Are there boundaries to Wicca? [Archive]

Vakuur Bairn

11-12-2010, 01:21 PM

Your probably being told this by some coven bound Gardenian. Some Wiccans, especially those belonging to a coven that believe only a witch can make a witch, seem to think there is a certain way to worship diety. Personally, as an ecclectic wiccan/pagan, I dont think there is one specific way to pracice Wicca as I base this belief off the description; Wicca is a proactive Earth-centered belief system that honors all life. Witchcraft is a nature based, life afferming belief system that follows a moral code and seeks to build harmony among people which, in its process, empowers the self and others.
With such in mind, I have always believed that no matter how you practice the Craft, be it through candle magik or nature magik or faery magik or what have you, or what pantheon you call Diety, be it egyptian, greek, norse, etc, what you practice is Wiccan so long as its goals are to the betterment and protection of nature and its creatures. And hey, if nothing else, you'd be one heck of a pagan regardless lol! Blessed be!

arohk

11-12-2010, 04:54 PM

I for one don't follow the "what is the right path to wicca thing" as far as I am concerned if you have to follow only one "right way" then it would be like being a christian or something similar to that.

I practice some of the beliefs of the celtic way but I also employ some of my own beliefs and understanding, so as far as I am concerned is it's your path so if it feels right to you then do it.

Mab

11-12-2010, 06:43 PM

Vakuur Bairn

11-12-2010, 06:51 PM

lol! Well how about this; I think what you are doing is blessed! I'm glad you are doing what feels right to you and that's exactly how it should be! lol Brightest blessing Mab, may your Dieties guide you on your path!

Silverm00n

11-12-2010, 10:52 PM

Why is it so hard to get rid of that Christian frame of mind, that deep inset training? Seems I have a hard time letting it go and opening myself up to a different way of life. I like my new path, love I should say, but I always feel I need this approval/disapproval thing if I'm doing things right. I will keep practicing and learning and maybe one day, I won't have to compare it to anything else or try to please anyone else. Thanks for the reminder, that old structured way is hard to fight off... Mab

Mab,

Indeed, it is difficult to undue and change our way of thinking and that holds true for anything we do. Because religion and beliefs are essentially "passed" down to us, it is more difficult to change because we are taught these practices from birth. Baptism, Communion, Confirmation, etc, is taught from day one because, that is what our parents believe. It's easier for kids who grow up in homes that have little to no religious roots to be more open to new thoughts and ideas.

What you are going through is very common, and as time goes on you will grow within yourself and within your spiritual path (whatever it may be). And most importantly, you will realize that there is not one person out there that is above, you. :ylflower:

Satyr

11-13-2010, 12:02 AM

Mab, if you are asking this question, then you are probably not 'wiccan' in the strict sense of the word, according to those 'initiated Gardinearian wiccans'. There is so often a big hoohaa about the use of the word 'wiccan' with the lineaged wiccans getting very upset with the loose use of the word these days.

Most likely you are just a plain ol witch and as such, you can go ahead and do your candle magick etc

Mab

11-13-2010, 08:27 PM

Thank you for all the comments. I am a solitary practitioner and have only been on this path just over a year and am still very inexperienced and things just seem to jumble up in my mind, but I like where I am right now - no matter how many questions - some how an answer comes to me from somewhere and that is a good thing, it allows me to keep moving forward... Mab

Artemisia

11-18-2010, 01:17 PM

Mab

11-18-2010, 05:18 PM

Mahershalalwis

12-10-2010, 04:26 PM

gabrielle004

04-26-2011, 11:33 AM

LexusVihal

04-26-2011, 03:04 PM

I think you can be many forms of wiccan, as long as you have a few of the basics like stated above. But I personally do candle magick all the time! As a solitary, I think you morph into your own system over time as you realize what connects you to the earth and deity and what doesn't work so well. I had to realize my Christian background coming in a well. Anytime I heard the word God, I would think of the Christian God... then I realized what i was doing and thought, why can't it be the Lord of Wicca to me when I hear Lord or God, instead of Jesus (Lord) and Eloheim (God the father). It can! It just took me a conscious thought to change the way I was thinking.

:hippy:

I really like what you said here. When I first started reading about Wicca I was hit with a masssive wave of guilt brought on by my Christian upbringing. I felt like I was 'betraying' my belief system. I went to bed one night thinking that I wished I had an answer to what was 'right'. I had my first OBE (out of body experience) and I actually got to talk to the Goddess in her maiden form. (I hadn't read about her forms yet, but she appeared to me exactly as she was described. Young, wearing a yellow sun dress, and radiating light and warmth.) She totally changed my perspective on gods and godesses and religion. She told me that every religion is apart of each other, and every god and goddess does exist. There is the ALL, the one powerfull being; then the God and Goddess are the male and female forms of the ALL; and then you have all the other gods and goddess of the many different pantheons. When calling on them specifically you're calling on specific energy, but it's all from the same force. Prayer in Christianity is a form of spellcasting. You're focusing your energy on a purpose and sending it up to God to help answer (of course try and actually tell that to a christain :p ).

You guys can take what you want from that, but it definitely helped me to further my way on my own path. And in the end I think that's the most important part, that it's YOUR own path. Everybody is different, and why shouldn't religion and it's practice be the same.

Mab

04-28-2011, 12:43 PM

I have to agree as far as furthering my path also. When I was going to church the few times I did, I used to always wonder why I couldn't have my own altar at home, why did I have to confess through a priest, why did only the minister do rituals, questions upon questions. I like the Wiccan "non-structure" style. It has taken awhile to get to this point, but I am dedicated. I sometimes just sit by my altar and light a candle and just thank deity... Mab

Gwenyfur

04-28-2011, 01:53 PM

I was out snuggling in the apple tree earlier today...just communing with nature and the divine...

I love that I don't need a "temple" or a "priest" to help me visit the Divine...it's all around me and in me at anytime ... anywhere...

It's a lovely spring day today...mid 60's, sunshine, white fluffy clouds, gentle breeze...the shade of the tree as I leaned against it's strong limbs the scent of the breeze coming through its leaves to tickle my hair...oh yeah...great afternoon for communing with the Divine and prepping for tonight's Working...

Mab

04-28-2011, 08:53 PM

It seems like you have experienced the deity in its truest form. I hope one day to get there.

I know it will not happen over night, in a year or two, but I know that I have a connection with deity but I want to feel it too... Mab

Gwenyfur

04-28-2011, 11:18 PM

Sometimes it really is as simple as inhaling the wind and lifting your face to the sky ...
we (most humans) tend to try and make it more complicated than it is ;)

You'll get there Mab :huggles:

Mahershalalwis

05-04-2011, 01:08 AM

She totally changed my perspective on gods and godesses and religion. She told me that every religion is apart of each other, and every god and goddess does exist. There is the ALL, the one powerfull being; then the God and Goddess are the male and female forms of the ALL; and then you have all the other gods and goddess of the many different pantheons. When calling on them specifically you're calling on specific energy, but it's all from the same force.

Why thank you so much!! I have had the very same lesson taught to me by the Lord in Green Man form. Its amazing really how deep of an understanding you can gain from such a simple religion and its simple practice. I mean, these lessons for me go farther in explaining deity than Christianity every did... talk about the Wiccan Mysteries!! :witch_prv:

spuck133

05-04-2011, 07:19 AM

serah

05-04-2011, 07:21 AM

This really resonated with me, and it went in my book of mirrors! Thanks for putting it this way!

It is a nice and simple way of putting it, isn't it? I like it, too. :)

Serah

Lunacie

05-07-2011, 10:20 AM

At the end of the day, as long as you're actually Wiccan, you shouldn't have any problems.

Wicca is a specific religion with specific beliefs and practices. If you honour the Lord and Lady, practice Wiccan magick (cast circles, invoke elements etc.), celebrate the Sabbats and Esbats, follow the Rede and believe in the Three-fold Law, you're a Wiccan.

If you're not, then you're not. Simple. If you're adding stuff from other sources, that doesn't make you any less Wiccan. But taking away crucial Wiccan stuff stops you being Wiccan.

This is what I believe as well. There is a framework that makes Wicca a separate and distinct path/religion, and if you take away the important stuff, it's not really Wicca anymore. But things can be added to the framework, and Gerald Gardner talked about doing exactly that. He didn't put any limits on the people who hived off of his coven, so why would those of us who were trained in his tradition think we have the right to tell anyone else that adding things is wrong?

These are the things I consider core to Wicca:

1. Law of Return / Law of Balance / Threefold Law (the concept of action=reaction)

2. Belief in Polytheism (more than one divine form), possibly including Pantheism (divinity in all things) and/or Animism (all things have life energy)

3. Celebrating the Sabbats (four or eight) and Esbats (recognition of the seasons/solar cycles and of the lunar cycles)

4. Belief in Diety (otherwise it's a practice, not a religion), generally both god and goddess energies but some believe in a divine that encompasses the masculine and the feminine and everything else

5. Belief in the existence of Witchcraft/Magic (whether you actually practice it or not)

6. Belief that Wicca is experienced, not simply taught

7. The Great Rite or Sacred Marriage (whether actual or symbolic) and Creative Energies

8. Taking personal responsibility

9. Constant Improvement (learning, study, practice, etc)

10. The Wiccan Rede - not as religious law, but a guideline

So ... candle magic would fall under #5, eh? What good would it do to put limits on the ways a Wiccan can use magic - as long as they keep personal responsibility and the Rede in mind.

WingedWolf

07-03-2011, 04:32 AM

Excellent inputs. Even though I have been learning Wicca/Paganism/Witchcraft only for 2years or so, it makes a lot of sense to me to follow what makes the most sense to me and gives me the sense of a meaningful accomplishment. Most of the guidelines [except for the core ones like the Rede] are probably just that...guidelines. We all make our own interpretations of them.

Blessings,
~WW

Alexandria

07-03-2011, 11:37 AM

Most of the guidelines [except for the core ones like the Rede] are probably just that...guidelines. We all make our own interpretations of them.

Many Wiccans see even the rede as a guideline that is open to interpretation - there are lots of views on the meaning of the rede out there. It's the same with the threefold law.

witchcraft595

07-24-2011, 08:14 PM

im with vakuur i think u can practice in anyway as long as u remember harm none

Vigdisdotter

07-24-2011, 08:43 PM

I know I'm coming late to this but.....

I've been told that candlemagic, for instance, is outside the realm of Wicca.

Eh? o.O I can't even think of why anyone would say that...unless they were just trying to be superior schmucks.

As for what makes one Wiccan...are you wanting to know makes one a trad Wiccan or an Eclectic Wiccan? While there is some overlap (AND merit to both) they are the same thing. ONe is an initiatory mystery religion, and the other is an eclectic variant that uses the public outer court teaches of Wicca as it's basis. This means the answer to the first a LOT more specific then the answer to the second.

Your probably being told this by some coven bound Gardenian.

You seem to have some resentment issues toward those coven trained. AS for what a coven trained Gardnerian would say...my BTW friend would be VERY puzzled by your statement since she was train in candle magic (among others).

Vigdisdotter

07-24-2011, 08:51 PM

Lunacie

07-25-2011, 09:22 AM

im with vakuur i think u can practice in anyway as long as u remember harm none

Seeing as Wicca is a orthopraxi (not an orthodoxi) no, you don't get to practice however you want and still call it Wicca.

Vigdisdotter is right, there is more to what makes Wicca a particular religion than just the Wiccan Rede - which, by the way, is more than just two words.

There are some variances in the way Wicca is practiced, but unless a person or group is following most of the common practices, they shouldn't call themselves Wiccan.

witchcraft595

07-25-2011, 09:36 AM

but im talking about like candle magic and the different types of magic

Lunacie

07-25-2011, 10:41 AM

but im talking about like candle magic and the different types of magic

Ah yes, things like candle magic which aren't part of the core practices can be added, as long as they don't cause conflict. Technically, candle magic isn't part of Wicca, but many Wiccans do use candle magic as an add-on.

Vigdisdotter

07-25-2011, 06:54 PM

but im talking about like candle magic and the different types of magic

It's hard to know what you're talking about when you post a comment at the end of a multi-page thread . Try back quoting so that people know what you're referring to.

gabrielle004

07-25-2011, 09:10 PM

Seeing as Wicca is a orthopraxi (not an orthodoxi) no, you don't get to practice however you want and still call it Wicca.

Can you explain this a bit better? I don't really understand what orthopraxi and orthodoxi mean and how they are different. (I tried googling it but it only confused me further.)

This is one of my biggest concern with Wicca. I feel like a lot of the time on this forum that we all preach the "Do what feels right." line but really, when does it stop being Wicca? When have we gone and changed things too much?

If I want to incorporate things like totem animals and tarot, dream catchers and yoga into my craft, does that mean that I'm no longer Wiccan? I was under the impression that being an eclectic Wiccan meant that I got to pick and choose what I wanted to incorperate into my craft, but lately I've been thinking that maybe I'm wrong?

I know that earlier in this post that this was said:

Originally Posted by Artemisia View Post
At the end of the day, as long as you're actually Wiccan, you shouldn't have any problems.

Wicca is a specific religion with specific beliefs and practices. If you honour the Lord and Lady, practice Wiccan magick (cast circles, invoke elements etc.), celebrate the Sabbats and Esbats, follow the Rede and believe in the Three-fold Law, you're a Wiccan.

If you're not, then you're not. Simple. If you're adding stuff from other sources, that doesn't make you any less Wiccan. But taking away crucial Wiccan stuff stops you being Wiccan.

And I agreed and still agree, but I'm reading a book right now and there was a part in there where the other got me thinking that maybe I was wrong.... hold on... going to try to find that page...

Okay found it! In All One Wicca, written by Kaatryn MacMorgan, in the section on Ritual Tools she writes about the Staff:
In some Native American-flavored trads ^58, the staff is the Speaking Stick, passed around the circle so each member may speak without interruption... ... As long as a Wiccan incorporating Native aspects into their rituals is not claiming to practice an indigenous religion, most people have no arguments against them. In North America, the power of indigenous religion cannot be put aside. For most of us, the spirits of the land are coming alive, and if those spirits are those of Elk, Eagle, Buffalo and Coyote, maybe it's because people have listen hard enough.

Footnote 58 - I'm personally not comfortable with the fashion of blending Wicca with Indigenous non-European beliefs, please don't take this statement as an endorsement of such traditions.

I don't know what to make of this. Why would the author be against blending Wicca with some indigenous north american beliefs? I ask because living on the Canadian prairies, my city is filled full with Aboriginal culture, and I've been finding myself mixing parts of that culture with Wicca. Am I wrong to do this?

Alexandria

07-25-2011, 09:40 PM

If I want to incorporate things like totem animals and tarot, dream catchers and yoga into my craft, does that mean that I'm no longer Wiccan? I was under the impression that being an eclectic Wiccan meant that I got to pick and choose what I wanted to incorperate into my craft, but lately I've been thinking that maybe I'm wrong?

IMO, you can incorporate any of those things into the Wiccan base, and still rightfully call yourself an eclectic Wiccan. There are core beliefs to Wicca, it is not just whatever one wants it to be, but you can add on many thing to the core if you're an eclectic.

I think we should all do the things that are right for us, that will allow us to grow spiritually and challenge ourselves and such. Sometimes this means we move away from Wicca into something else (and that's okay!), it just means doing a little bit of reflection and seeing if the Wiccan label really still fits you.

I think most of this was mentioned through the thread, but the basic things seem to include the Wiccan ritual structure and tools, following the rede and threefold law to some extent, following the Sabbats and Esbats, some belief in Deity - usually polytheistic (hard or soft), belief in magic/witchcraft (even if one doesn't personally practice it), that experiencing the rites and rituals is necessary to the religion.

Now you could probably get away with changing a few things in the core, maybe even doing away with bits of it, but if you modify or remove too much of the core... well, you just don't have Wicca anymore.

And that is really the difference between orthodoxy and orthopraxy. Wicca doesn't say you must believe in X, Y, and Z. You can have different views of Deity, worship different pairs of Gods or whatever, have your own idea of the afterlife and so on. However, you must follow Wiccan practice to be a Wiccan. In other words, if you want to worship Isis and Osiris, go ahead. Kali and Shiva? No problem. Believe in many separate Gods or believe in one God with many aspects. Doesn't matter. However, if you're not following the correct ritual structure to some extent, then you've moved away from what Wicca is.

Alexandria

07-25-2011, 09:50 PM

I don't know what to make of this. Why would the author be against blending Wicca with some indigenous north american beliefs? I ask because living on the Canadian prairies, my city is filled full with Aboriginal culture, and I've been finding myself mixing parts of that culture with Wicca. Am I wrong to do this?

Because a lot of native individuals don't want you doing this, and we must respect these still living traditions that have suffered so much abuse, theft and destruction of culture over the years.
I don't think it's always wrong to do, sometimes we work so close to the local land that it's hard to avoid, but it must always be done with extreme care and respect. As the author says, as a Wiccan you must never present what you're doing as practicing authentic native religion, or present yourself as any sort of expert or important member of the native community. You must think very carefully about what you bring in, and again, treat it very respectfully. Some things really just shouldn't be adopted into Wiccan practice, but other things might be okay with the right approach.

Vigdisdotter

07-25-2011, 09:56 PM

Can you explain this a bit better? I don't really understand what orthopraxi and orthodoxi mean and how they are different. (I tried googling it but it only confused me further.)

Ortho = Right
Doxi = Thought
Praxi = Practise

An Orthodoxi requires that adherents BELIEVE a certain thing or set of things to be part of the religion. this means thins like believing in a given god, in a given cosmology and so on.

An Orthopraxi requires that adherents engage in right practise to be part of the religion. This means thinks like casting a circle, calling quarters, etc.

When have we gone and changed things too much?

Honestly? And only speaking for myself, I think neo-wicca should have a different name. Because often the only similarity between two neo- or eclectic-wiccan paths is the Wiccan wheel of the year, and even that isn't a guarantee.

Also I would like to point out that I firmly believe that there are power in names and that a path deserves the respect of it's own name if it's outside the realm of what it claims to be.

If I want to incorporate things like totem animals and tarot, dream catchers and yoga into my craft, does that mean that I'm no longer Wiccan?

Would it be part of the religion? Or just another aspect of your life as your religion also is?

For example, my religion and my witchcraft are separate things for me.

I know that earlier in this post that this was said:

I don't know what to make of this. Why would the author be against blending Wicca with some indigenous north american beliefs? I ask because living on the Canadian prairies, my city is filled full with Aboriginal culture, and I've been finding myself mixing parts of that culture with Wicca. Am I wrong to do this?

I can't answer the author obviously, but one thins I would point out is the question of cultural misappropriation. this is what happens when things are taken out of their cultural context yet it's still to be claimed as part of that culture (and often that eh person practising it is also part of that culture).

How do you avoid cultural misappropriation? Let me use the sweat-lodge as an example. This is a common one that gets taken and ascribed to as "Native American" when in fact they are found in many indigenous cultures. In fact the concept the sweat-lodge came from North-Eastern Europe back in the days when the land bridge between what is now Russia and Alaska.

The point of this mini lecture is to point out that you CAN use a sweat-lodge, just don't claim a culture with it. Use it according to it's own merits, rather than what it's supposedly part of.

Pinkfluff

07-25-2011, 09:59 PM

when does it stop being Wicca? When have we gone and changed things too much?

Personally, I don't care. I believe what makes sense to me and honor the Gods in the ways that I am able and feel are appropriate. Some of my beliefs relating to magick I borrow from Wicca, but I really don't care whether someone else thinks I'm Wiccan or not. Some of my beliefs may not fit with what other Heathens believe, but that doesn't make me less Heathen.

I'm not out to fit into some strict coven or other group. That's not to say that there is anything wrong with want to follow a strict set of religious rules either. If that makes a person feel more devout or connected, go for it.

I agree it's pretty much about the core concepts. As long as you draw your core beliefs from the same place that other Wiccans do, then you still are one, regardless of whatever other things you also want to incorporate, as long as any of those other things don't directly contradict something in the core part.

Lunacie

07-26-2011, 09:30 AM

Ortho = Right
Doxi = Thought
Praxi = Practise

An Orthodoxi requires that adherents BELIEVE a certain thing or set of things to be part of the religion. this means thins like believing in a given god, in a given cosmology and so on.

An Orthodoxi requires that adherents engage in right practise to be part of the religion. This means thinks like casting a circle, calling quarters, etc.
>
.

OOPS! Serious typo there.

An OrthoPRAXI requires that adherents engage in right practice to be part of the religion.

gabrielle004

07-26-2011, 05:55 PM

Well, first let me start off by saying that I'd like to thank everyone for the responses!

Originally Posted by Vigdisdotter
Ortho = Right
Doxi = Thought
Praxi = Practise
An Orthodoxi requires that adherents BELIEVE a certain thing or set of things to be part of the religion. this means thins like believing in a given god, in a given cosmology and so on.

An Orthopraxi requires that adherents engage in right practise to be part of the religion. This means thinks like casting a circle, calling quarters, etc.

Thanks for this explanation! This makes a LOT of sense!

Originally Posted by gabrielle004 View Post
If I want to incorporate things like totem animals and tarot, dream catchers and yoga into my craft, does that mean that I'm no longer Wiccan?
Would it be part of the religion? Or just another aspect of your life as your religion also is?

For example, my religion and my witchcraft are separate things for me.

Ahhh... yes, I think that these would be more like another aspect of my life, rather than religion, except for maybe animal totems. This is a new idea to me, but since I feel drawn to owls as of late, it's something that I'm interested in learning more about.

I can understand PinkFluff's stance that she doesn't care what people think of her religion, and I do agree. As long as it makes sense to the practitioner, does it really matter what you call it? But at the same time I can relate to what Vigdisdotter is saying in this:
Honestly? And only speaking for myself, I think neo-wicca should have a different name. Because often the only similarity between two neo- or eclectic-wiccan paths is the Wiccan wheel of the year, and even that isn't a guarantee.

Also I would like to point out that I firmly believe that there are power in names and that a path deserves the respect of it's own name if it's outside the realm of what it claims to be.

I was having a discussion with my favorite pagan shop owner, whom calls herself an eclectic wiccan, and she was telling me how she attended the Gaia Gathering in Montreal this year and how she was on a panel of judges whom were reviewing papers written by students about Wicca. One of the students, a gay male, wrote that his coven is men only (by choice) and how you don't need women to make Wicca. The shop owner, let's call her "D", said that after the student was finished defending his paper the panel was all in agreement, until she asked the question, "But is it still Wicca?" She said the entire panel was quiet. D pointed out that Wicca is a fertility cult, and without women, there's no fertility. Same as trads that celebrate only the goddess and have only women in there coven; that's not truly representing Wicca, is it? (I'd like to point out that I can totally understand why a coven would want to be woman only, since I'm sure women would feel more comfortable to work skyclad without men around, and especially if they have past history of violence towards them by men, just elaborating on the point that D made.)

That day, talking to D I realized that all too often I hear the words, "Do what feels right!" "Add what you like!" and although I DO believe that the following is a good guideline for whether to consider yourself Wiccan or not:
Wicca is a specific religion with specific beliefs and practices. If you honour the Lord and Lady, practice Wiccan magick (cast circles, invoke elements etc.), celebrate the Sabbats and Esbats, follow the Rede and believe in the Three-fold Law, you're a Wiccan.

I sometimes wonder if were not missing more points on here?

Alexandria

07-26-2011, 07:21 PM

As long as it makes sense to the practitioner, does it really matter what you call it?

Honestly? Yes, it absolutely does matter. Words and labels do mean specific things, and they do matter. Yes, words can change over time - Wicca was once one specific tradition, and it's grown quite a bit since then. However, to simply say that any term can mean anything you want it to mean... well, it doesn't help you, and it does in fact harm people. It harms the people of the tradition you're claiming by muddying their waters and giving them a false image, it harms the people who want to actually learn the specific tradition.

I've written about this in particular with hedgecraft a few times. There are those who write about it as if it's nothing more than super watered down Wicca with a huge dose of "smile and think happy thoughts and get whatever you want ~it's magic~!" mixed in. Hedgecraft is not Wicca. To write about it in this fashion does a huge disservice to both Hedgecraft and Wicca. If people want to practice that, that's fine, but don't call it something that it is not. The same thing applies to Wicca or any other tradition with specific practices attached to it. There may always be room for personal touches, but when you move too far from the core, it's time to find a new label.

Or, look at it with more mainstream religions. If someone came up to you claiming to be a Roman Catholic, but did not follow ANY of the teachings of the religion (or maybe just one or two minor ones) - and instead seemed to be hybrid of a Buddhist and a Muslim, don't you think you'd wonder why they were claiming to be a Roman Catholic? It doesn't make sense to do that. I really don't understand why so many people want to do this with Wicca, or some other pagan paths... they gain nothing, and hurt others in the process. Practice what you (general you) will, that is your right, but there's no reason to cling to a label that doesn't fit you. Find a label that does, or don't label yourself at all if you want, but don't claim to be something you are not. It's dishonest.

Honestly, if you're not following the core Wiccan ideas/practices, why in the world would you want to call yourself Wiccan in the first place?

D pointed out that Wicca is a fertility cult, and without women, there's no fertility.

Hmm... now that gets into a trickier area. IMO fertility doesn't have to be all about the physical human fertility, the heterosexual man+woman=babies, or whatever. There are so many ways to celebrate fertility - and I would think specifically gay men and lesbian women would want to move away from the narrow man+woman focus.

The deeper implication here is that solitary Wiccans would also not be Wiccans, since if you're practicing alone there's no fertility since you are likely missing a man or women to pair with you. Obviously some people do feel Wicca can only truly be practiced with a coven, but that's another subject of debate.

All humans carry the spark and desire to create, and there are many ways to honor that spark, and the fertility of the earth around us, so I don't think having an all male or all female coven, or practicing alone, makes the group/individual not Wiccan.

Vigdisdotter

07-26-2011, 07:47 PM

Thanks for this explanation! This makes a LOT of sense!

You're quite welcome :) Thanks for ignoring the typo (which is now fixed) :P

I sometimes wonder if were not missing more points on here?

A big something is missing here. The Mysteries. And while there are many MANY Mysteries out there to be experienced, to know what the Wiccan mysteries are, you need to be initiated. Now, contrary to what some claim, this doesn't having to do with being elitist snobs. Oh such people can and do exist, but the situation with the Mysteries as that they simply defy explanation.

Human language is wholly inadequate for conveying all that the Mysteries are. So the tried and true method is the person experiences them and THEN talks about them with others that have experienced the same thing. Since all have experienced the same thing, the can fill in the conceptual holes that they doesn't have words for and have a meaningful discussion. But that discussion would make little or no sense to someone that hadn't been through them.

gabrielle004

07-27-2011, 09:06 PM

Honestly? Yes, it absolutely does matter. Words and labels do mean specific things, and they do matter. Yes, words can change over time - Wicca was once one specific tradition, and it's grown quite a bit since then. However, to simply say that any term can mean anything you want it to mean... well, it doesn't help you, and it does in fact harm people. It harms the people of the tradition you're claiming by muddying their waters and giving them a false image, it harms the people who want to actually learn the specific tradition.

I've written about this in particular with hedgecraft a few times. There are those who write about it as if it's nothing more than super watered down Wicca with a huge dose of "smile and think happy thoughts and get whatever you want ~it's magic~!" mixed in. Hedgecraft is not Wicca. To write about it in this fashion does a huge disservice to both Hedgecraft and Wicca. If people want to practice that, that's fine, but don't call it something that it is not. The same thing applies to Wicca or any other tradition with specific practices attached to it. There may always be room for personal touches, but when you move too far from the core, it's time to find a new label.

Or, look at it with more mainstream religions. If someone came up to you claiming to be a Roman Catholic, but did not follow ANY of the teachings of the religion (or maybe just one or two minor ones) - and instead seemed to be hybrid of a Buddhist and a Muslim, don't you think you'd wonder why they were claiming to be a Roman Catholic? It doesn't make sense to do that. I really don't understand why so many people want to do this with Wicca, or some other pagan paths... they gain nothing, and hurt others in the process. Practice what you (general you) will, that is your right, but there's no reason to cling to a label that doesn't fit you. Find a label that does, or don't label yourself at all if you want, but don't claim to be something you are not. It's dishonest.

Honestly, if you're not following the core Wiccan ideas/practices, why in the world would you want to call yourself Wiccan in the first place?

YES!!! I agree! I agree with it all! This is one of my biggest pet peeves about my sister in law and my mother! Both claim to be Catholic but they really don't know a damn thing about their religion!!! They don't know any of the facts, just want they've been told by "other people" and they just go along with it! Never questioning a damn thing!

(Sorry, got off on a tangent!)

Anyways, yes, Alexandria, I fully agree with what you are saying. I think my comment was more towards the private individual. You know, when you're all alone and you're doing your thing, and it just feels right. Do we really have to work so hard to have to explain it or defend it to other people? No, I don't think so. I think that as long as it means something to you and it makes sense, it doesn't matter what kind of name someone else wants to give it, it's important to you. But yes, I do NOT agree with running around, shouting about how you are following "such and such" religion when you clearly aren't.

"Hmm... now that gets into a trickier area. IMO fertility doesn't have to be all about the physical human fertility, the heterosexual man+woman=babies, or whatever. There are so many ways to celebrate fertility - and I would think specifically gay men and lesbian women would want to move away from the narrow man+woman focus.

The deeper implication here is that solitary Wiccans would also not be Wiccans, since if you're practicing alone there's no fertility since you are likely missing a man or women to pair with you. Obviously some people do feel Wicca can only truly be practiced with a coven, but that's another subject of debate.

All humans carry the spark and desire to create, and there are many ways to honor that spark, and the fertility of the earth around us, so I don't think having an all male or all female coven, or practicing alone, makes the group/individual not Wiccan.

Yes, I see what you mean, and I think the problem was that I didn't fully explain the whole story. Apparently the entire essay was how the all male coven ended up changing a LOT of their rituals and practices so that the goddess aspect was NOT being represented. The author defended it by saying that they (the coven) felt like the Wiccan focus was placed too much on women and so they made changes so that it worked for an all male coven and he was trying to prove that women aren't important in Wicca. I do find a problem in this. I think Wicca is a balance between God AND Goddess, male AND female. I don't think you can worship one, and ignore the other and still call it Wicca.

Alexandria

07-27-2011, 09:42 PM

I think my comment was more towards the private individual. You know, when you're all alone and you're doing your thing, and it just feels right. Do we really have to work so hard to have to explain it or defend it to other people?

On an individual level? I think it still can matter. If you can't explain your beliefs to other people, and can't give reasons for them, how well do you really know them yourself? (Of course there will always be someone who thinks you're not X enough to call yourself X - but generally speaking, it's not always a bad thing to be able to justify your beliefs on some level - especially on a personal level.)

I get what you mean though, sometimes you just want to do what's working for you and not worry so much about labels, and I think that's fine - but then, just say you're an eclectic pagan rather than claiming to be one tradition or another. Then you can do whatever you want without worry about how far you're getting from some set of core beliefs. Otherwise I think checking your beliefs against whatever tradition you practice (if you do practice one) now and again is a part of self reflection and growth monitoring. How inline with the core are you, how far have you drifted, do you want to realign? Have you drifted into another tradition? Just doing your own thing and happy with it?

Even when you're alone, just doing your own thing, you still need to be honest with yourself and be able to really reflect on your practice and where it is - and why it's there. If you identify as a specific tradition, it's good to think about why you do so, once in a while. If you're just practicing and not really thinking you belong to one tradition or another, then that's another matter. :)

Apparently the entire essay was how the all male coven ended up changing a LOT of their rituals and practices so that the goddess aspect was NOT being represented. The author defended it by saying that they (the coven) felt like the Wiccan focus was placed too much on women and so they made changes so that it worked for an all male coven and he was trying to prove that women aren't important in Wicca.

Eurgh, yeah that's... yeah. I mean, an all male worship group, focusing on male Divinity and male secrets... that could be one thing, if done right and with respect. Setting out to prove women aren't important? Not the right way to do it. I definitely think that would be moving too far from the Wiccan core practice. If they wanted to focus on the God but still include the Goddess in some cases, that would be one thing, but to totally remove the Goddess and the feminine mysteries? Kinda like removing half of the religion.

If they wanted to do that, that would be their business, but I do think they need to find another name for it. (On that note, I have actually noticed that many Goddess-only worshipers are moving away from the term Wicca and using witchcraft more instead. I think that's the sort of self editing and honesty more people could benefit from.)

Mahershalalwis

08-03-2011, 12:08 AM

This is what I believe as well. There is a framework that makes Wicca a separate and distinct path/religion, and if you take away the important stuff, it's not really Wicca anymore. But things can be added to the framework, and Gerald Gardner talked about doing exactly that. He didn't put any limits on the people who hived off of his coven, so why would those of us who were trained in his tradition think we have the right to tell anyone else that adding things is wrong?

These are the things I consider core to Wicca:

1. Law of Return / Law of Balance / Threefold Law (the concept of action=reaction)

2. Belief in Polytheism (more than one divine form), possibly including Pantheism (divinity in all things) and/or Animism (all things have life energy)

3. Celebrating the Sabbats (four or eight) and Esbats (recognition of the seasons/solar cycles and of the lunar cycles)

4. Belief in Diety (otherwise it's a practice, not a religion), generally both god and goddess energies but some believe in a divine that encompasses the masculine and the feminine and everything else

5. Belief in the existence of Witchcraft/Magic (whether you actually practice it or not)

6. Belief that Wicca is experienced, not simply taught

7. The Great Rite or Sacred Marriage (whether actual or symbolic) and Creative Energies

8. Taking personal responsibility

9. Constant Improvement (learning, study, practice, etc)

10. The Wiccan Rede - not as religious law, but a guideline

So ... candle magic would fall under #5, eh? What good would it do to put limits on the ways a Wiccan can use magic - as long as they keep personal responsibility and the Rede in mind.

As far as this goes. What I've read and studied, all you need to be doing to call yourself Wiccan is to be following the tradition, the cycles through out the year. I think this is the basic basic theme of Wicca... aside the magic, the rede (which is a central tenet), the gods and goddesses all that. Wicca follows a specific belief of a god and goddess. Now you obviously build on that with the rede and other aspects. You're also free to build on that and ad in as long as you have the core system. Now as far as active/non active practice. That's a personal thing in my book between the person and the gods... But I will say I have a bad habit of believing someone less if they say they aren't currently practicing... but that's my own biased.

The Big question is do you want to follow the Gardnarian Wicca or the Cunningham? To me they are very different. Gardnarian mixes in all the magic and secret initiation and strict ritual and need to do things a certain way. Cunningham takes that all out and says "do what feels right" and be solitary. This is important because shortly after his writings, there came the divergence of wiccans who aren't witches and witches who aren't wiccans. So to me, you don't need the spellwork to be wiccan, just need to observance of the holidays, following the mythos, the rede and so on.
As far as male and female, I personally believe the gods don't care if you don't have a partner to worship with if you're solitary. They're more concerned about you and your relationship with them, than the observance of male and female in ritual (which don't get me wrong, is important). In my experience, they aren't so concertinaed because they know you're trying, and sometimes, solitary is the only option you have.
:circle:

Mahershalalwis

08-03-2011, 12:15 AM

YES!!! I agree! I agree with it all! This is one of my biggest pet peeves about my sister in law and my mother! Both claim to be Catholic but they really don't know a damn thing about their religion!!! They don't know any of the facts, just want they've been told by "other people" and they just go along with it! Never questioning a damn thing!

(Sorry, got off on a tangent!)

Anyways, yes, Alexandria, I fully agree with what you are saying. I think my comment was more towards the private individual. You know, when you're all alone and you're doing your thing, and it just feels right. Do we really have to work so hard to have to explain it or defend it to other people? No, I don't think so. I think that as long as it means something to you and it makes sense, it doesn't matter what kind of name someone else wants to give it, it's important to you. But yes, I do NOT agree with running around, shouting about how you are following "such and such" religion when you clearly aren't.

Yes, I see what you mean, and I think the problem was that I didn't fully explain the whole story. Apparently the entire essay was how the all male coven ended up changing a LOT of their rituals and practices so that the goddess aspect was NOT being represented. The author defended it by saying that they (the coven) felt like the Wiccan focus was placed too much on women and so they made changes so that it worked for an all male coven and he was trying to prove that women aren't important in Wicca. I do find a problem in this. I think Wicca is a balance between God AND Goddess, male AND female. I don't think you can worship one, and ignore the other and still call it Wicca.

For me this is important. I'm a gay male. I have been working with the Lord and Lady for a while and its been fantastic. I have the unique advantage of being able to work with a female or another gay male. Gayness taps into a specific divine femininity that is usually a little deeper in straight men (just my opinion). So I feel like I can worship in an all male group or coed. Its important of course not to forget one side! The whole mythos goes out the window without both male and female aspects. Oh, and I don't know if I would call Wicca a fertility cult. It's never been labeled that, and it focuses on the Lord as much as the Lady in my book.
As far as male and female, I personally believe the gods don't care if you don't have a partner to worship with if you're solitary. They're more concerned about you and your relationship with them, than the observance of male and female in solitary ritual (which don't get me wrong, is important). In my experience, they aren't so concertinaed because they know you're trying, and sometimes, solitary is the only option you have.
:hippy:

Vigdisdotter

08-03-2011, 12:28 AM

all you need to be doing to call yourself Wiccan is to be following the tradition

Which is a LOT more then just the Wheel of the Year or even the Rede.

A lot of it isn't learned until initiation.

I won't got into the initiation issue again because I've already posted about it on this thread. Feel free to read through and comment on what you find.

Cunningham takes that all out and says "do what feels right" and be solitary.

No, Llewellyn does because they wanted to sell books. Cunningham wrote about his own Witchcraft tradition. But Llewellyn thought that Witch and Witchcraft wasn't as marketable as Wiccan and Wicca. So they told him to change the words.

Lunacie

08-03-2011, 09:25 AM

As far as this goes. What I've read and studied, all you need to be doing to call yourself Wiccan is to be following the tradition, the cycles through out the year. I think this is the basic basic theme of Wicca... aside the magic, the rede (which is a central tenet), the gods and goddesses all that. Wicca follows a specific belief of a god and goddess. Now you obviously build on that with the rede and other aspects. You're also free to build on that and ad in as long as you have the core system. Now as far as active/non active practice. That's a personal thing in my book between the person and the gods... But I will say I have a bad habit of believing someone less if they say they aren't currently practicing... but that's my own biased.

Well, the things I listed ARE (in my opinion as an initiated Trad Wiccan) the basic theme of Wicca. While covens tend to worship a certain God and Goddess pairing, it's accepted that each person in that coven will have their own connection with the divine that may well include a different God(s) or Goddess(es). Wicca is more about the orthopraxy (practices) than the orthodoxy (beliefs).

The Big question is do you want to follow the Gardnarian Wicca or the Cunningham? To me they are very different. Gardnarian mixes in all the magic and secret initiation and strict ritual and need to do things a certain way. Cunningham takes that all out and says "do what feels right" and be solitary. This is important because shortly after his writings, there came the divergence of wiccans who aren't witches and witches who aren't wiccans. So to me, you don't need the spellwork to be wiccan, just need to observance of the holidays, following the mythos, the rede and so on.
As far as male and female, I personally believe the gods don't care if you don't have a partner to worship with if you're solitary. They're more concerned about you and your relationship with them, than the observance of male and female in ritual (which don't get me wrong, is important). In my experience, they aren't so concertinaed because they know you're trying, and sometimes, solitary is the only option you have.

How is that such a "Big question?" There are certainly many more varieties of Wicca these days than just Traditional Gardnerian or Llewellyn Wicca-based-whatever. In fact, Scott Cunningham didn't want to call the book Wiccan at all, he was just advocating making your own solitary spiritual witchcraft practice.

There have always been Witches who weren't Wiccans, it's not true that this changed because of Cunningham's books. But - being a Witch is an important part of being a Wiccan. There is soooo much more to being a Witch than doing spells now-and-then. Most of the Wiccan ritual practices are magical in nature, and doing magic is certainly doing Witchcraft.

And I've never said that one cannot be a solitary Wiccan - it's different than being part of a coven or working group, but it can be just as valid.

Nameless

08-03-2011, 09:04 PM

Well the first rule of being Wiccan is there is us, and there is them...

I think that its ok to limit what the definition of a Wiccan is but when statements happen like those above. When the polarity of us/them mentality is being emphasized, mental/psychological/emotional damage will probably ensue. When damage ensues, the religion isn't doing what it was meant to do. It is a careful balance.

Otherwise I think checking your beliefs against whatever tradition you practice (if you do practice one) now and again is a part of self reflection and growth monitoring. How inline with the core are you, how far have you drifted, do you want to realign? Have you drifted into another tradition? Just doing your own thing and happy with it?

Could you rationalize this? Otherwise I don't agree. I think that if part of self reflection means finding out whether one wants to realign for the sake of realigning, then one doing such is missing the point. Self reflection should be about looking at what rituals feel right inside. Self reflecting based on labels would be caring more about your persona than your spirituality.

Maybe I misinterpret.

willow~moon

09-12-2011, 05:43 PM

To those with a Christian background:

Maybe, if you look far enough back, and out of the Christian box ordained by mankind, you will find that the God of the Abrahamic religions began as a dualistic Pagan entity. - Please don't feel guilt if he springs to mind - he may just be a facet of the Divine calling out to the Pagan Mind to reunite him with his beloved Asherah :)

willow~moon

09-12-2011, 06:06 PM

Yahweh and the Asherah (http://www.dhushara.com/book/orsin/asherah.htm#anchor1038268)

Mahershalalwis

09-22-2011, 04:17 PM

Which is a LOT more then just the Wheel of the Year or even the Rede.

A lot of it isn't learned until initiation.

I won't got into the initiation issue again because I've already posted about it on this thread. Feel free to read through and comment on what you find.

No, Llewellyn does because they wanted to sell books. Cunningham wrote about his own Witchcraft tradition. But Llewellyn thought that Witch and Witchcraft wasn't as marketable as Wiccan and Wicca. So they told him to change the words.

Yes. What I was saying is the smallest part of wicca that you need to call yourself wiccan, and in my opinion, I was saying following the mythos. There are so many layers to it, what would you say you need to be doing at a bare minimum to say you're wiccan?

Even then about Llewellyn, S.C. was still teaching his own tradition/method/pedagogy and it was the do it yourself/do what feels right method. Did you find a source about Cunningham having to change the wording? That's very interesting and would be really cool to read about, because I don't doubt Llewellyn has pulled a few of those lol

Mahershalalwis

09-22-2011, 04:26 PM

Well, the things I listed ARE (in my opinion as an initiated Trad Wiccan) the basic theme of Wicca. While covens tend to worship a certain God and Goddess pairing, it's accepted that each person in that coven will have their own connection with the divine that may well include a different God(s) or Goddess(es). Wicca is more about the orthopraxy (practices) than the orthodoxy (beliefs).

How is that such a "Big question?" There are certainly many more varieties of Wicca these days than just Traditional Gardnerian or Llewellyn Wicca-based-whatever. In fact, Scott Cunningham didn't want to call the book Wiccan at all, he was just advocating making your own solitary spiritual witchcraft practice.

There have always been Witches who weren't Wiccans, it's not true that this changed because of Cunningham's books. But - being a Witch is an important part of being a Wiccan. There is soooo much more to being a Witch than doing spells now-and-then. Most of the Wiccan ritual practices are magical in nature, and doing magic is certainly doing Witchcraft.

And I've never said that one cannot be a solitary Wiccan - it's different than being part of a coven or working group, but it can be just as valid.

Well, there were those who were the cunning men and women, and in some form those who practice witchcraft pre Gardner, I've only seen the distinction between wicca/witchcraft in modern days, so around 1980s when this trad withcraft, wiccan not witch, witch not wiccan came into full force. Back in the start up days, they were all using the words wicca/witch interchangeably. And of course, it way more than just spells, both wicca and witchcraft are spiritual practices, not just getting what you will through spells.

Yes.And that's why I was referring to Cunningham was how he was the main person who got the solitary practice going. I know there are many different types of wicca you can practice, but up until that point of Pre S.C, at least in the public eye, you had Gardner/Alexander and a few others who all were borrowing, combining and stealing the same information. So you had the coven practice, then the road forked with S.C. into solitary or coven. And I don't doubt Llewellyn forced a few word changes or advertising schemes here and there

Mab

10-01-2011, 04:06 PM

Lunacie

10-01-2011, 07:08 PM

When does a practice go outside or break the boundaries of Wicca? I've been curious to know when the practice of Wicca is no longer part of the religion. By that I mean - let's say - divination of some sort or the other. Is it considered part of the practice or an add on to a ritual or spell?

Is magick part of that "outside the boundaries" of Wiccan practice? I have my opinions but I wasn't sure if there were others out there that felt the same as I do about things that have nothing to do with religion... Mab

Magic is very much a part of Wicca - starting with basic things like casting a Circle.

Divination is often done during rituals, but I wouldn't call it an integral part of Wicca. By that I mean you could leave it out without undermining the foundation of Wicca.

Lots of things can be added to Wicca without changing it so much it's no longer Wicca. But adding too many things can change it enough that the basic foundation is obscured and unnoticed.

Mab

10-01-2011, 09:25 PM

Thanks for that reply, Lunacie. It clarifies some of my thought of that boundary theory that seems to be stuck in my head... Mab

Mahershalalwis

10-06-2011, 03:45 PM

I think there can be a point where you are no longer practicing wicca. There are thousands of people running around today with varying forms, but at least some have common threads.

Robertus_

10-06-2011, 05:34 PM

When does a practice go outside or break the boundaries of Wicca? I've been curious to know when the practice of Wicca is no longer part of the religion. By that I mean - let's say - divination of some sort or the other. Is it considered part of the practice or an add on to a ritual or spell?

Is magick part of that "outside the boundaries" of Wiccan practice? I have my opinions but I wasn't sure if there were others out there that felt the same as I do about things that have nothing to do with religion... Mab

I don't think Magical Practice ever takes one out of the boundaries of Wicca.

Instead I think it is determined by the Beliefs that a person holds. If a person doesn't believe that a God and Goddess exist at all, or if they believe that Initiation is bad or something along those lines then they are no longer Wiccan but have instead become an eclectic pagan of some variety.

Mahershalalwis

10-11-2011, 02:21 PM

what about eclectic wicca?

musicalsuicide

10-19-2011, 01:01 AM

My grandmother says that Wiccans do not practice black Magick. I do not know what qualifies as black.

Lunacie

10-19-2011, 06:35 AM

My grandmother says that Wiccans do not practice black Magick. I do not know what qualifies as black.

I think that was covered earlier in the thread. Traditional Wicca teaches that magic does not have a "color". It's not white or black or red or blue. However, magic should not be used for harm unless it's to prevent an even greater harm from being done.

agill8

03-12-2012, 04:47 AM

Personally i dont use or like lables. It constrains ur ability to grow . If u lable urself ur mind has limited its self to that one particular group. If anyone asks me i say im a "magical being"

lostkeyintro

03-12-2012, 05:37 AM

Okay, so I thought I would do what I felt "feels right" for me and then I've been told that I have stepped out of the bounds of Wicca, by that I mean, I've been told that candlemagic, for instance, is outside the realm of Wicca. Also some things that I do are not Wiccan. Okay, how do I know what is outside the boundaries of Wicca, and where do I read to find this out? Mab

I personally love wicca and everything I have read. I strongly believe in everything I have read over the years. BUT it seems a little all over the place, like you can make up your own rules, gods, magics, enchants ect ect. If gardener brought wicca back into the light, shouldn't HIS way be the way that is followed? Anyone can make anything up that they want. It seems like over the years people have just started "making up" new things to add to wicca. There is no structure.

Alexandria

03-12-2012, 06:07 AM

If gardener brought wicca back into the light, shouldn't HIS way be the way that is followed?

Gardner didn't bring anything back into the light. Wicca is not ancient, it did not exist before Gardner. He created the path, and while some of it is based on ancient pagan practices, Wicca is really Gardner's creation - a creation that he himself added to over time, as did others as the tradition was forming. His specific tradition still exists today as the Gardnerian tradition, and one can be initiated into it if they wish (and if a coven agrees to take them in).

It seems like over the years people have just started "making up" new things to add to wicca. There is no structure.

While there are a number of people who believe that Wicca is whatever a person wants it to be (which makes the label of Wicca useless), there is also a balance between that and the idea that Gardnerian Wicca is the only Wicca. Just as other religions split into different sects and denominations over time, Wicca has grown into different traditions. However, there are core things that bind all Wiccan practices together.

For example, Wiccans share a core ritual structure. While steps in the structure can be done in different ways, the core outline of the ritual will be the same. In other words, while you may see different words and actions in the casting of a circle, the base steps are the same from circle to circle.

Other than ritual structure, there are also shared ritual tools, ethical codes, holidays, and some shared beliefs (such as a belief in magic), among other things.

Wicca is flexible, there is room for personal beliefs, ideas, and the addition of some personal practices - but there is a core, a structure, which needs to be followed. Move too far from the core, and you don't have Wicca anymore... there's nothing wrong with that, of course, Wicca is only one of many paths, but it is something one who identifies as Wiccan should keep in mind.

lostkeyintro

03-12-2012, 06:10 AM

Did he not take old pagan beliefs and witchcraft and mold it into one adding a few new things along the way? If he "invented" this religion shouldn't his path be the only one?

lostkeyintro

03-12-2012, 06:12 AM

Nothing I have learned suggests that other then coining the name wicca Gardener invented the belief system. Did he not meet a coven in the UK who were direct descendents of old pagan witches whom taught him everything?

Alexandria

03-12-2012, 06:50 AM

Did he not meet a coven in the UK who were direct descendents of old pagan witches whom taught him everything?

He claimed he was initiated into a coven, but that there was very little surviving information, and that he fleshed out what he learned with many other ideas. Wicca is very clearly influenced by the ceremonial magic that was popular in Gardner's day, for example. There's very little to support the idea that there was some coven practicing anything truly ancient - many of the witch cult practices come right from Margaret Murray's ideas, which we now know to be historically inaccurate. So while he may have been initiated into a coven at some point (it's likely that he was, witchcraft and the occult was popular at the time), and they may have even claimed to have been ancient, there is very little to support that as actual truth.

Which is not to say there are no ancient ideas in Wicca, some of it is based on ancient pagan practice, but Wicca itself is not an ancient religion. It is not a continuation nor is it a reconstruction of any ancient pagan religion, it simply did not exist before Gardner.

Did he not take old pagan beliefs and witchcraft and mold it into one adding a few new things along the way? If he "invented" this religion shouldn't his path be the only one?

Well, that depends on who you ask. There are some who believe that Gardnerian Wicca is the only legit form of Wicca, and it's certainly still available for anyone who wants to follow it. Again, however, look at any other religion - they all grow and split over time. Even Gardnerian Wicca grew, new ideas were incorporated into it as new people came to the tradition. Gardner never claimed his way was the only way, to be set in stone for all eternity. New ideas come into the religion, some old ideas may be left behind... religions can be fluid, changing over time and as new people come into the practice. It is not necessarily a bad thing, it is only a problem when people get the idea that Wicca can be anything, which removes any meaning from the term.

lostkeyintro

03-12-2012, 06:56 AM

He claimed he was initiated into a coven, but that there was very little surviving information, and that he fleshed out what he learned with many other ideas. Wicca is very clearly influenced by the ceremonial magic that was popular in Gardner's day, for example. There's very little to support the idea that there was some coven practicing anything truly ancient - many of the witch cult practices come right from Margaret Murray's ideas, which we now know to be historically inaccurate. So while he may have been initiated into a coven at some point (it's likely that he was, witchcraft and the occult was popular at the time), and they may have even claimed to have been ancient, there is very little to support that as actual truth.

Which is not to say there are no ancient ideas in Wicca, some of it is based on ancient pagan practice, but Wicca itself is not an ancient religion. It is not a continuation nor is it a reconstruction of any ancient pagan religion, it simply did not exist before Gardner.

Well, that depends on who you ask. There are some who believe that Gardnerian Wicca is the only legit form of Wicca, and it's certainly still available for anyone who wants to follow it. Again, however, look at any other religion - they all grow and split over time. Even Gardnerian Wicca grew, new ideas were incorporated into it as new people came to the tradition. Gardner never claimed his way was the only way, to be set in stone for all eternity. New ideas come into the religion, some old ideas may be left behind... religions can be fluid, changing over time and as new people come into the practice. It is not necessarily a bad thing, it is only a problem when people get the idea that Wicca can be anything, which removes any meaning from the term.

I do not think everyone believes that this practice and belief system did not exist before G. Gardner. He just gave it a name.

Alexandria

03-12-2012, 07:18 AM

I do not think everyone believes that this practice and belief system did not exist before G. Gardner. He just gave it a name.

You can believe whatever you want, but the historical facts - along with Gardner's own claims to getting fragmented information, fragments that he had to add a lot to - do not back you up. I mean, it's really very clear when you break it down. To give a few examples...

No ancient religion worshiped the God and Goddess of Wicca. There was no single Horned God, there was no Triple Goddess, both are modern concepts. Even the specific God and Goddess of Gardnerian Wicca, usually said to be Cernunnos and Aradia, would not have been worshiped together, using the mythology and practice that Wicca currently does.

No ancient pagan practice followed all eight of the Sabbats that Wiccans currently do, and while some cultures did celebrate the equinoxes, solstices, and cross quarter dates, none truly followed all eight with the same mythology that Wicca currently does.

The Wiccan ritual structure was not practiced by any ancient religion as Wiccans practice it today. The circle is one very obvious place where the influence of ceremonial magic is very apparent. There is a lot of ceremonial magic in Wicca, which is no surprise considering the folks Gardner associated with.

The Wiccan Rede is not an ancient document or belief, it has modern origins. The same can be said of many of the rituals and writings in Gardner's Book of Shadows. We know who wrote this stuff, it's not ancient.

The history is there, the roots can be traced, Wicca is Gardner's creation. At this point the only way one can say it is a truly ancient practice is to ignore all the history and facts that we have. Some certainly do that, some authors who should know better continue to claim Wicca as "the old religion" (there was no single old religion, ancient paganism was very diverse), a religion that existed before Christianity, but it's simply not backed up by the facts.

Wicca does not need to be ancient for it to have meaning, and be a legitimate spiritual path. All religions are new at some point, after all.

lostkeyintro

03-12-2012, 07:23 AM

You can believe whatever you want, but the historical facts - along with Gardner's own claims to getting fragmented information, fragments that he had to add a lot to - do not back you up. I mean, it's really very clear when you break it down. To give a few examples...

No ancient religion worshiped the God and Goddess of Wicca. There was no single Horned God, there was no Triple Goddess, both are modern concepts. Even the specific God and Goddess of Gardnerian Wicca, usually said to be Cernunnos and Aradia, would not have been worshiped together, using the mythology and practice that Wicca currently does.

No ancient pagan practice followed all eight of the Sabbats that Wiccans currently do, and while some cultures did celebrate the equinoxes, solstices, and cross quarter dates, none truly followed all eight with the same mythology that Wicca currently does.

The Wiccan ritual structure was not practiced by any ancient religion as Wiccans practice it today. The circle is one very obvious place where the influence of ceremonial magic is very apparent. There is a lot of ceremonial magic in Wicca, which is no surprise considering the folks Gardner associated with.

The Wiccan Rede is not an ancient document or belief, it has modern origins. The same can be said of many of the rituals and writings in Gardner's Book of Shadows. We know who wrote this stuff, it's not ancient.

The history is there, the roots can be traced, Wicca is Gardner's creation. At this point the only way one can say it is a truly ancient practice is to ignore all the history and facts that we have. Some certainly do that, some authors who should know better continue to claim Wicca as "the old religion" (there was no single old religion, ancient paganism was very diverse), a religion that existed before Christianity, but it's simply not backed up by the facts.

Wicca does not need to be ancient for it to have meaning, and be a legitimate spiritual path. All religions are new at some point, after all.

Alright so all this other stuff "eclectic" and other off branches of wicca are just simply made up? It is nothing but a religion made up by an old man with no old roots and no real basis? I doubt wicca is the only religion that believes in multiple gods and goddess. So anyone can just "make up" a spiritual path?

If Gardner created Wicca like i stated before then all of these people not following his path can never be true real wiccans.

lostkeyintro

03-12-2012, 07:24 AM

The horned god and the triple goddess are modern concepts? I think that is the funniest thing I have heard all night.

lostkeyintro

03-12-2012, 07:31 AM

You can believe whatever you want, but the historical facts - along with Gardner's own claims to getting fragmented information, fragments that he had to add a lot to - do not back you up. I mean, it's really very clear when you break it down. To give a few examples...

The "historical facts" are that witchcraft has long existed gardener took old Pagan beliefs and put them all together but he by far didn't "invent" this stuff.

No ancient religion worshiped the God and Goddess of Wicca. There was no single Horned God, there was no Triple Goddess, both are modern concepts. Even the specific God and Goddess of Gardnerian Wicca, usually said to be Cernunnos and Aradia, would not have been worshiped together, using the mythology and practice that Wicca currently does.

Since wiccans worship many KNOWN gods and goddesses what do you mean NO other religion worships them? Because Plenty of religions do. The horned god and triple goddess are not modern.

No ancient pagan practice followed all eight of the Sabbats that Wiccans currently do, and while some cultures did celebrate the equinoxes, solstices, and cross quarter dates, none truly followed all eight with the same mythology that Wicca currently does.

Sure he put structure to something that was already there.

The Wiccan ritual structure was not practiced by any ancient religion as Wiccans practice it today. The circle is one very obvious place where the influence of ceremonial magic is very apparent. There is a lot of ceremonial magic in Wicca, which is no surprise considering the folks Gardner associated with.

The Wiccan Rede is not an ancient document or belief, it has modern origins. The same can be said of many of the rituals and writings in Gardner's Book of Shadows. We know who wrote this stuff, it's not ancient.

Obviously the Rede is not ancient.

The history is there, the roots can be traced, Wicca is Gardner's creation. At this point the only way one can say it is a truly ancient practice is to ignore all the history and facts that we have. Some certainly do that, some authors who should know better continue to claim Wicca as "the old religion" (there was no single old religion, ancient paganism was very diverse), a religion that existed before Christianity, but it's simply not backed up by the facts.

he simply pulled together different beliefs and practices that already existed.

Wicca does not need to be ancient for it to have meaning, and be a legitimate spiritual path. All religions are new at some point, after all.

No one said it needs to be ancient. But the belief system and witchcraft is much older then Gerald gardner.

Anyways I do not believe in what you are saying.

lostkeyintro

03-12-2012, 07:38 AM

this is a quote I like

1) It did not exist prior to Gerald Gardner’s invention of it
Indeed. We are a new religion, that tries to reconstruct ancient beliefs, but mainly, reinterprets them and creates new ways to approach our Gods. Anyone who claims we are the “old Religion” is a fluffy bunny.
BTW Christianity did not exist before Christ, and that does not make it less valid, right?

Alexandria

03-12-2012, 07:45 AM

Alright so all this other stuff "eclectic" and other off branches of wicca are just simply made up?

Other branches of Wicca, such as Alexandrian, originate with Gardner's tradition. They're no more made up than Gardner's particular version is. An eclectic Wiccan takes ideas and practices from the various Wiccan traditions, and sometimes outside traditions.

This is a bit like asking if Baptist Christianity is made up because Catholicism came first. Again, all religions split, grow, change over time. This not a bad thing. A religion that never changes at all, a religion that is totally rigid and offers no flexibility, is a religion that quickly grows old and is discarded as time moves on.

It is nothing but a religion made up by an old man with no old roots and no real basis?

Wicca has roots. Just because they're not all totally ancient does not make them non-existent. As I also said, there are ancient pagan influences in Wicca (just as there are many modern influences). Is it a continuation or reconstruction of an ancient religion? Nope, but there are certainly some pagan influences in the roots.

I doubt wicca is the only religion that believes in multiple gods and goddess. So anyone can just "make up" a spiritual path?

Correct, Wicca is not the only polytheistic religion. There are tons of other witchcraft and pagan traditions out there which are polytheistic in nature. Some are reconstructions of ancient religions, others are again more modern.

Just because something is ancient, doesn't necessarily make it correct. Many people find spiritual truth in Wicca and other modern traditions. There is nothing wrong with this. All religions were young at some point. There are also many individuals who do, essentially, make up their own path by experimenting with various ideas and beliefs, and using what works for them. There is nothing wrong with this.

If Gardner created Wicca like i stated before then all of these people not following his path can never be true real wiccans.

That is your view, and many disagree. I've already stated, multiple times, why I do not agree with this view.

The horned god and the triple goddess are modern concepts? I think that is the funniest thing I have heard all night.

Glad I can provide you with some amusement. Funny because you think I'm wrong, or...? Well, just to be sure...

The Triple Goddess, that is, the Maiden/Mother/Crone concept, came about thanks to Robert Graves (who has done much to put a lot of false history into modern paganism). Let me be clear here, there are ancient trinity goddesses, I do not deny this. Hekate is one of them, but she is not a maiden/mother/crone goddess. Hekate is a maiden goddess, often mistaken by modern Wiccans/witches to be a crone due to her attributes, but historically she was a maiden like Artemis. The Morrigan is another triple goddess, but again, she is no maiden/mother/crone (and is usually believed to be three goddesses). Brighid is another trinity, but again, maiden/mother/crone? Nope.

The Horned God. There were lots of Gods with horns or antlers, there were also Goddesses with horns. There was no single Horned God as put forth by Wicca. There was no single horned God worshiped throughout all of ancient Europe. This particular idea goes back, again, to Murray. As I said before, her ideas are pretty much rejected by historians today.

If you have historical evidence to prove that either concept existed in ancient paganism, I'd love to see it.

Alexandria

03-12-2012, 07:48 AM

1) It did not exist prior to Gerald Gardner’s invention of it
Indeed. We are a new religion, that tries to reconstruct ancient beliefs, but mainly, reinterprets them and creates new ways to approach our Gods. Anyone who claims we are the “old Religion” is a fluffy bunny.

I somewhat agree, and somewhat disagree. I agree that Wicca did not exist before Gardner. I disagree, strongly, that Wicca is reconstructionist in nature. There are pagan traditions that strive to reconstruction ancient pagan religions, Wicca does not fall into this category. Again, there are some ancient ideas in Wicca - this does not make it reconstructionist.

I also agree that anyone who sticks to the whole "old religion" bit after being shown the evidence otherwise is doing a huge disservice to Wicca and to pagan history.

BTW Christianity did not exist before Christ, and that does not make it less valid, right?

Have I claimed anywhere that Wicca is not valid?

lostkeyintro

03-12-2012, 07:55 AM

I somewhat agree, and somewhat disagree. I agree that Wicca did not exist before Gardner. I disagree, strongly, that Wicca is reconstructionist in nature. There are pagan traditions that strive to reconstruction ancient pagan religions, Wicca does not fall into this category. Again, there are some ancient ideas in Wicca - this does not make it reconstructionist.

I also agree that anyone who sticks to the whole "old religion" bit after being shown the evidence otherwise is doing a huge disservice to Wicca and to pagan history.

Have I claimed anywhere that Wicca is not valid?

That was a quote taken from another website. No you did not say wicca isn't valid.

lostkeyintro

03-12-2012, 07:59 AM

That quote is what I have found many other wiccans to believe. And if you can just make it up as you go along I am going to say that, that quote is correct :violin:

Alexandria

03-12-2012, 08:08 AM

That was a quote taken from another website.

I understand. I am, however, saying that while I agree with most of it, I disagree with a particular part of it. That quote is in agreement with much of what I have been saying though - that while there are some ancient elements, Wicca is not an ancient religion. That is quite different than saying Wicca is a true continuation or reconstruction of an ancient religion.

That quote is what I have found many other wiccans to believe. And if you can just make it up as you go along I am going to say that, that quote is correct :violin:

I never said one can just make it up as they go along. I believe I specifically said one can't just make up anything and call it Wicca, that there are core practices that bind all Wiccan traditions together.

You can practice and believe whatever you want. It may not be correct to call that practice Wicca, however. (Beliefs and practices are also a lot different than history and facts.)

lostkeyintro

03-12-2012, 08:09 AM

I understand. I am, however, saying that while I agree with most of it, I disagree with a particular part of it. That quote is in agreement with much of what I have been saying though - that while there are some ancient elements, Wicca is not an ancient religion. That is quite different than saying Wicca is a true continuation or reconstruction of an ancient religion.

I never said one can just make it up as they go along. I believe I specifically said one can't just make up anything and call it Wicca, that there are core practices that bind all Wiccan traditions together.

You can practice and believe whatever you want. It may not be correct to call that practice Wicca, however. (Beliefs and practices are also a lot different than history and facts.)

I think "facts" elude most religions.

Alexandria

03-12-2012, 08:36 AM

I think "facts" elude most religions.

Not when speaking of the history of a religion, or at least they shouldn't, even if that is sometimes the case.

There's a big difference between trying to talk facts of personal beliefs and practices, and talking the historical facts of a particular religion. As an example, we can discuss the existence of Deity, but trying to prove the existence of deity with facts is a totally different matter. However, discussing the history behind particular Deities and religious ideas using facts can be done.

Lunacie

03-12-2012, 09:16 AM

I personally love wicca and everything I have read. I strongly believe in everything I have read over the years. BUT it seems a little all over the place, like you can make up your own rules, gods, magics, enchants ect ect. If gardener brought wicca back into the light, shouldn't HIS way be the way that is followed? Anyone can make anything up that they want. It seems like over the years people have just started "making up" new things to add to wicca. There is no structure.

You're right, Gardner did create a structure for Wicca. I've often compared it to the blueprint for a house. You can use bricks on the outside or maybe shake shingles or seamless siding. You can put in clear windows or colored glass windows or bow windows. You can paint it any color of the rainbow. But it's still going to look a lot like other houses built from the same blueprint and you'll still be able to find the bathroom because it will be in the same place in each house built from that blueprint. :D

So while there is a structure that is common between all of them, there is room for many differences as well. Unfortunately, a lot of authors have taken that concept a step too far and decided that all blueprints that call for two bedrooms and one bathroom (as an example) can be called by the same design name. Not true. And unfortunately it confuses the crap out of a lot of people who are really interested in learning about the Wiccan path.

That's why it's a good idea to find someone who teaches traditional Wicca (a group or a mentor) and learn about Gardner's Wicca, even if you decide to make some changes later or leave the path entirely.

lostkeyintro

03-12-2012, 10:01 AM

You're right, Gardner did create a structure for Wicca. I've often compared it to the blueprint for a house. You can use bricks on the outside or maybe shake shingles or seamless siding. You can put in clear windows or colored glass windows or bow windows. You can paint it any color of the rainbow. But it's still going to look a lot like other houses built from the same blueprint and you'll still be able to find the bathroom because it will be in the same place in each house built from that blueprint. :D

So while there is a structure that is common between all of them, there is room for many differences as well. Unfortunately, a lot of authors have taken that concept a step too far and decided that all blueprints that call for two bedrooms and one bathroom (as an example) can be called by the same design name. Not true. And unfortunately it confuses the crap out of a lot of people who are really interested in learning about the Wiccan path.

That's why it's a good idea to find someone who teaches traditional Wicca (a group or a mentor) and learn about Gardner's Wicca, even if you decide to make some changes later or leave the path entirely.

So he created the structure for wicca? I personally would rather study Gardner wicca that has a foundation and structure over a type of "make it up as you go along" stucture.

Alexandria

03-12-2012, 10:09 AM

So he created the structure for wicca? I personally would rather study Gardner wicca that has a foundation and structure over a type of "make it up as you go along" stucture.

I think you're still not quite understanding. The basic structure is the same for all Wiccan traditions. Gardnerian Wicca is a particular way of detailing the structure, other traditions offer different details, but the core structure is still the same. Non-Gardnerian traditions can still have foundation and structure. There are initiatory oath-bound Wiccan traditions that are not Gardnerian, but are still quite structured and have particular ways of doing things.

lostkeyintro

03-12-2012, 10:12 AM

I think you're still not quite understanding. The basic structure is the same for all Wiccan traditions. Gardnerian Wicca is a particular way of detailing the structure, other traditions offer different details, but the core structure is still the same. Non-Gardnerian traditions can still have foundation and structure. There are initiatory oath-bound Wiccan traditions that are not Gardnerian, but are still quite structured and have particular ways of doing things.

When Gardner made up this religion there was a specific RULE that it was an initiatory oath bound religion. So all people walking around claiming to be "wiccan" because they bought a few books, candles, alter and do some chants alone, are just giving themselves a false name. I understand completely, people took his foundation and tweeked it to whatever they wanted it to be.

Alexandria

03-12-2012, 10:22 AM

I understand completely, people took his foundation and tweeked it to whatever they wanted it to be.

If they kept his foundation, the core beliefs, practices, and ideas, then the core of Wicca remains and they become another tradition of Wicca. (Just as pretty much every other religion out there splits off into various sects or denominations.) Some Wiccan traditions are not hugely different from Gardnerian, while others may be. Now some think being initiatory and oath-bound is a core belief, so that would exclude solitaries, but there are other traditions that do keep those practices...

There is a middle ground between Gardnerian Wicca is the only Wicca, and "Wicca is whatever I want it to be." If one wants to study Gardnerian Wicca, great, but it doesn't do much to bash every other tradition out there.

lostkeyintro

03-12-2012, 10:27 AM

If they kept his foundation, the core beliefs, practices, and ideas, then the core of Wicca remains and they become another tradition of Wicca. (Just as pretty much every other religion out there splits off into various sects or denominations.) Some Wiccan traditions are not hugely different from Gardnerian, while others may be. Now some think being initiatory and oath-bound is a core belief, so that would exclude solitaries, but there are other traditions that do keep those practices...

There is a middle ground between Gardnerian Wicca is the only Wicca, and "Wicca is whatever I want it to be." If one wants to study Gardnerian Wicca, great, but it doesn't do much to bash every other tradition out there.

The point is he made up this religion. And no I don't care about the millions of sectors broken off from Catholicism or Christianity that has nothing to do with this. But the FOUNDER of this religion says you have to be initiated then by those standards those who are not are just taking a false title, but that is fine delusion exists all though out every religion. I am not bashing these other "wiccan" religions they have just branched off and made there own traditions. But eclectic is pretty much a joke.

Alexandria

03-12-2012, 10:45 AM

I am not bashing these other "wiccan" religions they have just branched off and made there own traditions. But eclectic is pretty much a joke.

The whole initiation as a requirement debate has been done to death. You'll find there are Wiccans who agree with you, but there are many who do not. It's not a clear cut topic, and there are reasonable arguments from both sides. To be honest though, it's a debate that I have no particular interest in, so I'll just leave it at this... Solitary and eclectic Wiccans can adhere to the core of Wicca beyond the initiation requirement. Being a solitary or eclectic does not necessarily mean the person is doing whatever they want, making it up as they go along, or are "a joke." It is possible to disagree with a particular group without dragging in insults, doing so doesn't add anything to your argument.

Lunacie

03-12-2012, 10:47 AM

When Gardner made up this religion there was a specific RULE that it was an initiatory oath bound religion. So all people walking around claiming to be "wiccan" because they bought a few books, candles, alter and do some chants alone, are just giving themselves a false name. I understand completely, people took his foundation and tweeked it to whatever they wanted it to be.

I don't think Gardner himself saw any of those things as RULES, rather they were beliefs or convictions about the way things are or how they work.

I'm one of those in the "middle ground", not a BTW but nor am I a fluffy bunny who does whatever I want while calling it Wicca. I know the history of Wicca, why Gardner had to add things from other sources to the core of "the craft of the wise."

I believe things can be tweaked or changed somewhat while remaining true to the foundation Gardner put into place. He himself said that he only had some of the pieces to the puzzle and he fully understood that others would add things to what he had found. I use my best judgment when I replace something from traditional Wicca with something else as to whether it changes the basic structure of Wicca too much to be honest in still calling it Wicca.

Mab

03-13-2012, 04:06 PM

There are some basic fundamental ideas that are within the realm of being a Wiccan whether one is solitary or belongs to a coven. Just because I'm solitary, does not mean I don't adhere to the basic concepts of the Wiccan religion and follow those basic guidelines. I'm not changing things to fit my needs, but if I'm adding things - it is to expand my belief... Mab

Mahershalalwis

03-14-2012, 01:02 PM

I don't think Gardner himself saw any of those things as RULES, rather they were beliefs or convictions about the way things are or how they work.

I'm one of those in the "middle ground", not a BTW but nor am I a fluffy bunny who does whatever I want while calling it Wicca. I know the history of Wicca, why Gardner had to add things from other sources to the core of "the craft of the wise."

I believe things can be tweaked or changed somewhat while remaining true to the foundation Gardner put into place. He himself said that he only had some of the pieces to the puzzle and he fully understood that others would add things to what he had found. I use my best judgment when I replace something from traditional Wicca with something else as to whether it changes the basic structure of Wicca too much to be honest in still calling it Wicca.

I agree. I think cultural influences of the presence and acceptance of wicca at the time in different countries played a role into the openness and closeness of it. They were just trying to be safe and protect everyone. Wicca is sill evolving and forming, and I think Gardner would agree that fluidity is best for change instead of being stagnant :1poke:

Lunacie

03-14-2012, 02:05 PM

I agree. I think cultural influences of the presence and acceptance of wicca at the time in different countries played a role into the openness and closeness of it. They were just trying to be safe and protect everyone. Wicca is sill evolving and forming, and I think Gardner would agree that fluidity is best for change instead of being stagnant :1poke:

I think the core structure of Wicca is still intact in many places. The fluidity overlays that core structure and prevents stagnation.

Core structure is doing ritual at certain time by the solor or lunar calendar -
flexible is being skyclad or wearing robes or street clothes.
Core structure is casting a circle before ritual -
flexible is using an athame or a wand or a finger or your mind.
Core structure is calling the quarters -
flexible is calling them watchtowers or elementals or whatever.

There are some groups who insist there should not be any flexibility,
that rituals must be done on the astrological date; many groups meet on the weekend closest to that date. Some insist on being skyclad in the circle; many understand that frostbite or sunburn or insect bites may make clothing the better option.

Mahershalalwis

03-24-2012, 03:16 PM

I think the core structure of Wicca is still intact in many places. The fluidity overlays that core structure and prevents stagnation.

Core structure is doing ritual at certain time by the solor or lunar calendar -
flexible is being skyclad or wearing robes or street clothes.
Core structure is casting a circle before ritual -
flexible is using an athame or a wand or a finger or your mind.
Core structure is calling the quarters -
flexible is calling them watchtowers or elementals or whatever.

There are some groups who insist there should not be any flexibility,
that rituals must be done on the astrological date; many groups meet on the weekend closest to that date. Some insist on being skyclad in the circle; many understand that frostbite or sunburn or insect bites may make clothing the better option.

Very nice outline of core and flexibility! I am more of the mind set of having everyone be comfortable because in my own practice, when people are at ease the magic is much more successful. Those who are so strict to the point of denying others the ability to choose clothes on or off or inside or outside, I feel are in some way missing the point of being in circle with other people. I've met only a few like that, and to me it always felt more of a way to control what's happening instead of letting it flow naturally. :Hail: