|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 5:17 am
I actually saw this post in another guild I almost joined. I decide against it because despite the fact that they claim tolerance and education, upon reading into the guild, they really don't. In fact, it seems like many of their members are... *erm* egotistical.. sweatdrop So I thought I'd bring it here where people are much mroe tolerant. biggrin
A topic of debate amongst Witches, Wiccans, and Pagans (earth-based) overall is whether or not you're a "true" Wiccan or Witch is you practice or gained your education as a solitary or without formal teaching. Those same people also tend to believe that Wiccans, even with some formal teaching or a coven aren't really Witches or Pagans.. that they're all fluff.
Thoughts?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:29 am
OK, I will be a little more tough. I believe in god, I pray. But I also practice "magic" because I can help people by that.
Wicca is a modern nonsense, it is not based on old cultural habits and if some, they twist them. I do not believe a wicca spell when the reciept is put an oil *witha specific name which you have to buy in their special shops* into water and say *a pretty long spell*. This does not work.
Magic is not about boiling frogs in the chaudrons. It is life learning. It is knowledge of herbs, their usage and where they can help. It is old habits of protecting your house and love ones. It is about living in peace with the nature. NOT about saying spells (well there are spells of course, but who has time and ingredients to do it), acting like in a movie or buying preprepared ingredients. That is what I say. heart
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 9:20 am
Seeing as how truth is in the eye of the beholder and quite relative in the first place, it's really up to you to decide your own standards. No matter what you believe, what stance you pick, there will always be someone who disagrees with you. Particularly in terms of how you choose to categorize things, that really varies from person to person. Just think of all the different ways people conceive of 'love!' Where words have particularly diverse definitions, it's best to just set up an operational defintion or spell out what you mean by it if the conversation calls for it. There's no consensus definition.
Personally, I find that traditional training and more various types both have their place and they will both continue to exist no matter how much both sides may exchange harsh words with each other. Formal teaching is important, but a bright, diligent individual can do quite well on one's own. Particularly with this path, because it is so experiential. So much of it cannot be 'taught' ... you either get it or you don't. A teacher can help, but you have to awaken to that little mystery on your own. Nobody can do it for you. Does that make any sense?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 9:21 pm
I personally am not Wiccan. I'll admit that I have several books on the matter (not Silver Ravenwolf.. rider.. thing.. or whatever her name is LOL). But I also have books on Buddhism and Gnosticism. Religion as a whole fascinates me.
I do believe that it's important to give people respect if they're willing and want to tread the path of knowledge. There is definitely more to any faith than "Oh neat! I can cast a spell!" Or "Oh neat! I can chant!" Those peopel bother me regardless they're faux faith. Faux faith of any kind is a hindrence on society of a whole and sets true believers back.
To me, if a person is willing to put forth the time and effort that faith and practice requires, that makes them a part of their spiritual path. Just because someone went and found a teacher doesn't necessarily make them more of a "real" Witch. If I required the need of a Witch, I' dmuch rather go to someone who learned on their own and has working and comprehensive knowledge than someone who meets with a tutor twice a week (that might be somewhat of an exaggeration but I think you know what I mean).
I hope this makes sense sweatdrop And thank you all for doing exactly what I thought you would- answer civilly. It's a nice treat to be a true tolerance-oriented guild mrgreen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 7:04 am
Silver gets more flak than she deserves. I have a feeling that many of her critics criticize based on what they've heard from other people instead of actually reading her works and making up their own minds. Her books seem to vary in quality though; I haven't gotten to giving each of them a fair treatment. But then, I'm also the sort who cuts out the wheat from the chaff in terms of evaluating sources.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 8:21 am
Starlock Silver gets more flak than she deserves. I have a feeling that many of her critics criticize based on what they've heard from other people instead of actually reading her works and making up their own minds. Her books seem to vary in quality though; I haven't gotten to giving each of them a fair treatment. But then, I'm also the sort who cuts out the wheat from the chaff in terms of evaluating sources. I've read "To RIde a Silver Broomstick".. it okay. I didn't like it because I didn't feel as though I Was really getting more than a sort-of happy-go-lucky side of things. I can appreciate enthusiasm for a spiritual path. But I'm also the type of person that's more "Okay. That's good you're happy about it. But what else is to this besides wanting to do a spell and dance around some candles?" And that's how I felt after reading that book. More like she wanted to dance around some candles than what explainging what the true meaning and important of it was. BUt that's just my opinion. smile
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 10:02 am
The Goddess Aradia Starlock Silver gets more flak than she deserves. I have a feeling that many of her critics criticize based on what they've heard from other people instead of actually reading her works and making up their own minds. Her books seem to vary in quality though; I haven't gotten to giving each of them a fair treatment. But then, I'm also the sort who cuts out the wheat from the chaff in terms of evaluating sources. I've read "To RIde a Silver Broomstick".. it okay. I didn't like it because I didn't feel as though I Was really getting more than a sort-of happy-go-lucky side of things. I can appreciate enthusiasm for a spiritual path. But I'm also the type of person that's more "Okay. That's good you're happy about it. But what else is to this besides wanting to do a spell and dance around some candles?" And that's how I felt after reading that book. More like she wanted to dance around some candles than what explainging what the true meaning and important of it was. BUt that's just my opinion. smile I'd agree on the evaluation of that book. As far as 101 books go, it isn't particularly outstanding and I wouldn't recommend it as a starting point. When I moved past judging her by that book and checked out the other two in the series (Cauldron and Sacred Flame) that's where I was pleasantly surprised. She gets into real meat issues of spirituality more than some others I've read (which admittedly, doesn't take much, sad to say).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 10:15 am
Starlock The Goddess Aradia Starlock Silver gets more flak than she deserves. I have a feeling that many of her critics criticize based on what they've heard from other people instead of actually reading her works and making up their own minds. Her books seem to vary in quality though; I haven't gotten to giving each of them a fair treatment. But then, I'm also the sort who cuts out the wheat from the chaff in terms of evaluating sources. I've read "To RIde a Silver Broomstick".. it okay. I didn't like it because I didn't feel as though I Was really getting more than a sort-of happy-go-lucky side of things. I can appreciate enthusiasm for a spiritual path. But I'm also the type of person that's more "Okay. That's good you're happy about it. But what else is to this besides wanting to do a spell and dance around some candles?" And that's how I felt after reading that book. More like she wanted to dance around some candles than what explainging what the true meaning and important of it was. BUt that's just my opinion. smile I'd agree on the evaluation of that book. As far as 101 books go, it isn't particularly outstanding and I wouldn't recommend it as a starting point. When I moved past judging her by that book and checked out the other two in the series (Cauldron and Sacred Flame) that's where I was pleasantly surprised. She gets into real meat issues of spirituality more than some others I've read (which admittedly, doesn't take much, sad to say). If they're better than her first I might read them just for the sake of reading them. wink It's alwas interesting to find out others opinions on books and such. 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 6:42 pm
I'll read anything and anything I can get my hands on. Having done that, it gives one a wider appreciation (or criticism as it may be) of what's available. There was one book I read once that was a recent print and was still circulating some of the misconceptions. There have been works I've read that are organized as if put together by a scatterbrain, books whose author's tone is just a bit too abrasive for some tastes, and of course misinformation. You'll be hard pressed to find any work without something you can gripe about in it... so instead it can be best to seek what you value in a work.
One thing that can be valuable is to read from a variety of angles; not just what you find in the New Age section. That can be hard if you're not attending college, though. For instance, many of the more academic studies really don't make a strong distinction between modern witchcraft and Wicca, even though the community usually sees these as distinct. Many of them also do not distinguish between more traditional forms of Wicca and the newer forms that have arisen from publication of how-to books. All this may be in error, but I suppose the point is the jury isn't in on these issus even though there seem to be some who believe that it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
