Clarification on Wicca

[ShadowCatSoul]

I believe I understand now, thank you.  

[Bastemhet]

Celeblin Galadeneryn

TeaDidikai

Bastemhet

Is it valid to worship other gods in a Wiccan ritual context?

According to the Alexandrians and Gards I know personally, no. How much that is a function of personal opinion verses Orthopraxy is up in the air.

One might also want to look at the Gods on the other side of the ritual. Would they be alright with being worshiped that way?

That was my concern. I was told about people doing a ritual with Kemetic deities in a Wiccan context, with no idea that the Kemetic deities have particular purity standards that were not addressed by the participants. That really ruffled my feathers. I mean why the ******** would you worship deities you don't even take the time to get to know? Why call upon them and ask them for something when you couldn't be bothered to at least take a spiritual shower or something? I just hope that whoever they called upon was patient enough to put up with their nonsense. Or just not present at all.

But if this group was even Wiccan and not generic neopagan is up for debate as well.  

[TeaDidikai]

Bastemhet

That was my concern. I was told about people doing a ritual with Kemetic deities in a Wiccan context, with no idea that the Kemetic deities have particular purity standards that were not addressed by the participants. That really ruffled my feathers. I mean why the ******** would you worship deities you don't even take the time to get to know? Why call upon them and ask them for something when you couldn't be bothered to at least take a spiritual shower or something? I just hope that whoever they called upon was patient enough to put up with their nonsense. Or just not present at all.

But if this group was even Wiccan and not generic neopagan is up for debate as well.

I'm betting generic neo-pagan.
Or maybe Open ritual- which isn't part of the cult's practices, but might be something they use to train those of the outer court etc.  

[too2sweet]

TeaDidikai

too2sweet

It may depend as well on if one is soft poly or hard poly.

If they change the deities, isn't that well, breaking the orthopraxy?

Gardner talked about other groups who worship other deities, excluding them from the Wica.

The problem is that I've seen authors (Viviane Crowley come to mind first) who seem to have a very soft poly bent to their writings. I already took the book back to the library, but she mentioned various names in connection with both the God and the Goddess in Wicca: The Old Religion in the New Millennnium. The Fararrs do it as well in The Witches' God and The Witches' Goddess. Again how much either actually relate to the orthopraxy I have no idea, but both are on many of the "recommended reading" lists for BTW.

But from what I've heard here, and on A&J the Gods of the Wica are specific deities, and to worship others within Wiccan ritual is a no-no. It's certainly not something I'd do.

Quote:

Quote:

Wiccan traditions are Gardnerian, Alexandrian, Central Valley, Mohesian, Majestic, Kingstone, Silver Crescent, Daoine Coire, and some lines of Blue Star, Georgian and Protean. (there are probably a few more out there, but those are the major ones I think)

Blue Star and Protean are often said to have violated the orthopraxy.

Georgian doesn't claim to have the bare minimal requirements.

It's only certain lines of those (Blue Star, Georgian and Protean) particular ones that can claim it - and I have no idea which ones. So it would be something that anyone looking into those trads would need to check carefully (if having BTW lineage is important to them).  

[TeaDidikai]

too2sweet

The problem is that I've seen authors (Viviane Crowley come to mind first) who seem to have a very soft poly bent to their writings. I already took the book back to the library, but she mentioned various names in connection with both the God and the Goddess in Wicca: The Old Religion in the New Millennnium. The Fararrs do it as well in The Witches' God and The Witches' Goddess. Again how much either actually relate to the orthopraxy I have no idea, but both are on many of the "recommended reading" lists for BTW.

But from what I've heard here, and on A&J the Gods of the Wica are specific deities, and to worship others within Wiccan ritual is a no-no. It's certainly not something I'd do.

But none of those sources are actually of Wica. confused

Written by members of the Wica? Sure. Written about the cult and it's practices? Not so much.

Quote:

It's only certain lines of those (Blue Star, Georgian and Protean) particular ones that can claim it - and I have no idea which ones. So it would be something that anyone looking into those trads would need to check carefully (if having BTW lineage is important to them).

What I was trying to show was that two of those groups don't even meet the most basic definition of The Wica according to their own creator's words. One has lineage but has removed the practice from orthopraxy to different degrees and the other lacks lineage all together.  

[too2sweet]

TeaDidikai

too2sweet

The problem is that I've seen authors (Viviane Crowley come to mind first) who seem to have a very soft poly bent to their writings. I already took the book back to the library, but she mentioned various names in connection with both the God and the Goddess in Wicca: The Old Religion in the New Millennnium. The Fararrs do it as well in The Witches' God and The Witches' Goddess. Again how much either actually relate to the orthopraxy I have no idea, but both are on many of the "recommended reading" lists for BTW.

But from what I've heard here, and on A&J the Gods of the Wica are specific deities, and to worship others within Wiccan ritual is a no-no. It's certainly not something I'd do.

But none of those sources are actually of Wica. confused

Written by members of the Wica? Sure. Written about the cult and it's practices? Not so much.

But they are given as study material for potential initiates, so why would they want you to study something that wasn't relative in some way? Crowley's book is supposedly about Wicca, so if she is saying "this is how Wiccans view their God and Goddess...", and goes on to describe a soft poly view point, then odds are that, at least some other lineaged Wiccans see it the same way.

My understanding - due to the orthopraxic nature of Wicca, is that it is really up to each individual how they "believe" in the Gods. So I don't see that having a soft poly view of it, is completely out of the question.

Quote:

Quote:

It's only certain lines of those (Blue Star, Georgian and Protean) particular ones that can claim it - and I have no idea which ones. So it would be something that anyone looking into those trads would need to check carefully (if having BTW lineage is important to them).

What I was trying to show was that two of those groups don't even meet the most basic definition of The Wica according to their own creator's words. One has lineage but has removed the practice from orthopraxy to different degrees and the other lacks lineage all together.

I understand that for the most part, those Trads are not considered BTW, I'm not disputing that. It has been noted elsewhere that there are still some specific lines within them that are (exactly which ones, or how they meet the requirements - I have no idea), which is all I was mentioning.  

[TeaDidikai]

too2sweet

But they are given as study material for potential initiates, so why would they want you to study something that wasn't relative in some way.

Kudzu pointed out that once one of her activities while she preped for initiation was to look at a dressed alter and "fix" what was wrong.

Part of the lesson was understanding that what is commonly available isn't always of the Wica.

Quote:

Crowley's book is supposedly about Wicca, so if she is saying "this is how Wiccans view their God and Goddess...", and goes on to describe a soft poly view point, then odds are that, at least some other lineaged Wiccans see it the same way.

But the whole point is that it doesn't matter what individual members of the cult believe, it's how they practice.

Lineaged members of the Wica may be soft polytheistic, but that doesn't mean that Wica is.

Quote:

My understanding - due to the orthopraxic nature of Wicca, is that it is really up to each individual how they "believe" in the Gods. So I don't see that having a soft poly view of it, is completely out of the question.

Not saying it is. I'm merely pointing out that it isn't a contextual point of the cult.

Quote:

I understand that on the whole those Trads are not considered BTW, but it has been noted elsewhere that there are still lines within them that are, which is all I was mentioning.

How do you have a line of a tradition that is of the Wica without lineaged initiation?  

[too2sweet]

Quote:

Part of the lesson was understanding that what is commonly available isn't always of the Wica.

So where does one go to get valid information? If one can't trust someone who is lineaged to write accurately (at least as much is possible without breaking any oaths), then who do you trust?

Quote:

But the whole point is that it doesn't matter what individual members of the cult believe, it's how they practice.

Considering that it is through the practices that one defines one's beliefs, it seems odd to me that the same mysteries, could lead to such vastly differing views on one's Gods (at least in terms of hard v. soft poly).

TeaDidikai

How do you have a line of a tradition that is of the Wica without lineaged initiation?

You are way too fast for me. sweatdrop I edited my original post somewhat before I saw this, but with Protean for example, my understanding is that some kept the orthopraxy and some didn't, so the line that kept it - is still BTW. Blue Star, honestly I have no idea, but I would assume it is something similar. With Georgian, my understanding is that they have the many of the same practices, but lack lineage, so if one was able to get lineage (though proper initiation), then their downline would be BTW as long as they continue to maintain the orthopraxy (in theory anyways).  

[TeaDidikai]

too2sweet

So where does one go to get valid information? If one can't trust someone who is lineaged to write accurately (at least as much is possible without breaking any oaths), then who do you trust?

You trust what is revealed after initiation.
It's kinda part and parcel with it being a Mystery tradition.

Quote:

Considering that it is through the practices that one defines one's beliefs, it seems odd to me that the same mysteries, could lead to such vastly differing views on one's Gods (at least in terms of hard v. soft poly).

What about it seems odd?
That is to say- is there something actually wrong with it or is this a byproduct of you projecting your expectations onto it?

Quote:

You are way too fast for me. sweatdrop I edited my original post somewhat before I saw this, but with Protean for example, my understanding is that some kept the orthopraxy and some didn't, so the line that kept it - is still BTW.

But then, are they actually Protean? I acknowledge that some of this is in the air because it depends on which member of the cult you talk to... same with Blue Star.

Quote:

With Georgian, my understanding is that they have the many of the same practices, but lack lineage, so if one was able to get lineage (though proper initiation), then their downline would be BTW as long as they continue to maintain the orthopraxy (in theory anyways).

But Georgian wouldn't be the tradition, they would be initiates of a lineage such as Alexandrian etc.  

[too2sweet]

TeaDidikai

too2sweet

So where does one go to get valid information? If one can't trust someone who is lineaged to write accurately (at least as much is possible without breaking any oaths), then who do you trust?

You trust what is revealed after initiation.
It's kinda part and parcel with it being a Mystery tradition.

How does one get to the point of knowing if Wicca is the right path for them, if all the information that they have to go on (pre-initiation) is contradictory? I understand it's a mystery tradition, but of all the books that have been written, are there not any that are actual valid representations of what Wicca is?

Because at this point what I'm getting out of it all, is that all books are right and all are wrong - only the correct practices matter and it will only be what you (the initiate) gets from the mysteries that really matters. (if that makes any sense).

Quote:

Quote:

Considering that it is through the practices that one defines one's beliefs, it seems odd to me that the same mysteries, could lead to such vastly differing views on one's Gods (at least in terms of hard v. soft poly).

What about it seems odd?
That is to say- is there something actually wrong with it or is this a byproduct of you projecting your expectations onto it?

Some is my expectations, and I realize that we all experience things in different ways (so that is not odd), and I'm not saying that there is anything necessarily wrong with people coming to those differing conclusions. They are just such opposites, that it seems strange that the same practices and/or mysteries would lead to such oppsoing views on deity.

Quote:

Quote:

You are way too fast for me. sweatdrop I edited my original post somewhat before I saw this, but with Protean for example, my understanding is that some kept the orthopraxy and some didn't, so the line that kept it - is still BTW.

But then, are they actually Protean? I acknowledge that some of this is in the air because it depends on which member of the cult you talk to... same with Blue Star.

Protean was originally BTW (Gardnerian lineage), and my understanding is that anyone who wanted to continue to call themselves Protean was free to do so (source).

Quote:

Quote:

With Georgian, my understanding is that they have the many of the same practices, but lack lineage, so if one was able to get lineage (though proper initiation), then their downline would be BTW as long as they continue to maintain the orthopraxy (in theory anyways).

But Georgian wouldn't be the tradition, they would be initiates of a lineage such as Alexandrian etc.

Since I don't know how similar the two practices are, don't know if they can be combined or not (if it would be one of those, "you can add to the core, but not take away" type of things). I personally don't know anyone that is Georgian who claims BTW, so at this point it's all pure speculation.  

[TeaDidikai]

too2sweet

How does one get to the point of knowing if Wicca is the right path for them, if all the information that they have to go on (pre-initiation) is contradictory? I understand it's a mystery tradition, but of all the books that have been written, are there not any that are actual valid representations of what Wicca is?

Because what makes the cult the cult is the Mysteries. How you understand the Mysteries is the orthopraxy.

Quote:

Because at this point what I'm getting out of it all, is that all books are right and all are wrong - only the correct practices matter and it will only be what you (the initiate) gets from the mysteries that really matters. (if that makes any sense).

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Mystery Traditions are really hard for folks raised with Revealed Traditions to grasp. But from my non-Wica perspective, I think you just got it as well as anyone could.

Quote:

Some is my expectations, and I realize that we all experience things in different ways (so that is not odd), and I'm not saying that there is anything necessarily wrong with people coming to those differing conclusions. They are just such opposites, that it seems strange that the same practices and/or mysteries would lead to such oppsoing views on deity.

~shrugs~ Doesn't strike me as that odd really. But then, I have heard of Monotheistic Asatru.

Quote:

Protean was originally BTW (Gardnerian lineage), and my understanding is that anyone who wanted to continue to call themselves Protean was free to do so (source).

Like I said, there's some schism there between the Wica. Grey area and all that.

Quote:

Since I don't know how similar the two practices are, don't know if they can be combined or not (if it would be one of those, "you can add to the core, but not take away" type of things). I personally don't know anyone that is Georgian who claims BTW, so at this point it's all pure speculation.

Part of the problem is that the Georgians were never exposed to the core to begin with.  

[too2sweet]

TeaDidikai

Mystery Traditions are really hard for folks raised with Revealed Traditions to grasp. But from my non-Wica perspective, I think you just got it as well as anyone could.

I'm just frustrated, because there comes a point where books are useless, but if one doesn't have access to a coven, then they are pretty much screwed.

Quote:

~shrugs~ Doesn't strike me as that odd really. But then, I have heard of Monotheistic Asatru.

Interesting...

Quote:

Quote:

Since I don't know how similar the two practices are, don't know if they can be combined or not (if it would be one of those, "you can add to the core, but not take away" type of things). I personally don't know anyone that is Georgian who claims BTW, so at this point it's all pure speculation.

Part of the problem is that the Georgians were never exposed to the core to begin with.

I was thinking that he'd had some exposure to it at some point, but maybe not.  

[TeaDidikai]

too2sweet

I'm just frustrated, because there comes a point where books are useless, but if one doesn't have access to a coven, then they are pretty much screwed.

I hope your frustration comes to a pleasant end one day.

Quote:

I was thinking that he'd had some exposure to it at some point, but maybe not.

Not through initiation. But then, anyone can find an Open Source BOS if they look hard enough.  

[too2sweet]

TeaDidikai

too2sweet

I'm just frustrated, because there comes a point where books are useless, but if one doesn't have access to a coven, then they are pretty much screwed.

I hope your frustration comes to a pleasant end one day.

Thanks! heart Me too!

Quote:

Quote:

I was thinking that he'd had some exposure to it at some point, but maybe not.

Not through initiation. But then, anyone can find an Open Source BOS if they look hard enough.

Well, he spent quite a bit of time studying with initiates, and the way some of the bio was worded implied that he'd had access to some stuff. I couldn't tell as well if the Coven he was working with originally was BTW or not, but it did mention that at one point he'd actually had a BOS, but that it'd been destroyed.

For some reason I got the impression that they had a good bit of the core (hence the reason they did the whole oathbound/initiatory thing), but just couldn't prove lineage. Not really sure how I came to that conclusion though. sweatdrop  

[TeaDidikai]

too2sweet

Well, he spent quite a bit of time studying with initiates, and the way some of the bio was worded implied that he'd had access to some stuff. I couldn't tell as well if the Coven he was working with originally was BTW or not, but it did mention that at one point he'd actually had a BOS, but that it'd been destroyed.

For some reason I got the impression that they had a good bit of the core (hence the reason they did the whole oathbound/initiatory thing), but just couldn't prove lineage. Not really sure how I came to that conclusion though. sweatdrop

Granted, we have the internet now, but there's a good chance that with a bit of effort given the resources available to me I would be able to produce something that resembled Wica enough to fool a Seeker.