Neo-Wiccan??

[pinkgirl02]

OK- I'm a member of a wiccan group on myspace, and the members of it are telling this guy that he is not a wiccan but a Neo-Wiccan. They said he can't be an actual wiccan if they have been initiated by BTW (apparently that is British Traditional Witchcraft/British Traditional Wicca). So, even if I begin practicing the traditions of Wicca and clasify myself as Wiccan I won't BE Wiccan until I find a coven and be initiated? I thought that you could practice alone, which is one thing that draws me to it. There's nothing telling you what you can and can't do. You know what I mean? I would love if someone could explain this for me :confused: .

[Silverm00n]

There are some Traditions out there that claim that you can't be wiccan unless you're initiated. Then there are others that say it doesn't matter. You can practice however you want. I practice solitare too and I could care less about the rules and guidelines of set traditions. I'm happy this way and that's all that matters! Here's a thread of some definitions where this topic was sort of discussed. Technically though there is self initiation as a solitare too.

http://www.wiccanwisdom.com/forum/showthread.php?t=226&highlight=witch

[yukiwitch]

You have to think of wicca like any other religion...
Like christianity, it has lots of different beliefs within it, and people argue about and have different definitions about what it means to be a wiccan.
However, one of the integral parts of wicca/paganism is that it believes that each person finds their own path to diety. We do not tell christians or jews or muslims or bhuddists that our way is the right way. And because of that, no wiccan should be telling you that you are on the wrong path.
Each person finds their own path that guides them. The only argument is about what that particular path is called. But this is an arbitrary argument. Whether its pagan, neo-pagan, wiccan, etc., doesn't really matter. As long as it feels right to you and you are able to live a happy healthy life, attune with nature and do good in the world.

[Lunacie]

People have a lot of opinions about this issue, from "no you're not a Wiccan unless you were initiated by someone in Gardner's lineage" to "I initiated myself and I'm just as good as anyone else."

In my experience, the majority (at least 51% *wink*) say that there are different ways of being Wiccan. There's the "initiated into a Tradition Wiccan" and the "self-dedicated Wiccan" and a bunch of "I was initiated but now I'm a solitary Wiccan."

I believe they are all just as good as each other - but self-initiation is really not possible. Initiation is being welcomed into a group by other group members. Self-dedication is a promise to yourself and the to the gods that you are serious about following a path and learning as much as possible to make yourself a better person.

[Mab]

Yukiwitch said: "Like christianity, it has lots of different beliefs within it, and people argue about and have different definitions about what it means to be a wiccan."

I don't think Wiccans or pagans for that matter argue about the different beliefs or practices. There is no black and white, or bible structure as there is in Christianity - so what's to argue about.

Your BOS becomes your structure, but it is more or less a learning tool - not meant to be structured.

Seems to me a very wise man told me about structure and tossing that concept out the window. Thank you Arohk, it does take time and practice and that structured concept still comes back to haunt me at times... Mab

[arohk]

Wow now I'm wise Goddess help us all lol. It's true I did say from what I was tought via book's etc the one thing that stuck from all my teachings was that wicca is basiccally your religion there is nothing set in stone about what is right or wrong I concider myself a Celtic wiccan some say I would be concidered or should call myself pagan not wiccan but concidering I do spells and rituals I concider myself wiccan not pagan.

And as far as being a member of a coven people of older times were not part of covens it would be to dangerous so they would practice alone (solitary) covens are a new idea as far as I could tell.

I am a firm believer in the concept that wicca is an individual choice and that it is a individual practice nothing is written in stone about how you practice hope this helps.

[serah]

"Neo-Wiccan." Huh. That really seems like over-doing it somehow. That term just seems like a way to shoot down someone else's way of doing things.

Seems to me a very wise man told me about structure and tossing that concept out the window. Thank you Arohk, it does take time and practice and that structured concept still comes back to haunt me at times... Mab

I think that's a problem for me at times as well. I just want for there to be a "right way" to do things, but in Wicca, there are a ton of right ways, and no one way is better than the other.

I guess you just have to take what you truly think is best and make that your basis and guideline. I'm still working on what I truly think of all these different things, and I'm sure I will be for a long time to come.

Serah

[dagillus_ap_owen]

Pinkgirl, the people in that group calling that guy a "neo-wiccan" and not a wiccan are idiots. They think that they're part of some ancient tradition, when in fact, Wicca is, in itself, a Neo-pagan faith. Wicca was started in the fifties by Gerald Gardner, not some ancient civilization of peoples in the British Isles :wink2:. So, you go a head and call yourself a Wiccan. I'm a solitary practitioner, and I've never been initiated into any traditions or covens, but I still call myself a Wiccan.

[Lunacie]

Wow now I'm wise Goddess help us all lol. It's true I did say from what I was tought via book's etc the one thing that stuck from all my teachings was that wicca is basiccally your religion there is nothing set in stone about what is right or wrong I concider myself a Celtic wiccan some say I would be concidered or should call myself pagan not wiccan but concidering I do spells and rituals I concider myself wiccan not pagan.

And as far as being a member of a coven people of older times were not part of covens it would be to dangerous so they would practice alone (solitary) covens are a new idea as far as I could tell.

I am a firm believer in the concept that wicca is an individual choice and that it is a individual practice nothing is written in stone about how you practice hope this helps.

I guess I missed any posts that were written after my last response 'cause I'm just now seeing this one.

If you're talking about Witchcraft, what you say is true. If you're talking about Wicca, not so much.

There is a framework in place that makes Wicca unique among other Pagan religions or variations of Witchcraft. It's like the framework that makes one house pretty much the same as others that were built from the same blueprints, they may have different siding on them, different windows, some may have left the fireplace out, may have carpet or hardwood floors, but the basic shape is identifiable.

With Wicca, unless one can recognize that framework it may be wrong to call what one is doing Wicca.

[Pinkfluff]

They think that they're part of some ancient tradition, when in fact, Wicca is, in itself, a Neo-pagan faith.

That's the first thing I thought when I saw the title of this thread. "Neo-Wiccan" doesn't even make sense. The whole religion is "neo".

[dagillus_ap_owen]

That's the first thing I thought when I saw the title of this thread. "Neo-Wiccan" doesn't even make sense. The whole religion is "neo".

That's exactly my point :lol:. The things that we do in our practices as Wiccans very well might have some groundings in ancient traditions and practices of the native peoples of the British Isles; however, our religion is, in itself, not an ancient religion. Our faith is a reconstructionist religion, in that we can't actually prove what we do is based on acutal practices, due to the lack of written evidence, be it in words or in pictures. So, when it comes to listening to those people who say that you can't actually be a witch unless you're initiated into a traditional british Wicca coven, take it all with a grain of salt :wink2:

[Pinkfluff]

I'm not sure if it is really reconstructionist. It reuses old traditions (to the extent that historical knowledge allows) but, at least as far as I know, Wicca is not trying to rebuild a religion that once existed, but rather a new one in the style of native European religion. I guess it is a small distinction compared to the rest of the world though =)

[Alexandria]

I'm not sure if it is really reconstructionist. It reuses old traditions (to the extent that historical knowledge allows) but, at least as far as I know, Wicca is not trying to rebuild a religion that once existed, but rather a new one in the style of native European religion.

I agree, Wicca is not reconstructionist, Wicca is a new religion. While it does have some roots in older religions, there is a lot of modern influence as well. Wicca doesn't just pull from one ancient religion, but you can easily see a mix of several different traditions - not always European ones, at that.

There are pagan reconstructionist traditions out there, (quite a few of them actually - for many different ancient pagan religions) and they don't really fit the definition you give of what a reconstructionist is. Yes, sometimes there's (educated) guess work involved, but the heart of recon. practices will most often be based in historical evidence. Wicca doesn't fit under the recon. umbrella because it's just not an ancient religion.

[dagillus_ap_owen]

I agree, Wicca is not reconstructionist, Wicca is a new religion. While it does have some roots in older religions, there is a lot of modern influence as well. Wicca doesn't just pull from one ancient religion, but you can easily see a mix of several different traditions - not always European ones, at that.

There are pagan reconstructionist traditions out there, (quite a few of them actually - for many different ancient pagan religions) and they don't really fit the definition you give of what a reconstructionist is. Yes, sometimes there's (educated) guess work involved, but the heart of recon. practices will most often be based in historical evidence. Wicca doesn't fit under the recon. umbrella because it's just not an ancient religion.

Yes, Wicca isn't exclusively a Reconstrucionist religion, but you must admit, it does fit the bill in a few areas. But that's neither here, nor there. The point I was making is that Wicca is by no means of the imagination an ancient religion, as some members of it's traditional community would have others believe. I apologize for having used the wrong wording to make my point, for any who might've been confused :cheers:

[Alexandria]

Yes, Wicca isn't exclusively a Reconstrucionist religion, but you must admit, it does fit the bill in a few areas.

Well, no, not really... that's the point I was trying to make, actually. A reconstructionist religion is a reconstruction of one ancient religion. Wicca isn't an ancient religion, and what it does pull from older sources isn't limited to any one ancient tradition. Many of the things it pulls from old religions, such as holidays, aren't celebrated as they were but given a new mythos. Wicca doesn't fit with the other reconstruction traditions at all - not that there's anything wrong with that, just that they're two very different approaches.

However I can agree with the point that neo-Wicca is a strange term, because Wicca itself is new, rather than an old religion... but, on the other hand, I can also understand why some would want such a term. There are a lot of people out there who insist that they are Wiccan, when they're not really following the majority of the core concepts of what Wicca is (not even getting into initiation, but many other aspects beyond that). I can see how that would be frustrating, frequently seeing your religion reduced down to "it's whatever you want it to be." I do think there's a line between BTW being the only Wicca and Wicca being a free for all, though...

[dagillus_ap_owen]

Well, no, not really... that's the point I was trying to make, actually. A reconstructionist religion is a reconstruction of one ancient religion. Wicca isn't an ancient religion, and what it does pull from older sources isn't limited to any one ancient tradition. Many of the things it pulls from old religions, such as holidays, aren't celebrated as they were but given a new mythos. Wicca doesn't fit with the other reconstruction traditions at all - not that there's anything wrong with that, just that they're two very different approaches.

However I can agree with the point that neo-Wicca is a strange term, because Wicca itself is new, rather than an old religion... but, on the other hand, I can also understand why some would want such a term. There are a lot of people out there who insist that they are Wiccan, when they're not really following the majority of the core concepts of what Wicca is (not even getting into initiation, but many other aspects beyond that). I can see how that would be frustrating, frequently seeing your religion reduced down to "it's whatever you want it to be." I do think there's a line between BTW being the only Wicca and Wicca being a free for all, though...

Ok, I concede. You win this round :lol: :Hail:

[Pinkfluff]

There are a lot of people out there who insist that they are Wiccan, when they're not really following the majority of the core concepts of what Wicca is (not even getting into initiation, but many other aspects beyond that).

Yeah that is certainly true. I wonder if it is because Wicca is the only Pagan religion the general public seems to know about. People probably confuse witchcraft with Wicca too.

[dagillus_ap_owen]

Yeah that is certainly true. I wonder if it is because Wicca is the only Pagan religion the general public seems to know about. People probably confuse witchcraft with Wicca too.

Yeah, I've heard to two terms used pretty interchangably, which is wrong. Wicca is probably the most widely known pagan faith, because it has the most information out there in the public eye (at least, from what I've seen).

[Alexandria]

Yeah that is certainly true. I wonder if it is because Wicca is the only Pagan religion the general public seems to know about. People probably confuse witchcraft with Wicca too.

I've often wondered why some insist on clinging so tightly to a label that doesn't fit them. One excuse I've heard is that they just don't want to try to stuff their beliefs into a box, or whatever... well, which is fine, but why not just call yourself an eclectic pagan or witch and be done with it?

On the individual level, I've seen a wide range of reasons... from simply being lazy or stubborn, to feeling attacked if you question what in their path makes it Wiccan, to their not wanting to question/examine what they believe...

However, I agree with you, I think a big reason is what Wicca is so popular - and yet, there's also so much bad information out there, partially because of it's popularity. A lot of people simply don't seem to understand what Wicca is, or that there are certain things that make Wicca, Wicca. Or thinking that Wiccan, witch, and pagan all mean the same thing anyway... so not knowing that there are different paths out there. I get that a lot, actually, as a hedgewitch, and even before as an Egyptian pagan, people would still think I follow the rede or (insert something else Wiccan here) - because "it's all the same, right?"

Okay so I feel like my rant might be getting a little off topic, but that's really why I think labels are important, and why I can understand why some Wiccans are trying to do something about it (even if we don't always agree with the specific lines they draw).

[jdwoodschild]

Alexandria, people feel better with labels, especially if they have a very Christian upbringing/views on religion. There are SOOOOOO many nitches with in Christianity, and each one has their own name and history. So, for allot of people on the outside looking in, they look for a name they can attach to "all of this" that they feel comfortable with, and Wicca is one of the "big" names they know, so unfortunately they kinda categorize everything under it.

Now, for those of us who are neo-pagan, I do agree that people should be able to explain their path. To me, Wicca is an umbrella term, like... *thinks* Christianity is an umbrella term. If someone told me that they were Wiccan, I would ask them what their path is. I don't believe the term Wicca or Wiccan can just be claimed by the Traditional Wiccans, but the terms "Traditional Wiccan" or "Gardarian Wiccan" are rightfully theirs, because it denotes a specific path. I was initiated by my teacher into Wicca, but I've always led an eclectic and solitary path, though at times I have worked with people I've never worked in a group, and my personal beliefs are humanistic (before I discovered Wicca I claimed that I was a Humanist lol). So for me, I'm an Eclectic Humanistic Solitary Wiccan, which I can shorted to an Eclectic Wiccan.

I actually speak at a local college on Wicca, and I'm opening up what I teach from Wicca specifically to the different types of modern paganism because I have seen this confusion out there, and I want to try to help clear it up ^.^ Even if it's one classroom of college kids at a time.

[Alexandria]

Yes, it's not so much a question as to why someone would want a label in general, as to why they'd try to stick to one that doesn't fit them. As I said, I do think some of it comes down to just lacking the knowledge that there could be something more fitting, as even popular authors write books that seem to shove all thing pagan under the Wiccan label. That's only one of many reasons, though.