (1884-1964) and Doreen Valiente (1922-1999). These are the two individuals who are generally regarded as the founders of modern Wicca.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/wicrede.htm
The term itself may be old, and it may make use of old forms of witchcraft, but a lot was just plain made up, such as the threefold law.

Maybe because TV hasn't made ecclectic pagan a "cool" word?

Yeah pretty much

*nods* If someone has come to their interest in Wicca through MTV and Charmed, then they're not likely to know much of what the reality is. They can be taught though. In time, they will either mature and learn, or move on to something else.

Which is why there's a group on the forum I mentioned who tries to education them as to the reality. Unfortunately, some felt so "oppressed" by this, there's now a rival group. Mainly comprised of kids who don't know any better. One can only hope they learn.

I understand now where you're coming from.
...
*nods* Thanks for the explanation. As I said, I understand your view better now.

I'm glad

I'm certainly not discriminating against Wiccans in any way - only ignorance, and those who don't know anything about it.

Asiaprod

bluewolf wrote:

Yes, I'm aware of what Wicca is and is not.
Well, now I've moved this to the pagan forum as requested - it's up to ye.

Thanks for the clarification, I understand your point better now. I hope to learn more of this.

Nevyn

Well are you saying the rites and rituals are made up or are you saying that the whole religion and the worship of the gods is made up ?
What is published about wicca is what is public the writings and books published by Gardener and Valiente are not all that there is.
As you yourself have stated it is a mystery tradition and certain things are only revealved when you have been initated and then you gain access to them.

Wicca as become popularist term for many things that are witchcraft or newage or certain esortic skills which in many cases is
unfortunate.
Spell craft, tarot cards, crystals ect maybe be used by a witch or those who are of the Wica or persuing that path but it is the connection and worship of the Gods and Goddess and that connection to Them that makes it a religion and spiritual path
not the trappings or the bigest overloaded altar or the bigest most impressive book of glitte opps I mean shadows.

coffee_cake

The origins of the rites and rituals seems to be largely based on Gardner's influences, from Crowley and various others thanks to the golden dawn crowd, though it's in dispute and some argue he made those up himself entirely.
The threefold law seems to be traceable to this fellow:
http://www.controverscial.com/Raymond%20Buckland.htm
The whole thing is clearly [attempted to be?] based on old pagan religions, drawing in from here and there, but is not in itself an old one.

As for the gods - well people have obviously been worshiping gods for a very long time. As far as I'm aware, there was no historic practice of ...ditheism?
Perhaps you could tell me where that comes from.
I'm aware there are secrets; it's usually agreed that they come from Gardner as well. Certainly what I've heard from initiated ex-wiccans doesn't contradict that, whatever about oaths

http://www.crystalinks.com/wicca.html <- also makes an interesting read
As is a standard infodump given by a friend:

Wicca is a mystery tradition begun by Gerald Gardner in the 1950s. He based it on some ancient folklore, took the holidays of the Celts and the Norse and combined them, and created a magical system in the style of Kabalism. Wicca assumes a magical system based on five elements (earth, air, fire, water, spirit) and four directions. It is ditheistic and strictly divides gods and goddesses, as well as men and women, by characteristics associated with each. The Wiccan God is a diune figure, the Oak and Holly King who dies in the fall and is reborn in the spring. The Wiccan Goddess is a triune figure associated with the moon; she is the mother/maiden/crone figure. The Wiccan Rede, believed by some to be written by Doreen Valiente, includes many of the assumptions and indicates the worldview of this religion. When Valiente left the initial coven created by Gardner, he wrote the 161 Laws of the Wicca to expand on the earlier created Wiccan Rede.

More recent authors have bought into the provably false claims of Margaret Murry that Wicca is an ancient religion practiced by Northern Europeans. Although Wicca has a superficial relationship with several of the religions found in Northern Europe, it is very distinctive in a wide variety of ways and combines different traditions in a way that was never historically done. Wicca's modern creation is well established, but it does not mean the religion is without merit. However, as a mystery tradition, the only way to truly become a Wiccan is to find someone within the tradition to teach you, usually via a coven, and advance to the higher mysteries. Any published books will only cover the basics of Wicca enough to get people curious; these published books also frequently do not disclose they are only giving part of the story, leading to many people becoming confused as to the real nature of Wicca.
www.geraldgardner.com
www.doreenvaliente.com

Nevyn

bluewolf wrote:

The origins of the rites and rituals seems to be largely based on Gardner's influences, from Crowley and various others thanks to the golden dawn crowd, though it's in dispute and some argue he made those up himself entirely.

The rite the exist in christainity were made up by someone as well.
The 'Mass' is a lot more stylised then what was the last supper and it is only
recently the readings were incorperated and the mass is no longer preformed in latain with the priest facing away from the congration.

bluewolf wrote:

Certainly what I've heard from initiated ex-wiccans doesn't contradict that, whatever about oaths

Anyone who speaks out of tunr about things that were revealed to them that are Oathbound and in foreswearing thier oath to do so are proving themselves to be untrustworthy and why would you trust what they have said ?

Wica is not for everyone, it is a difficult path and finding a coven to work with and within is hard and things don't always fit and you do get dissillusioned people who for what ever reason ( personal or lack of work or being unable to face and accept themselves ) don't progress.

As for ditheism, there are many people that were pantheism, but while the accpeted many Gods and would worhpd them according to thier briefs they would have one or two to which they were dedicated.

coffee_cake

Thaedydal wrote:

The rite the exist in christainity were made up by someone as well.
The 'Mass' is a lot more stylised then what was the last supper and it is only
recently the readings were incorperated and the mass is no longer preformed in latain with the priest facing away from the congration.

What's your point?

Anyone who speaks out of tunr about things that were revealed to them that are Oathbound and in foreswearing thier oath to do so are proving themselves to be untrustworthy and why would you trust what they have said ?

I said whatever about oaths to indicate I didn't know about oathbound stuff

Wica is not for everyone, it is a difficult path and finding a coven to work with and within is hard and things don't always fit and you do get dissillusioned people who for what ever reason ( personal or lack of work or being unable to face and accept themselves ) don't progress.

That's nice, but again, what's your point?

As for ditheism, there are many people that were pantheism, but while the accpeted many Gods and would worhpd them according to thier briefs they would have one or two to which they were dedicated.

Still a different thing though

Nevyn

At this stage Bluewolf I do have to ask as you seem to know so much already why did you start this thread and do you have questions or just accusations ?

hairyheretic

The thread was started at my request, as bluewolf made a comment in a thread in the christianity forum that I found rather puzzling and wanted expanded on.

Asiaprod

hairyheretic wrote:

The thread was started at my request, as bluewolf made a comment in a thread in the christianity forum that I found rather puzzling and wanted expanded on.

And I seconded it as I wished to learn more and did not think that the Christianity forum was a good place to pursue it in

Nevyn

ah ok.

All religious rites have been 'made up' by man to worship thier Gods, that was the point, does it make any of them less relavent if the most recent revision was 50 years ago or the most publically known revision ?

coffee_cake

It was creation, not revision, thae
Based on a few sources sure, but Wicca the religion did not pre-date the 1940s/1950s

Nevyn

If you wish to think that that is your opinion and you are entitled to it.
Wiccan as it is publicly known was founded and made public by gerald gardner.
But I know from my own up bringing and the practices of my grand mothers and
thier goddess worship in the form of thier devotion to Mary that such things were not made up by some old english guy.

Asiaprod

Thaedydal wrote:

But I know from my own up bringing and the practices of my grand mothers andthier goddess worship in the form of thier devotion to Mary that such things were not made up by some old english guy.

Thaedydal, is this the same Mary as spoken of in relation to Christianity?
Sorry, I should clarify, Mary the mother of Christ or Mary M. I spent many months researching Mary M and was very impressed at what I found. (Nothing to do with Dan Brown).

coffee_cake

Thaedydal wrote:

If you wish to think that that is your opinion and you are entitled to it.

More like a fact, tbh

Wiccan as it is publicly known was founded and made public by gerald gardner.
But I know from my own up bringing and the practices of my grand mothers and
thier goddess worship in the form of thier devotion to Mary that such things were not made up by some old english guy.

Wicca the religion isn't about goddess worship though.

Out of curiosity, why not just call yourself a neopagan?

Nevyn

Wicca the religion isn't about goddess worship though.

Well what do you think it is about ?

Asiaprod, it was a devotion to Mary mother mother of us all is how they would have put it.

Mary Madaglena is very instresting to research and to see how she went from being portrayed as a public women, as being active in her community to being a public woman as in a whore.

coffee_cake

Thaedydal wrote:

Well what do you think it is about ?

The god and goddess and their relationship would be a good start

Asiaprod

Thaedydal wrote:

Asiaprod, it was a devotion to Mary mother mother of us all is how they would have put it.

Thanks for the clarification, do you have a link you can recommend I wish to better understand the roots of Wicca.
Re Mary Magdalena, for some one who became a noted public woman (as in a whore) she sure has garnered a huge following in France, where there are some amazing accounts of her. I actually plan to go to France to pursue this further.

Nevyn

A public woman was not a whore in that context.
She was a women who was involved in public affairs and involved in the comunity and out spoken and independant with out a husband.
That is what is ment by public this was later interpeted as being a loose woman and then as a whore.

There are info stickies in the forum on a range of pagan paths.

Sapien

bluewolf wrote:

It was creation, not revision, thae
Based on a few sources sure, but Wicca the religion did not pre-date the 1940s/1950s

You do not credit any hitorical continuity in, say, Aradian witchcraft?

Asiaprod

Sapien wrote:

You do not credit any hitorical continuity in, say, Aradian witchcraft?

Sapien, My regards as always.

Correct me if I am wrong here, but are we talking Correllian Wicca here. which was introduced in 1479, and is descended via marriage from Cherokee Didanvwisgi and a line of Scottish Traditional Witches. The descendants of which were further influenced by Aradian Witchcraft and by the Spiritualist Church. What happened prior to 1479 and what is the Cherokee influence. Did a net search but must have been looking in the wrong place.
?

Nevyn

You are wrong.
Correllians are an american group/tradition that is not proper Wica as is they are not part of the lineged traditions that trace their roots back to the New forest covens ( one of which initiated Gerald Gardener ).
They are what is loosey know as eletice witchcraft.

Aradian witchcraft is also known as Strega and is an italian family tradition.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/pag/aradia/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aradia,_or_the_Gospel_of_the_Witches

Pretty much Strega is the complete and utter oppsite to the Correllians,
like greek orthodox chirstians are to southren american TV evanglists.

akari no ryu

It's rare for me to find a thread on Wicca and not have to post my standard pre-made info dump on why you can't just decide to be a Wic(c)an and why initiation is important.

akari no ryu

Thaedydal wrote:

If you wish to think that that is your opinion and you are entitled to it.
Wiccan as it is publicly known was founded and made public by gerald gardner.
But I know from my own up bringing and the practices of my grand mothers and thier goddess worship in the form of thier devotion to Mary that such things were not made up by some old english guy.

Thaedydal, this makes it seem like you believe that Goddess worhsip equates to Wicca. Surely, if you're actually a Wiccan, you'll have read Hutton's Triumph of the Moon. Surely you're not disregarding a non-pagan saying "Yes, Goddess Worship is old, but it's nothing whatsoever like Wicca which is in its entirety a brand spanking new religion unlike anything that existed before it".

Just because someone made the religion up doesn't make it spiritually invalid. If Gardner's claims are correct, then the religion is a direct result of UPG (unidentifiable Personal Gnosis) from the Lord and Lady (the Lord and Lady actually have names, but they are oathbound and, as such, can not be revealed)

Nevyn

akari no ryu wrote:

Thaedydal, this makes it seem like you believe that Goddess worhsip equates to Wicca. Surely, if you're actually a Wiccan, you'll have read Hutton's Triumph of the Moon. Surely you're not disregarding a non-pagan saying "Yes, Goddess Worship is old, but it's nothing whatsoever like Wicca which is in its entirety a brand spanking new religion unlike anything that existed before it".

I have read triumph of the moon tis currently sitting on my beside locker being reread.

The point I was making was that it was from my family I first saw and learned devotion to a godess and to seek a connection with a godess and not only a god.

akari no ryu

Thaedydal wrote:

I have read triumph of the moon tis currently sitting on my beside locker being reread.

The point I was making was that it was from my family I first saw and learned devotion to a godess and to seek a connection with a godess and not only a god.

You seem to have misinterpreted me. I could see no relevance to that tidbit of information unless you were equating Goddess Worship to Wicca. I know a family who practice a tradition of Witchcraft which predates wicca by a good deal (they wouldn't tell me how long, you know how people can be). That doesn't have any relevance to this conversation though.

Context... context is your friend.

Nevyn

I was making a point about ditheism.
You assumed that I equated goddess worship to be Wicca which made me laugh
as I can't see devotes of Kali being at home in a wiccan circle.

akari no ryu

Thaedydal wrote:

I was making a point about ditheism.
You assumed that I equated goddess worship to be Wicca which made me laugh
as I can't see devotes of Kali being at home in a wiccan circle.

So your family's tradition believes in only one God and one Goddess?
Because if you believe in more but only worship one, you're polythiest.

Nevyn

I would not say what my grandmothers believed was family trad in witchcraft terms but they did put Mary on an equal footing with God (christain god).

joseph dawton

Wicca undoubtedly did not exist before Gerald Gardner (and later input from Doreen Valiente) created it. Wicca certainly draws on traditional european witchcraft, the Golden Dawn and Aleister Crowley, Celtic/Druidic paganism, Egyptian and Judaic magical systems but it is definitely a new religion. I am not knocking it or saying it is any less valid than any other spiritual path either but it is still definitely only 60 years old.

Given that all the other sources were pretty much dead or in serious decline Gardner felt it necessary to combine and remould paganism of old into a more accessible and modern form to prevent it from disappearing completely and began his public work after the repeal of the old witchcraft laws in England with the book 'Witchcraft Today' in 1954, I doubt he envisaged Wicca reaching the heights of popularity it now enjoys.

It amazes me how many wiccans don't know the roots of the religion and have never read anything by Gardner. For more info see http://www.geraldgardner.com

http://www.electricpublications.com