Welcome to Gaia! ::

And didn't you get kicked out?
I'm a pre-initiate of Gardnerian Wicca. My affiliation with the PFRG is irrelevant.

What defines Wicca is its practices. The core of Wicca is its Mysteries. In any matter, the practices require belief in Deity, specifically the Lord and Lady of the Isles. The practices worship the Lord and Lady... and would be kind of pointless if you didn't believe in them.

That's right. They couldn't find your username in the memberlist when they were trying to boot you out. No offense, but I don't think you're in a position to talk down to me the way you did.

Uh, belief in the Lord and Lady and experiencing Their Mysteries is the entire point of Wicca. Therefore the most major thing. It's being initiated into and worshipping Them as a priest or priestess. The rituals are definitely a major part of Wicca, but they are just means to an end, that end being the worship of the Lord and Lady.

Age has no bearing on something's truth value. A religion is no less "real" than another simply because of the time it was founded. Nice Wisdom of the Ancients fallacy though. 3nodding



Excuse me, I need to go get my frying-pan if I'm going to cook that delicious red herring. 3nodding



Oh, so if something is described as X and Y, yet it only follows the definition of X, but you treat X as the core, you can still call it X and Y?

Then I am your Australian King. Now, I'm not really a king (yet), but I am from Australia, which I treat as the main part of my proposition, so I get to keep the title and everything that comes with it. Concede now pleb, and your Australian King may have mercy on you.

Edit: And just so you know "Celtic" is an adjective, Wicca a noun, so calling it "Celtic Wicca" is tantamount to saying "It is Wicca that is Celtic", it is by structural definition stating that Wicca is the basis. Which, if I recall correctly you stated yourself that it is not, you said it has "Celtic gods in Wiccan beliefs" or some-such nonsense. Considering that Wicca is an orthopraxy, and without being lineaged you cannot stick to the correct orthopraxy, and that by introducing Celtic systems you would be significantly deviating from the orthopraxy, it is impossible for it to be in any shape Wicca. It would be like me removing a T-Bone from a T-Bone steak and continuing to call the bone a T-Bone steak even though the steak is no longer there.



Except you linked to the very page we use as the definition of Wicca xp

I'm sorry, this much fail means I have to confiscate all your internets. 3nodding

So you are introduced to the Lord and Lady before your initiation?

After/during initiation I believe. Someone can say I am wrong about this though. I doubt it though, because I am right.

Why? Based on age? Still Wisdom of the Ancients fallacy.



...it's called "logic", mayhap you should look it up sometime.



If raising valid points is being an a**, then draw a face on my bum and call it Harold! 3nodding



What little I can make sense of in this word salad you seem to be claiming that you know what the definition of Wicca is, to which I would further ask, why then, do you insist on calling something "Celtic Wicca" when it is clearly not Wicca?



rofl oh this is rich. Where the flying ******** did any of us claim to be Wiccan? Last I checked, not anyone who's posted here in response to you is. xd



Then "people" are intellectually dishonest morons who you shouldn't listen to simply based on the ad populum fallacy. If everyone jumped off of a cliff, would you instantly think it a swell idea?

I rarely do.



Actually, they said Celtic Wicca doesn't exist, your religion may or may not be "real", it's merely the title you give your religion that's being contested here.



No, but I know two Wiccans whose lineages have been independently verified who have shared enough outer-court information with me to get a general idea of what I'm talking about. On top of that, I have read some of the writings of Gerald Gardner, and am currently looking to procure a copy of Triumph of the Moon.



Well, we already had that definition, so posting it wasn't particularly necessary.



Two things. First off, Celt or Celts would be the correct term to refer to those groups who are Celtic. Celtic is still an adjective.

Secondly, "Celtic religion" is a bit of a misnomer. The Celts were a loose grouping of several different peoples joined primarily by their spoken and written dialects, their religious views differed quite drastically. For example, the religion of my Scottish Celt ancestors deviates very significantly from those of the Gael Celts. Thus, to call it the "Celtic religion" is as much of a misnomer as me talking about "The Eastern Religion".



It's not an adjective in the sentence you gave because the sentence was constructed in a grammatically incorrect manner.

It's much in the same way I could construct the sentence "Absolutely is toast." wherein "absolutely" is treated as a noun, however such a statement would be grammatically incorrect as absolutely is not a noun.

Edit: Or, alternatively (sorry for leaving this bit out, it's been a while since my advanced English courses), Celtic could be a modifier to a silent noun. In much the way I would say "Go do the dishes." and the noun would be an unspoken "you", in this case Celtic could be the adjective to the unspoken noun "people". However, if I recall correctly, that exception only applies to direct address anyways, so it may or may not be valid in the context given.

Double Edit: Sorry, there is one form of Celtic that functions as a noun, but would not make sense in the sentence you provided.



In this sense, Celtic is the language spoken, not the groups of people who speak it, so unless your sentence is referring to the language, it still doesn't make grammatical sense.