Paganism and Wicca

[vwytche]

CuAnnan

vwytche

My goodness, you really ARE playing to an audience, aren't you?

There's those personal attacks again.

vwytche

Now, prove it.

Shifting Burden of Proof again.
Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof.
The evidence provided by Ronald Hutton in Triumph of the Moon aught to be enough for any scholar or academic.

rolleyes No dear, it's a behavioral observation. My God, EVERYTHING is an attack with you, isn't it? See an attack would be if I called you a ******** b***h w/ her head so far up her a** she wouldn't recognize the truth if it bit her on aforementioned a**. (Don't go running for the report button. I'm not saying it, just giving it as an example.) Making an observation about certain behaviors such as post mining and addressing others outside the conversation are simply that, observations. They are not attacks, and they are not insults, so stop playing victim. It's not impressing anyone, least of all me.

And don't give me that shifting burden of proof garbage. We're not in a court room, so there is no burden of proof here. There is just an opinionated person who is so convinced of her reality that anything that disagrees with it is an extraordinary claim.

Now, are you going to provide any evidence of YOUR claim? Or would you just like it taken as given that you have fact on your side? And don't throw Hutton in my face. I'm so sick of everytime one of "you people" (to use your words) are challenged on this point the only thing you know how to do is type Ronald Hutton, and Triumph of the Moon. Most of you have never even read it.

You know what you have just proven? That you can type, or at least C/P Ronald Hutton and Triumph of the Moon. You haven't even proven such a person, or such a book exsists. They do, but YOU haven't proven it.

Now, do you have any evidentiary text to share? Or are you just going to stick with the appeal to false authority? Doesn't matter either way. Ronald Hutton is a historian, not a Wicca. Therefore by your own argument, he CAN NOT be an authority on Wicca.

How's THAT for an attack on your position, luv? You have come to your conclusions based on the work of a source that is not admitable by YOUR own standards. Now why don't YOU prove YOUR extraordinary claim that it is.

[vwytche]

Lucky~9~Lives

vwytche

BYW, my suggestion to take a look in a mirror, ie take a look at yourself, was not an attack of any sort.

It's the way you sarcastically phrased it ("There's a wonderful invention called a mirror." ).

That wasn't sarcasm, it was metaphor.

All I did was tell her she needed to take a good look at herself, granted in a rather poetic fasion. Anybody that finds that insulting is looking for something to feel attacked over. I'm not going to take on the guilt for her projection.

[Alaois]

Ophelia Leona Faye

Short of skyclad ritual and strict initiation practices, I'd say that's about as Wiccan as one can get.

Still doesn't mean you're a Wiccan.

[Kaira T v2]

CuAnnan

They don't.

Gardnerians follow the Charge of the Goddess as their guide for morality, you are correct. But just because it isn't Gardnerian or Alexandrian, doesn't mean it is not Wicca (or "Neo-Wicca", as is more properly termed). Something new does not mean something invalid--it just means something new.

CuAnnan

Druids are all dead, wiped out by a combination of Christianity and oppression.

No they aren't. Neo-druidism is as alive as any other Neo-Pagan religion. In fact, the druids usually lead the Summer Solstice ritual at Stonehenge every year.

[Kaira T v2]

Alaois

Ophelia Leona Faye

Short of skyclad ritual and strict initiation practices, I'd say that's about as Wiccan as one can get.

Still doesn't mean you're a Wiccan.

Yes, it does. I am not BRITISH TRADITIONAL, but I -am- Wiccan. I do not have to be British Traditional in order to be a Wiccan anymore than a Christian has to be a Catholic in order to be a Christian. And yes, that analogy still stands, because it is relevant and valid.

[Alaois]

Ophelia Leona Faye

Alaois

Ophelia Leona Faye

Short of skyclad ritual and strict initiation practices, I'd say that's about as Wiccan as one can get.

Still doesn't mean you're a Wiccan.

Yes, it does. I am not BRITISH TRADITIONAL, but I -am- Wiccan. I do not have to be British Traditional in order to be a Wiccan anymore than a Christian has to be a Catholic in order to be a Christian. And yes, that analogy still stands, because it is relevant and valid.

No you're not. British Traditional Wicca is the only Wicca. There is no other Wicca, Ophelia, regardless of what others (authors and the like) say.

The analogy doesn't stand as Wicca and Christianity are not the same type of religion.

Wicca is an orthopraxic religion - literally, this is 'right practice'. If you know the right way to do things within that faith, and you do them, you're a member of that faith.

Christianity is an orthodoxic religion - meaning 'correct belief'. If you believe the right things, you qualify as a member of that faith.

[Alaois]

Ophelia Leona Faye

No they aren't. Neo-druidism is as alive as any other Neo-Pagan religion. In fact, the druids usually lead the Summer Solstice ritual at Stonehenge every year.

Followers of Neo-Druidism are not Druids, they're nature worship Eclectic Pagans who are using a stolen title.

[Lucky~9~Lives]

vwytche

Lucky~9~Lives

vwytche

BYW, my suggestion to take a look in a mirror, ie take a look at yourself, was not an attack of any sort.

It's the way you sarcastically phrased it ("There's a wonderful invention called a mirror." ).

That wasn't sarcasm, it was metaphor.

Metaphor involves a direct identification between two entities - for example: "the stage is a mirror of the world"; sarcasm is the use of incongruity (specifically, irony) to mock - for example: referring to a mundane device, such as a mirror, as "a wonderful invention".

vwytche

All I did was tell her she needed to take a good look at herself, granted in a rather poetic fasion.

CuAnnan is male.

[Kaira T v2]

Alaois

No you're not. British Traditional Wicca is the only Wicca. There is no other Wicca, Ophelia, regardless of what others (authors and the like) say.

Says who? British Traditionalists branched off to bring Wicca to other parts of the world, and many helped to create Neo-Wicca, which requires no initiation, and is not oathbound. Again, just because it is NEW, does not mean it is not invalid.

Alaois

Wicca is an orthopraxic religion - literally, this is 'right practice'. If you know the right way to do things within that faith, and you do them, you're a member of that faith.

Christianity is an orthodoxic religion - meaning 'correct belief'. If you believe the right things, you qualify as a member of that faith.

Wicca is not just about practice--it requires just as much faith and belief as Christianity. It requires the belief in a deity of some sort, whether you are a strict pantheist or believe in the All. If you practice WITCHCRAFT without any of the theology, then it is just that--witchcraft. But it is not Wicca. If I practice all the right things without believing a single bit of it, that doesn't make me a Wiccan--it makes me a poser. Witchcraft and Wicca are -not- the same thing. They usually are practiced TOGETHER, but they are -not- the same thing.

So, yes. The comparison still stands. Wicca is a religion, not just a practice. If a Christian does all the right things, but does not believe, he/she is not a Christian. If a Wiccan does all the right things, but does not believe, he/she is not a Wiccan. Simple as that.



Again, unless you -are- of a Pagan faith, you have no room to tell anyone else what they are and what they aren't. Unless you have attended an Alexandrian/Gardnerian circle, and a Neo-Wiccan circle, and have first-hand experience that allows you to make a judgment based on the comparison of the two, you have no room to tell anyone else what they are and what they aren't. Picking up a book written by someone else does not make you an expert on the religion or its practices.

[Kaira T v2]

Alaois

Followers of Neo-Druidism are not Druids, they're nature worship Eclectic Pagans who are using a stolen title.

And when did you become an expert on Druidism, Neo or otherwise? Have you been to Stonehenge at the Summer Solstice? Have you sat down and talked with a Druid? Have you listened to a Bard? Somehow, I don't think so. You have no authority to make such a claim.

[CuAnnan]

vwytche

Oh, but I will address the liar thing. If you check, I clearly said "whether you are or are not dyslexic", meaning I NEVER drew any conclusion about it one way or the other. I merely pointed out that dyslexia would not cause the behavior you were attempted to justify with it. People usig a personalchallenge as an excuse for their less endearing personality traits is a pet peeve of mine. So yeah, I called you on it. Sue me.

You are in error, where the truth is concerned.

vwytche

Dyslexic my a**. If you were so dyslexic that you can't manage to comprehend the main point of a post no more than a dozen sentences w/o chopping out single sentences and phrases to repond to, you'd never be able to post as coherently as you do.

[Alaois]

Ophelia Leona Faye

Says who? British Traditionalists branched off to bring Wicca to other parts of the world,

Source?

Quote:

and many helped to create Neo-Wicca, which requires no initiation, and is not oathbound. Again, just because it is NEW, does not mean it is not invalid.

Like who? Neo-Wicca isn't Wicca though, it's Eclectic Neo-Paganism that's been mislabeled thanks to authors such as Cunningham, Silver Ravenwolf, and Buckland to name a few.

Being new doesn't make it valid either.

Quote:

Wicca is not just about practice--it requires just as much faith and belief as Christianity. It requires the belief in a deity of some sort, whether you are a strict pantheist or believe in the All.

It is about the practice though, that's why i'ts considered an orthopraxic religion. Belief does not pay that much of a role in Wicca, the practice does.

Quote:

If you practice WITCHCRAFT without any of the theology, then it is just that--witchcraft.

Yeah, and?

Quote:

But it is not Wicca.

That's where the practice comes in.

Quote:

If I practice all the right things without believing a single bit of it, that doesn't make me a Wiccan--it makes me a poser.

Do you know the practices? Do you know what you're suppose to do? Do you know the names of the Lord and Lady? No? Ok then.

If you're not a BTW you're not a Wiccan you're a, and let's say it together now, a poser.

Quote:

Witchcraft and Wicca are -not- the same thing. They usually are practiced TOGETHER, but they are -not- the same thing.

Exactly. What's your point?

Quote:

So, yes. The comparison still stands. Wicca is a religion, not just a practice. If a Christian does all the right things, but does not believe, he/she is not a Christian. If a Wiccan does all the right things, but does not believe, he/she is not a Wiccan. Simple as that.

Just because Wicca is a religion does not mean belief is an important part of the religion. It's about proper practice. I don't see why you're so hung up on the concept of belief=religion. It doesn't work like that.

To be a Christian you only need to do two things:
- Accept Christ as your savior (died for your sins and all that)
- Follow the Law of Agape.

Nothing more. That's it.

Wicca requires a lot more.

Quote:

Again, unless you -are- of a Pagan faith, you have no room to tell anyone else what they are and what they aren't.

That's rather arrogant to say, don't ya think?

Quote:

Unless you have attended an Alexandrian/Gardnerian circle, and a Neo-Wiccan circle, and have first-hand experience that allows you to make a judgment based on the comparison of the two, you have no room to tell anyone else what they are and what they aren't.

Even if someone has attended a BTW circle/gathering, what they'll see (if it's for everyone and not just initiates) in a generic Pagan circle/gathering. You won't see what actual initiates see because you (general use) are not an initiate.

You're wrong.

Quote:

Picking up a book written by someone else does not make you an expert on the religion or its practices.

No one ever said it did, but reading helps people learn and learning what is an isn't a valid source can help someone understand the difference between what is and isn't Wicca.

[Alaois]

I'm gonna start off by saying this:
Drop the logical fallacy and the strawman.

Ophelia Leona Faye

And when did you become an expert on Druidism, Neo or otherwise?

Never said I was an expert, why would it matter if I'm an expert or not?

Quote:

Have you been to Stonehenge at the Summer Solstice?

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

Quote:

Have you sat down and talked with a Druid?

Can't, they're all dead.

Quote:

Have you listened to a Bard?

Several, what's your point?

Quote:

Somehow, I don't think so.

And? I'm suppose to care what you think?

Quote:

You have no authority to make such a claim.

And who has the authority? Because if I can't, that means you cannot either.

[Kaira T v2]

Alaois

Source?

Doreena Valiente. Originally an initiate by Gerald Gardner himself, who branched off and wrote several books to bring the religion to other parts of the world (it took hold primarily in America). She is the author of the Charge of the Goddess, which British Traditionalists follow. She also wrote "The Rebirth of Witchcraft", which while controversial, is considered one of the writings that started the Neo-Wicca movement.

Information regarding Traditional Wicca from someone actually initiated into a Gardnerian tradition. Here, the author explains that Gardnerian Wicca is a TRADITION of Wicca--meaning, a form of Wicca, which shows that there -can- be other forms. If you read through her writing, and keep in mind she IS a British Traditional Witch, there is very little difference from what she practices/believes, and what -I- practice/believe. She is merely part of ONE tradition amidst SEVERAL traditions of Wicca.

Alaois

Like who? Neo-Wicca isn't Wicca though, it's Eclectic Neo-Paganism that's been mislabeled thanks to authors such as Cunningham, Silver Ravenwolf, and Buckland to name a few.

Why isn't Neo-Wicca valid Wicca? The beliefs are the same. Even amongst Neo-Wiccans, Silver Ravenwolf and Buckland are not considered well-written authors (especially considering Ravenwolf encourages teenagers to lie to their parents and practice in secret).

Alaois

Being new doesn't make it valid either.

It does to the practitioner, which in the end, is the only person that matters. Spirituality does not need confirmation from anyone else--it is a personal journey, and really isn't anyone else's business.

Alaois

It is about the practice though, that's why i'ts considered an orthopraxic religion. Belief does not pay that much of a role in Wicca, the practice does.

There are plenty of Wiccans that do not include witchcraft as part of their daily life, and only celebrate the esbats/sabbats. To them, the belief is important. The spiritual connection to deity is just as important to Wicca as the practice of witchcraft. Calling it orthopraxic just goes to show that it is still not a very well understood faith system.

Quote:

If you practice WITCHCRAFT without any of the theology, then it is just that--witchcraft.

Alaois

That's where the practice comes in.

Which is a result of the faith.

Alaois

Do you know the practices? Do you know what you're suppose to do? Do you know the names of the Lord and Lady? No? Ok then.

The practices as in...what, exactly? Each circle/solitary/coven practices and celebrates the holy days in their own way. There is no TRUE way, if the spirit is worshiping in ernest. As for the names of the Lord and Lady, they have many names, and yes I know a lot of them. You do, too. It's not a secret.

Alaois

If you're not a BTW you're not a Wiccan you're a, and let's say it together now, a poser.

Ad hominem. Since, you know, you're claiming I'm throwing straw man, I suppose I'll point out your ad hom.

Alaois

Exactly. What's your point?

My point is that just because someone practices witchcraft/ritual, that doesn't automatically make them a Wiccan. Many pagan religions practice witchcraft.

Alaois

Just because Wicca is a religion does not mean belief is an important part of the religion. It's about proper practice. I don't see why you're so hung up on the concept of belief=religion. It doesn't work like that.

Belief -is- an important part of the religion. How can one practice without belief? Magick in itself requires belief. There is no science to it--it is belief.

Alaois

To be a Christian you only need to do two things:

That depends--is the Christian a Catholic or a Protestant? According to Protestants, you would be correct. According to Catholics, however, you would be wrong.

Alaois

That's rather arrogant to say, don't ya think?

And claiming that I am a poser-Wiccan because I don't follow YOUR idea of valid Wicca isn't arrogant at all?

Alaois

Even if someone has attended a BTW circle/gathering, what they'll see (if it's for everyone and not just initiates) in a generic Pagan circle/gathering. You won't see what actual initiates see because you (general use) are not an initiate.

The public practices are the same. We cast circle, we call quarters, etc. The basics are exactly the same. What goes on in private, however, you will never know--because you are not Wiccan/Neo-Wiccan. So I suppose you can't judge whether the two are different or the same, because you will never be privy to those secrets.

Alaois

You're wrong.

Your opinion.

Alaois

No one ever said it did, but reading helps people learn and learning what is an isn't a valid source can help someone understand the difference between what is and isn't Wicca.

No it can't, because in the end, those authors themselves are only projecting THEIR viewpoint. Their viewpoint is not the end-all-be-all of spirituality.

[vwytche]

Lucky~9~Lives

vwytche

Lucky~9~Lives

vwytche

BYW, my suggestion to take a look in a mirror, ie take a look at yourself, was not an attack of any sort.

It's the way you sarcastically phrased it ("There's a wonderful invention called a mirror." ).

That wasn't sarcasm, it was metaphor.

Metaphor involves a direct identification between two entities - for example: "the stage is a mirror of the world"; sarcasm is the use of incongruity (specifically, irony) to mock - for example: referring to a mundane device, such as a mirror, as "a wonderful invention".

vwytche

All I did was tell her she needed to take a good look at herself, granted in a rather poetic fasion.

CuAnnan is male.

Ah well, the avi looks female.

And I don't see what's so sarcastic about calling mirror a wonderful invention, it is. So's a wheel, a ballpoint pen, and matches. What's so offensive abotu saying so?

I say again HE, is just looking to feel attacked.