Wiccan FAQ - ?????? PROFIT

******** THIS s**t IS HILARIOUS INNIT

STEP 1: CALL YOURSELF WICCAN	11.7%	[ 259 ]
STEP 2: BUY STRANGE CLOTHES	6.3%	[ 139 ]
STEP 3: WHINE ABOUT HOW OPPRESSED YOU ARE	10.7%	[ 237 ]
STEP 4: ????????	37.7%	[ 836 ]
STEP 5: PROFIT!	33.6%	[ 744 ]
Total Votes:			[ 2215 ]

[xLady Tsukiyox]

@Doram: The Wiccan Rede is advice, it's not law. Hell the word rede even means advice. In other words it's up to the individual.

The Rule of Three isn't something all Wiccans follow. Again it's up to the individual.

The word Pagan encompasses all that's not Christian, Muslim or Islam. Also Wicca has been around since the 50's. It was created in 1954.

[garra_eyes]

xLady Tsukiyox

@Doram: The Wiccan Rede is advice, it's not law. Hell the word rede even means advice. In other words it's up to the individual.

The Rule of Three isn't something all Wiccans follow. Again it's up to the individual.

The word Pagan encompasses all that's not Christian, Muslim or Islam Jewish. Also Wicca has been around since the 50's. It was created in 1954.

Fixed.

[xLady Tsukiyox]

garra_eyes

xLady Tsukiyox

@Doram: The Wiccan Rede is advice, it's not law. Hell the word rede even means advice. In other words it's up to the individual.

The Rule of Three isn't something all Wiccans follow. Again it's up to the individual.

The word Pagan encompasses all that's not Christian, Muslim or Islam Jewish. Also Wicca has been around since the 50's. It was created in 1954.

Fixed.

Thanks. My brain has been on the fritz as of late xD.

[garra_eyes]

xLady Tsukiyox

garra_eyes

xLady Tsukiyox

@Doram: The Wiccan Rede is advice, it's not law. Hell the word rede even means advice. In other words it's up to the individual.

The Rule of Three isn't something all Wiccans follow. Again it's up to the individual.

The word Pagan encompasses all that's not Christian, Muslim or Islam Jewish. Also Wicca has been around since the 50's. It was created in 1954.

Fixed.

Thanks. My brain has been on the fritz as of late xD.

No problem. ^.^
I figured you knew what you were talking about and just mistyped it or something.

[Doram]

xLady Tsukiyox

@Doram: The Wiccan Rede is advice, it's not law. Hell the word rede even means advice. In other words it's up to the individual.

Well, as part of my point, I said that there was no central authority, so of course nothing can really be considered law. Plus, most pagan religions attempt to not label anything as law, by emphasizing the empowering abilities of each perspective, and surrounding that with loose warnings and suggestions. Finally, pagan does cover lots of ground, and not having done an actual exhaustive search, I cannot state what percentage of paths teach it or something like it, only that in my experience it has been the majority.

But ultimately, most of the books that I respect, and also coming from that Dianic Wiccan training, I was taught to treat it very seriously, and as for where I have grown from there, I have come to understand its far reaching implications, and the importance of those implications in performing magick in a way that is not harmful to others, or through any universal reaction, harmful to myself. I wanted to suggest a slightly stronger wording, both to indicate its importance in some paths, as well as suggest it as a worthwhile concept to have in any path.

xLady Tsukiyox

The Rule of Three isn't something all Wiccans follow. Again it's up to the individual.

Again, I was not attempting to say that it was something that was universal, but in an attempt to have an exhaustive coverage of the topic, since I have heard of it being taught in several paths, it should be addressed in the "Other things you may have heard" vein.

xLady Tsukiyox

The word Pagan encompasses all that's not Christian, Muslim or Islam. Also Wicca has been around since the 50's. It was created in 1954.

I understand that Gardnerian Wicca was started in the 50s, and as far as I knew that had already been covered previously in this thread, but it really didn't catch on in a big way in the Americas until the 60s. Being an American, I apologize for my American-centered point of view (no sarcasm intended) because I recognize that we are in fact holding a conversation about a wider topic, and all I can really say is that I forgot myself for a moment.

As for Pagan covering all that is not Judeo-Christian, I have definitely heard it used that way, but in what little that I know of comparative religious studies, European paganism (mid-post Dark Ages common peasant practices) is not the same as ancient European mythology (Greek/Roman, Norse/Celtic, Egyptian [not European, I know, but somehow gets lumped], etc.), is not the same as far-eastern mysticism (Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism, Taoism, Shinto, etc.), is not the same as ancient American mythology (Native American, Aztec/Mayan, Incan, etc.), is not the same as Judeo-Christian (Pre-Jewish angel cults, Jewish. Christian, and Islamic past and current practices), is not the same as neo-paganism (New Age, Neo-Pagan, Wicca, etc.), much less the other of really ancient stuff (Assyrian/Babylonian, etc) or modern African mythmashes like Vodou/Santeria, and everything more obscure than falls in any other category.

While my personal path has encompassed all of that and Judeo-Christian, and taken bits of it all to be smashed into something that I call Pagan, I do not assume that everyone else is the same. Most of the people that I know either mean Pagan to cover either European paganism, ancient European mythology, or both, but not far-eastern mysticism or Judeo-Christian traditions. I also remember, before I became Pagan, thinking that pagan just covered all polytheistic religions.

But, after all that is said and done, my point is that nobody can agree on a definition of Pagan that makes everyone happy. What is probably worse is that most of the non-Pagans think that Wicca and Pagan can be used interchangeably, and that may be a completely justifiably separate argument worth considering for discussion. And, I'm not even going to touch the Catholic xenophobic "heathen" entry in this discussion either...

[Thorns and Spices]

Doram

Well, as part of my point, I said that there was no central authority, so of course nothing can really be considered law.

That's bollocks, isn't it? There are many things considered law in specific religions. No one said they had to apply to every Pagan to be religious laws.

Besides, Wicca has no central authority. It has over 100 laws.

Quote:

Finally, pagan does cover lots of ground, and not having done an actual exhaustive search, I cannot state what percentage of paths teach it or something like it, only that in my experience it has been the majority.

Which specific ones have you found that do? Out of interest.

Quote:

But ultimately, most of the books that I respect, and also coming from that Dianic Wiccan training, I was taught to treat it very seriously, and as for where I have grown from there, I have come to understand its far reaching implications, and the importance of those implications in performing magick in a way that is not harmful to others, or through any universal reaction, harmful to myself. I wanted to suggest a slightly stronger wording, both to indicate its importance in some paths, as well as suggest it as a worthwhile concept to have in any path.

Was this back when the Dianics retained the core?

When you say "importance in some paths", which paths are you referring to, and what is its import in said paths? Which books are these that you respect?

Quote:

I understand that Gardnerian Wicca was started in the 50s, and as far as I knew that had already been covered previously in this thread, but it really didn't catch on in a big way in the Americas until the 60s. Being an American, I apologize for my American-centered point of view (no sarcasm intended) because I recognize that we are in fact holding a conversation about a wider topic, and all I can really say is that I forgot myself for a moment.

Bloody yanks.

Quote:

As for Pagan covering all that is not Judeo-Christian, I have definitely heard it used that way, but in what little that I know of comparative religious studies, European paganism (mid-post Dark Ages common peasant practices) is not the same as ancient European mythology (Greek/Roman, Norse/Celtic, Egyptian [not European, I know, but somehow gets lumped], etc.), is not the same as far-eastern mysticism (Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism, Taoism, Shinto, etc.), is not the same as ancient American mythology (Native American, Aztec/Mayan, Incan, etc.), is not the same as Judeo-Christian (Pre-Jewish angel cults, Jewish. Christian, and Islamic past and current practices), is not the same as neo-paganism (New Age, Neo-Pagan, Wicca, etc.), much less the other of really ancient stuff (Assyrian/Babylonian, etc) or modern African mythmashes like Vodou/Santeria, and everything more obscure than falls in any other category.

We know that. That's why we - well, I anyway - resent any implication that Paganism is one entity, or that all Pagans behave in a particular way or believe a particular thing. It's an umbrella term. It means, at its widest, "non-Abrahamic". Not just non-Judeo-Christian, as there are more religions than those two that are Abrahamic. So I for one would rather you didn't say things like "most Pagans" unless you do, in fact, mean "most Pagans". I mean, you said "most Pagans attempt not to label anything as 'law'". I'm not sure about that one at all. The Laws of Ma'at spring to mind immediately, of course, though I appreciate one example hardly counters your "most". And I do not know the Kemetic term and whether the translation as "law" is appropriate.

I'm unsure about this "label as law" too. I mean, if something's a law, it's a law. If something's advice, it's advice. It's not about hesitating to say it's a law, as if that were something to be avoided for its own sake, it's about the appropriateness of the word.

I've digressed.

Quote:

While my personal path has encompassed all of that and Judeo-Christian, and taken bits of it all to be smashed into something that I call Pagan,

How'd you manage this? I am always interested to see eclecticism done well, as it is often done so badly.

Quote:

But, after all that is said and done, my point is that nobody can agree on a definition of Pagan that makes everyone happy.

I don't care about making people happy. I care about hitting on a definition that is the most correct that it can be.

Quote:

What is probably worse is that most of the non-Pagans think that Wicca and Pagan can be used interchangeably,

You know what's worse even than that? Many Pagans think that "Wiccan" and "Pagan" can be used interchangeably. Ditto "witch" and "Wiccan".

Know what's worse even than that? He has to eat his way to freedom.

Quote:

And, I'm not even going to touch the Catholic xenophobic "heathen" entry in this discussion either...

What's wrong with us Heathens now? Do I have to go stick another horse's head on a pole? Because the stables down the road is catching onto me.

[scorplett]

Doram

Well, as part of my point, I said that there was no central authority, so of course nothing can really be considered law.

Wicca has laws, they are called the Ardaines.

Doram

and also coming from that Dianic Wiccan training,

I think you are mistaken.
Dianic Witchcraft is not and was never Wicca. It was mislabelled as such for some time, and occasionally still is. But the Dianic traditions were never Wicca.

Doram

I understand that Gardnerian Wicca was started in the 50s, and as far as I knew that had already been covered previously in this thread, but it really didn't catch on in a big way in the Americas until the 60s.

Nothing hit America in a big way until the late '60's.
Wicca did not hit America in a big way until the Gardnerian tradition, though some will argue that the original sub-trad of Central Valley was happily surviving already.

Doram

But, after all that is said and done, my point is that nobody can agree on a definition of Pagan that makes everyone happy. What is probably worse is that most of the non-Pagans think that Wicca and Pagan can be used interchangeably, and that may be a completely justifiably separate argument worth considering for discussion.

I fail to see how the interchangable use of Pagan and Wiccan can be justified.
Wicca is a very specific thing, with clear definitions as to inclusion within the cult. Pagan s merely an umbrella term for all that is not Abrahamic.

[scorplett]

Thorns and Spices

Was this back when the Dianics retained the core?

Dianics never had the core in order to retain it. They originated as a feminist spirituality that then co-opted the term Wicca believing their name to mean or equate with 'goddess worshipping witchcraft'.
Their use of Wicca is less valid than Seax, Cabbot, Ara, Eclectic, Celtic or others that similarly misapropriate the term Wicca.

[Thorns and Spices]

scorplett

Thorns and Spices

Was this back when the Dianics retained the core?

Dianics never had the core in order to retain it. They originated as a feminist spirituality that then co-opted the term Wicca believing their name to mean or equate with 'goddess worshipping witchcraft'.
Their use of Wicca is less valid than Seax, Cabbot, Ara, Eclectic, Celtic or others that similarly misapropriate the term Wicca.

Oh, okay. Thanks 3nodding

[Cunning Witch Angus]

scorplett

Thorns and Spices

Was this back when the Dianics retained the core?

Dianics never had the core in order to retain it. They originated as a feminist spirituality that then co-opted the term Wicca believing their name to mean or equate with 'goddess worshipping witchcraft'.
Their use of Wicca is less valid than Seax, Cabbot, Ara, Eclectic, Celtic or others that similarly misapropriate the term Wicca.

I am but a servant...

Didn't the leaders of the Dianic movement say that they weren't of the Wica anymore?

...of the Cunning Flame

[scorplett]

Arcanist Angus

scorplett

Thorns and Spices

Was this back when the Dianics retained the core?

Dianics never had the core in order to retain it. They originated as a feminist spirituality that then co-opted the term Wicca believing their name to mean or equate with 'goddess worshipping witchcraft'.
Their use of Wicca is less valid than Seax, Cabbot, Ara, Eclectic, Celtic or others that similarly misapropriate the term Wicca.

I am but a servant...

Didn't the leaders of the Dianic movement say that they weren't of the Wica anymore?

...of the Cunning Flame

I believe so, but even Z.Budapest has realized what giving free reign to people means, and the consequences of anyone who chooses a name becoming associated with you.

[Renkon Root]

I have a bit of a ticklish question for those of you that are indoctrinated Wiccans. Are you aloud to wear protection during your sex-rights? If not, do you have your Priests/Priestesses and inductees screened for STDs before the ritual? (Or do I have the wrong idea about "sex-rights" completely?)

[scorplett]

DaikonNairu -Ren-

I have a bit of a ticklish question for those of you that are indoctrinated Wiccans. Are you aloud to wear protection during your sex-rights? If not, do you have your Priests/Priestesses and inductees screened for STDs before the ritual? (Or do I have the wrong idea about "sex-rights" completely?)

I think you probably have the wrong idea about sex-rites. Actual sex-rites are done between two consenting partners, generally in a relationship or similar. Contraception is not an issue any more than it is for couples who are not using some of their sex lives as religious experiences.

[Doram]

Thorns and Spices

Doram

Well, as part of my point, I said that there was no central authority, so of course nothing can really be considered law.

That's bollocks, isn't it? There are many things considered law in specific religions. No one said they had to apply to every Pagan to be religious laws.

Besides, Wicca has no central authority. It has over 100 laws.

I meant that there is no set of laws that is valid in all pagan religions. The term is too wide and varied to allow any real consensus. Attempts have been made, and for the most part, they have failed at agreeing on anything definitive.

I also meant that in those that use the Wiccan Rede, or something similar, as their launching point, may supply rules of behavior that are acceptable, but you are more than free to mess up and thus suffer the consequences, and moreover consider that act of messing up to be OK. And in those cases, it is not treated, or supposed to be treated, as a strictly binding law punishable by death, nor is any other rule suggested.

Thorns and Spices

Doram

Finally, pagan does cover lots of ground, and not having done an actual exhaustive search, I cannot state what percentage of paths teach it or something like it, only that in my experience it has been the majority.

Which specific ones have you found that do? Out of interest.

Generally, many new-agey books on general paganism, that I have seen, mention it and suggest it as an important rule. I fail at remembering any specifics right now, since it has been some time since I did said research, but I will certainly see if I can find any good examples in my bookshelf.

Thorns and Spices

Doram

But ultimately, most of the books that I respect, and also coming from that Dianic Wiccan training, I was taught to treat it very seriously, and as for where I have grown from there, I have come to understand its far reaching implications, and the importance of those implications in performing magick in a way that is not harmful to others, or through any universal reaction, harmful to myself. I wanted to suggest a slightly stronger wording, both to indicate its importance in some paths, as well as suggest it as a worthwhile concept to have in any path.

Was this back when the Dianics retained the core?

When you say "importance in some paths", which paths are you referring to, and what is its import in said paths? Which books are these that you respect?

The Dianics and core has been addressed. I had not heard that those traditions were not actually Wiccan. Perhaps my teacher was wrong. I will have to do some research of my own on that now. Thank you for pointing that out.

From the name, the Wiccan Rede is obviously important to Wiccans, and from my training it is clearly important to Dianic witches as well. As I stated earlier, my memory of the particulars has faded, and I will have to get back to you on much more than that.

Books that I respect.... Well, a list will take a bit (me writing this slightly bleary eyed at 2AM). There are a good many of them that I respect at least parts of, and not all of them are strictly books meant to be learned from ("The Mists of Avalon" springs to mind).

Thorns and Spices

Doram

I understand that Gardnerian Wicca was started in the 50s, and as far as I knew that had already been covered previously in this thread, but it really didn't catch on in a big way in the Americas until the 60s. Being an American, I apologize for my American-centered point of view (no sarcasm intended) because I recognize that we are in fact holding a conversation about a wider topic, and all I can really say is that I forgot myself for a moment.

Bloody yanks.

I did apologize.

Thorns and Spices

Doram

As for Pagan covering all that is not Judeo-Christian, I have definitely heard it used that way, but in what little that I know of comparative religious studies, European paganism (mid-post Dark Ages common peasant practices) is not the same as ancient European mythology (Greek/Roman, Norse/Celtic, Egyptian [not European, I know, but somehow gets lumped], etc.), is not the same as far-eastern mysticism (Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism, Taoism, Shinto, etc.), is not the same as ancient American mythology (Native American, Aztec/Mayan, Incan, etc.), is not the same as Judeo-Christian (Pre-Jewish angel cults, Jewish. Christian, and Islamic past and current practices), is not the same as neo-paganism (New Age, Neo-Pagan, Wicca, etc.), much less the other of really ancient stuff (Assyrian/Babylonian, etc) or modern African mythmashes like Vodou/Santeria, and everything more obscure than falls in any other category.

We know that. That's why we - well, I anyway - resent any implication that Paganism is one entity, or that all Pagans behave in a particular way or believe a particular thing. It's an umbrella term. It means, at its widest, "non-Abrahamic". Not just non-Judeo-Christian, as there are more religions than those two that are Abrahamic. So I for one would rather you didn't say things like "most Pagans" unless you do, in fact, mean "most Pagans". I mean, you said "most Pagans attempt not to label anything as 'law'". I'm not sure about that one at all. The Laws of Ma'at spring to mind immediately, of course, though I appreciate one example hardly counters your "most". And I do not know the Kemetic term and whether the translation as "law" is appropriate.

I'm unsure about this "label as law" too. I mean, if something's a law, it's a law. If something's advice, it's advice. It's not about hesitating to say it's a law, as if that were something to be avoided for its own sake, it's about the appropriateness of the word.

I've digressed.

See earlier responses, but yeah. Digressed it is.

Thorns and Spices

Doram

While my personal path has encompassed all of that and Judeo-Christian, and taken bits of it all to be smashed into something that I call Pagan,

How'd you manage this? I am always interested to see eclecticism done well, as it is often done so badly.

Well, my friends who have become my family have formed what we call a tribe, and we essentially have crafted our own family tradition pulling from a great many things. If you are more curious, I am certainly willing to continue the discussion via PM.

Thorns and Spices

Doram

But, after all that is said and done, my point is that nobody can agree on a definition of Pagan that makes everyone happy.

I don't care about making people happy. I care about hitting on a definition that is the most correct that it can be.

Well, my point is that Wiccan has a clear and definitive definition, and Pagan does not, and the two conversations are often intertwined and/or confused.

Thorns and Spices

Doram

What is probably worse is that most of the non-Pagans think that Wicca and Pagan can be used interchangeably,

You know what's worse even than that? Many Pagans think that "Wiccan" and "Pagan" can be used interchangeably. Ditto "witch" and "Wiccan".

Know what's worse even than that? He has to eat his way to freedom.

Agreed. Also, where does the "eat his way to freedom" quote come from? British saying?

Thorns and Spices

Doram

And, I'm not even going to touch the Catholic xenophobic "heathen" entry in this discussion either...

What's wrong with us Heathens now? Do I have to go stick another horse's head on a pole? Because the stables down the road is catching onto me.

Hah! That I can appreciate.

[Sanguina Cruenta]

Doram

Thorns and Spices

Know what's worse even than that? He has to eat his way to freedom.

Agreed. Also, where does the "eat his way to freedom" quote come from? British saying?

Dead baby joke.