Solitary Eclectic Wiccans brings to mind...?

[streetwisekitty]

So I'm tentatively holding that title as my own, because I feel like it fits but I'm wondering what it brings to mind with other people. I know that a lot of people feel like the title contradicts itself because most say that a Coven is one of the fundamental concepts in practicing Wicca.

A lot of people also say that Eclectic Wiccans just practice what ever they feel like at the time but that isn't true for me. For me it means bringing in concepts from different traditions while staying true to the dual deity concept.

What do you think?  

[Viz_22]

I also consider myself Eclectic Wiccan, but I do realize that Wiccans who belong to traditional, lineaged covens will not recognize it as being Wicca, and instead will see it as neo-paganism. Although, society sees the Wiccan religion (anthropologists for one and is listed among the text book my boyfriend uses for his class) as being a Neo-Pagan religion.

As I see it, there can be eclectic Wiccans, as long as we don't claim to be part of traditional Wicca which is structured and requires initiation into a coven.

Eventually I'll seek out a coven, but in my area there aren't any Wiccan covens and I have no means of transport of my own. Witchvox doesn't list any near to me and the groups it does list there's no indication of lineage. Bible Belt sucks...Though if I can eventually go the Pagan Pride Day at home I'll see if there are any coven members there and see if I can join.  

[ncsweet]

Have you had a chance to read the Use of the Word Wicca thread yet?

You may want to head over there first, before claiming "solitary" or "eclectic" Wiccan as a title for yourself.

There is a lot more to Wicca than just a "dual deity" concept, and most of what has been published under the name of "Wiccan" is at best simply outer-court, non-oath bound parts of Wicca, and in worse cases has absolutely nothing to do with Wicca what-so-ever.

It's not so much the Coven that is fundamental (even though it is), it's that you cannot learn the Mysteries, or correctly practice the rituals solitary. My understanding is that at the very least, you need 2 people (preferably a man and a woman). Also, Wicca being an oath-bound religion, you really can't bring concepts - because a non-initiate will never know the core concepts that actually make up Wicca. Initiates can do what they like as long as they don't break their oaths, but if they change the Core too much, then it ceases to be Wicca.

Viz_22

As I see it, there can be eclectic Wiccans, as long as we don't claim to be part of traditional Wicca which is structured and requires initiation into a coven.

All Wicca is structured and requires initiation into a lineaged Coven - that's the problem. The only ones who say differently - were (in most cases) never initiated. Cunningham (who basically started the whole "solitary Wicca" thing) was only a 1st degree initiate, and he left soon after his initiation and never completed his training. What he wrote about was a Witchcraft Tradition (Standing Stones) that he created - that was only loosely based on what Wicca actually is. Unfortunately too many people followed his examples and have misappropriated "Wicca" for their own purposes.

__________

There is no problem with being "eclectic" or "solitary", but there is no reason at all to tack "Wiccan" to the end of it. It's just not a mix-n-match practice.  

[streetwisekitty]

ncsweet

Have you had a chance to read the Use of the Word Wicca thread yet?
There is a lot more to Wicca than just a "dual deity" concept, and most of what has been published under the name of "Wiccan" is at best simply outer-court, non-oath bound parts of Wicca, and in worse cases has absolutely nothing to do with Wicca what-so-ever.

I know, but it is one of the core concepts that have spoken to me. Are you saying that because its not Traditional Wicca, that it is invalid? Please don't take that as sounding snappish, I'm just trying to understand.

ncsweet

It's not so much the Coven that is fundamental (even though it is), it's that you cannot learn the Mysteries, or correctly practice the rituals solitary. My understanding is that at the very least, you need 2 people (preferably a man and a woman). Also, Wicca being an oath-bound religion, you really can't bring concepts - because a non-initiate will never know the core concepts that actually make up Wicca. Initiates can do what they like as long as they don't break their oaths, but if they change the Core too much, then it ceases to be Wicca.

So basically, those of us who do not have a way to be initiated cannot be called Wicca, even if its self-initiated?

ncsweet

There is no problem with being "eclectic" or "solitary", but there is no reason at all to tack "Wiccan" to the end of it. It's just not a mix-n-match practice.

So do you think the most appropriate/accurate term would be witch? The reason I ask is because I don't feel entirely comfortable with using it, but at the same time I feel like titles are just labels. Changing the label won't change my beliefs - just how people see them.  

[streetwisekitty]

Viz_22

As I see it, there can be eclectic Wiccans, as long as we don't claim to be part of traditional Wicca which is structured and requires initiation into a coven.

So you see Eclectic Wiccan as being entirely different from the Traidtional Wiccan path but still connected the same way the Roman and Greek Pantheons are connected?

Viz_22

Eventually I'll seek out a coven, but in my area there aren't any Wiccan covens and I have no means of transport of my own. Witchvox doesn't list any near to me and the groups it does list there's no indication of lineage. Bible Belt sucks...Though if I can eventually go the Pagan Pride Day at home I'll see if there are any coven members there and see if I can join.

I have no intentions of joining a coven myself though there are a few in my town. I feel like I need to find myself more first, and cultivate my own relationship with my Lord and Lady without influences before I join and even then, I feel like the path I am drawn to is meant to be more personal than a Coven, which I feel is awesome in its place and values but not for me. I wish you good luck in finding one though!  

[Viz_22]

To stray off for a bit, I've been thinking about something since I read Witchcraft Today by Gerald Gardner (Such a pain that was, not becuase of content, but because a good number of the pages in the copy my Uni's library has, has pages with the pages printed text and the other sides text, such a struggle to read that....but I managed to make out the text at least). In that book he says to have known witches who were part of covens, and was initiated among them. But also speaks about family traditions when coven practices wasn't possible during certain periods. This doesn't seem like he founded Wicca, just a tradition within Wicca.

Why is Gardner the founder of Wicca when his book has him joining the ranks of "the Wica" as he put it. Just curious.... And although I know what the thread says about the use of the word Wicca, I just don't see what the problem is (then again, I'm not an initiated Wiccan, so I don't know what their view is and I won't know unless I become one).

And I'm pretty sure the Standing Stones tradition was supposed to be an example in his book. To me it seems odd that it ended up becoming a tradition but when people take words seriously (even though I'm fairly certain he did state that he wasn't trying to create a new tradition) I guess it shouldn't be so odd. And I got the impression that he suggested the solitary thing for those who don't have access to lineaged covens for one reason or another (ie age).  

[Viz_22]

streetwisekitty

So you see Eclectic Wiccan as being entirely different from the Traidtional Wiccan path but still connected the same way the Roman and Greek Pantheons are connected?

Actually, that's a good way of putting it....And yes, separate but connected. Not the same, but similar paths. This is my opinion and how I see it.

streetwisekitty

I have no intentions of joining a coven myself though there are a few in my town. I feel like I need to find myself more first, and cultivate my own relationship with my Lord and Lady without influences before I join and even then, I feel like the path I am drawn to is meant to be more personal than a Coven, which I feel is awesome in its place and values but not for me. I wish you good luck in finding one though!

I'm still wondering if a coven is right for me too, but I won't throw the idea out completely. I believe belonging to a coven would be beneficial in its own way, and there are *a majority* of Wiccan mysteries that cannot be discovered/experienced without being an initiate. If there's a coven right for me, I'll seek membership. For now, it's not possible for me. Which means right now there isn't a coven right for me *yet*.  

[streetwisekitty]

Viz_22

...In that book he says to have known witches who were part of covens, and was initiated among them. But also speaks about family traditions when coven practices wasn't possible during certain periods. This doesn't seem like he founded Wicca, just a tradition within Wicca.

I think people mean that he created Wicca as it is known today, not that he is the inventor of Wicca. It possibly could be that its referencecd to American Wicca but i couldn't be sure. sweatdrop Although it could be said that he took the concept of another pagan religion and created his own system to go with it. -shrugs-. I honestly am not the best person to ask so...

Viz_22

(then again, I'm not an initiated Wiccan, so I don't know what their view is and I won't know unless I become one).

I think thats part of the problem. While I understand that traditional Wicca is a mystery religion and founded in covens, it leaves a lot to be desired for those of us who do not have access to a coven or even a teacher.

Viz_22

And I'm pretty sure the Standing Stones tradition was supposed to be an example in his book. To me it seems odd that it ended up becoming a tradition but when people take words seriously (even though I'm fairly certain he did state that he wasn't trying to create a new tradition) I guess it shouldn't be so odd. And I got the impression that he suggested the solitary thing for those who don't have access to lineaged covens for one reason or another (ie age).

I personally really like Cunningham. A lot of what he says makes sense to me, although you have to take a lot of what any author says with a grain of salt. Especially when it concerns something that has recently been pushed into mainstream society. one could argue that he is the founder of Solitary Wicca the same way General Gardner is the founder of Traditional Wicca.  

[Viz_22]

streetwisekitty

I think people mean that he created Wicca as it is known today, not that he is the inventor of Wicca. It possibly could be that its referencecd to American Wicca but i couldn't be sure. sweatdrop Although it could be said that he took the concept of another pagan religion and created his own system to go with it. -shrugs-. I honestly am not the best person to ask so...

Yeah, I mostly put the question out there for any one who could answer it. But while I don't believe he founded Wicca, I give him credit for publicizing it and bringing it to the eyes of society. And of course, credit for his own tradition.

streetwisekitty

I think thats part of the problem. While I understand that traditional Wicca is a mystery religion and founded in covens, it leaves a lot to be desired for those of us who do not have access to a coven or even a teacher.

Yeah, plus I think oaths prevent a lot of questions asked by seekers from being answered. But that's how it works.

streetwisekitty

I personally really like Cunningham. A lot of what he says makes sense to me, although you have to take a lot of what any author says with a grain of salt. Especially when it concerns something that has recently been pushed into mainstream society. one could argue that he is the founder of Solitary Wicca the same way General Gardner is the founder of Traditional Wicca.

I also like Cunningham. What he wrote makes sense. I'd suggest him, just like he was suggested to me on another forum.  

[mechanical kitsy]

And what is Wicca, as you understand it to be?

Do you know the mysteries?

Can you truly practice a religion if you just shave off pieces here and there and use them?

You may be pagan, but calling yourself Wiccan is disrespectful. It's like Taking another religion, and putting another name to it, just because you like that name. It doesn't belong to you.  

[Sanguina Cruenta]

streetwisekitty

I know, but it is one of the core concepts that have spoken to me.

Ditheism alone is just a deity concept. The two deities in question that you're worshipping may not be the deities of Wicca.

Quote:

Are you saying that because its not Traditional Wicca, that it is invalid? Please don't take that as sounding snappish, I'm just trying to understand.

Definitely not. All Sweet - and the rest of us - are saying is that it's not Wicca. Being not Wicca doesn't make something invalid. wink

Quote:

So basically, those of us who do not have a way to be initiated cannot be called Wicca, even if its self-initiated?

Self-initiation as a concept doesn't make a lot of sense. Initiation is a way of bringing someone into a group and presenting them with something - in this case, the names of the deities and the first of the mysteries. You can't give these things to yourself, because you don't have them to begin with. You can't bring yourself into something that you aren't already a part of.

In the same way, you can't initiate yourself as a freemason or into a fraternity.

Quote:

So do you think the most appropriate/accurate term would be witch? The reason I ask is because I don't feel entirely comfortable with using it, but at the same time I feel like titles are just labels. Changing the label won't change my beliefs - just how people see them.

If you're not comfortable calling yourself a witch, don't call yourself a witch. You may technically be one, but it's a title that can take you a while to "earn" in yourself. Eclectic Neo-Pagan is the general go-to term, but you might want to throw in other relevant terms depending on what way your faith goes. Ditheistic Neo-Pagan works fine.

Quote:

To stray off for a bit, I've been thinking about something since I read Witchcraft Today by Gerald Gardner (Such a pain that was, not becuase of content, but because a good number of the pages in the copy my Uni's library has, has pages with the pages printed text and the other sides text, such a struggle to read that....but I managed to make out the text at least). In that book he says to have known witches who were part of covens, and was initiated among them. But also speaks about family traditions when coven practices wasn't possible during certain periods. This doesn't seem like he founded Wicca, just a tradition within Wicca.

Gardner was (ostensibly) initiated into a religious witchcult. It is where he got a lot of the ideas that he incorporated into Wicca (along with Margaret Murray and other authors), but it wasn't Wicca itself. The rituals he had access to were very fragmentary, so he supplemented them with a great deal of stuff of his own, influenced heavily by OTO, Golden Dawn etc. The Charge of the Goddess, for example, which appears to be very important in Wiccan ritual, was written by Doreen Valiente. Wicca is understood to have been created by Gardner, according to scholars such as Hutton. At the time, he did fudge things a bit so that it appeared older than it was.

Quote:

I believe belonging to a coven would be beneficial in its own way, and there are *a majority* of Wiccan mysteries that cannot be discovered/experienced without being an initiate.

What Wiccan mysteries can be experienced without initiation?

Quote:

I think thats part of the problem. While I understand that traditional Wicca is a mystery religion and founded in covens, it leaves a lot to be desired for those of us who do not have access to a coven or even a teacher.

This is true... although, I think a lot of people think of themselves as practising a religion they can't properly access, and that they have to get initiated in order to learn the rest of it. But you're really practising a different religion entirely. If you want to convert to Wicca, that's fine... you just first have to ensure that that's really what you want, rather than deepening the religion you already practise.

Quote:

I personally really like Cunningham. A lot of what he says makes sense to me, although you have to take a lot of what any author says with a grain of salt. Especially when it concerns something that has recently been pushed into mainstream society. one could argue that he is the founder of Solitary Wicca the same way General Gardner is the founder of Traditional Wicca.

For some reason I quite like the way Cunningham writes, even though I disagree with much of what he says. One could argue that he created solitary Wicca, but one would quickly be disavowed of one's position when one was asked to support how Cunningham's religion was Wicca. It's a nice little tradition of religious witchcraft he created, but it doesn't share much in common with Wicca.

Quote:

Yeah, I mostly put the question out there for any one who could answer it. But while I don't believe he founded Wicca, I give him credit for publicizing it and bringing it to the eyes of society. And of course, credit for his own tradition.

Even if he didn't create Wicca, all Wicca would still be descended through initiation from the New Forest Coven. There are actually Wiccans who are happy to use that definition. However, there's currently no known coven descended from New Forest that isn't also descended from Gardner, so it's essentially a moot point. Gardner's Wicca is the only Wicca wink  

[Morgandria]

Wow. Can opened, worms everywhere. Figures it'd happen while I was away.

Viz_22

I also consider myself Eclectic Wiccan, but I do realize that Wiccans who belong to traditional, lineaged covens will not recognize it as being Wicca, and instead will see it as neo-paganism. Although, society sees the Wiccan religion (anthropologists for one and is listed among the text book my boyfriend uses for his class) as being a Neo-Pagan religion.

I've never personally known any coven or tradition of Wicca that didn't call itself or understand that it was 'neo-pagan'.

Viz_22

Eventually I'll seek out a coven, but in my area there aren't any Wiccan covens and I have no means of transport of my own. Witchvox doesn't list any near to me and the groups it does list there's no indication of lineage. Bible Belt sucks...Though if I can eventually go the Pagan Pride Day at home I'll see if there are any coven members there and see if I can join.

I have been there, myself. I started Seeking when I was 20 - made much more difficult by distance, lack of a vehicle, and the fact that I myself don't drive. I still 'tried out' 3 or 4 groups, and I didn't end up finding the right group until I was 27. Even now, I still travel 260 kms. round trip every time my coven meets.

Seeking out traditional Wicca can be time-consuming and take considerable effort. Travelling to Seek the Craft out properly is considered very normal, however, so most groups won't see comments in a positive light if you make them often as a Seeker.

Viz_22

As I see it, there can be eclectic Wiccans, as long as we don't claim to be part of traditional Wicca which is structured and requires initiation into a coven.

The problem with this argument, when regarding Wicca, is that Wicca's structure is what defines Wicca. If you're not following its' rites in the manner they were created and have been passed down to initiates, then you can't really be said to be practicing Wicca.

----------------------------------------------

streetwisekitty

I know, but it is one of the core concepts that have spoken to me. Are you saying that because its not Traditional Wicca, that it is invalid? Please don't take that as sounding snappish, I'm just trying to understand.

We're not saying it's invalid by any means. Wicca doesn't lay claim to being the only ditheistic path.

However, understand that the terms "Lord" and "Lady" are placeholders, in Wicca. They're honorific titles used around non-initiates. Only initiates learn the names of Wicca's god and goddess, and they're two very specific deities - not soft-polytheistic "All Gods are One" sorts of things. So it's always possible your Lord and Lady aren't Wicca's Lord and Lady.

It's also possible, I think, for non-initiates to have a relationship with the Gods of Wicca. But it's one that I think inevitably ends in them coming to traditional Wicca, and becoming their priesthood to serve them in the ways they prefer.

For me it came as relief and epiphany at initiation to really finally know that I wasn't "barking up the wrong tree", and that I hadn't kept at Wicca on the basis of a relationship with deities that perhaps I created in my own mind and had nothing to do with them. I was 99% certain...but the 1% of doubt was still there.

streetwisekitty

So basically, those of us who do not have a way to be initiated cannot be called Wicca, even if its self-initiated?

There's always a way to become an initiate, if you are meant to be. It may take many many years, a lot of searching, and multiple covens. No-one said it was easy, or quick. And Wicca simply isn't for everyone.

Try to see it from an initiate's perspective. "Wiccan" is an earned title. You can give it to yourself, but doing so implies that you have the same knowledge and training in Wicca as a person who has worked for many years with a coven for the right to recieve initiation.

The people who earn the title tend to be very displeased by those who simply take it for themselves: why work for years to attain initiation and the right to use the title, when anyone can just claim it for themselves without any measure of their knowledge or skill?

Also, it might help to think of initiation as a kind of "laying on of hands". The initiation is passed from initiate to initiate in a way that requires you to recieve it from someone else - there isn't another way to recieve the Mysteries of Wicca. Part of this proper transmission of the Mysteries is the rite itself - and only a properly trained 3rd degree initiate is going to be able to shape that experience in the required manner.

When one hasn't recieved the Mysteries, one has no access to the core practices that are what define Wicca. At best, you may be practicing something that only resembles Wicca in a small way, and does not connect to its' ritual resonance, or do homage to the Gods of Wicca.

streetwisekitty

So do you think the most appropriate/accurate term would be witch? The reason I ask is because I don't feel entirely comfortable with using it, but at the same time I feel like titles are just labels. Changing the label won't change my beliefs - just how people see them.

That's sort of the issue at hand - how people see things. So many people have labelled things that aren't Wicca, as Wicca, that people think Wicca is whatever you want it to be. It perpetuates and compounds the issue of appropriation and misinformation.

No-one's asking you to change your beliefs, certainly. Don't use a title you don't like or doesn't fit your path. If you're not comfortable with witch, don't use it. I'd use 'eclectic neo-pagan", myself - and I do, since not everything I do myself can be called Wicca.

---------------------------------------------

Viz_22

Why is Gardner the founder of Wicca when his book has him joining the ranks of "the Wica" as he put it. Just curious.... And although I know what the thread says about the use of the word Wicca, I just don't see what the problem is (then again, I'm not an initiated Wiccan, so I don't know what their view is and I won't know unless I become one).

And I'm pretty sure the Standing Stones tradition was supposed to be an example in his book. To me it seems odd that it ended up becoming a tradition but when people take words seriously (even though I'm fairly certain he did state that he wasn't trying to create a new tradition) I guess it shouldn't be so odd. And I got the impression that he suggested the solitary thing for those who don't have access to lineaged covens for one reason or another (ie age).

My answer to Kitty about the word Wicca is pretty much my answer to this. It's a matter of perspective, and most non-initiates have a difficult time with the initiates' view. But all initiates
were non-initiates once upon a time, and many felt the same way as you once upon a time. It is
possible to change one's POV.

Also, I think you'd enjoy reading "Triumph of the Moon" by Ronald Hutton. It does explore the history of Wicca quite thoroughly, and in more detail than I could ever get into.

Cunningham regretted calling what he wrote Wicca, according to some Craft elders I have spoken to about it. Perhaps he did, and perhaps he didn't. Most Wiccans have mixed feelings about his two "Solitary" books. He clearly intended the path in the book to be an example of a tradition. Practicing 'Standing Stone', even if it wasn't ever intended to be a 'real' tradition, is still valid. It just isn't Wicca.

On one hand, they contain no Wiccan material. Indeed, Cunningham is not held to be an oathbreaker in any way, so the books themselves contain absolutely no oathbound material. They're basic neo-pagan witchcraft; mislabelled as Wicca - which is the point of contention. If he'd called them a "Guide to the Solitary Witch", it wouldn't be an issue. It's an example of people being misinformed of the actual nature of Wicca - Cunningham's books served to help muddy the waters surrounding Wicca.

On the other hand - "Standing Stone" is perfectly valid as a neo-pagan witchcraft path of its' own. Along with his other books on magic, they are very handy for beginners, and even his "Solitary" books get used by some covens as reading materials for their outer-court training. They are beginner-friendly, and expose some basic concepts that a coven's teachings may build upon later.

So Cunningham is a mixed bag.

Viz_22

Actually, that's a good way of putting it....And yes, separate but connected. Not the same, but similar paths. This is my opinion and how I see it.

It might help the discussion if we knew what you thought were the connecting factors between Solitary Eclectic and Traditional Wicca. Traditional Wicca may not have the things in common that you assume as part of its' practice.

Viz_22

I'm still wondering if a coven is right for me too, but I won't throw the idea out completely. I believe belonging to a coven would be beneficial in its own way, and there are *a majority* of Wiccan mysteries that cannot be discovered/experienced without being an initiate. If there's a coven right for me, I'll seek membership. For now, it's not possible for me. Which means right now there isn't a coven right for me *yet*.

It's more accurate to say that there are a majority of Mysteries in the world that aren't Wiccan at all, and are freely available to everyone. The Wiccan Mysteries are specifically what's transmitted at initiation. They aren't available to anyone, in any other way, outside the initiation ritual.

Wicca is a priesthood. The Mysteries at initiation make one "Witch and Priest/ess" in the eyes of the Gods and coven. If you don't intend or want to be the initiated priesthood of two specific deities, and to give service to those deities for life, through their rites - why do those Mysteries matter to you? Not everyone is meant to be clergy.

There's nothing wrong with seeking Mysteries that aren't oathbound or for one specific group. Some of my favorite Mysteries have nothing to do with Wicca at all.  

[pompoennetje]

Just in in simple words. Not too difficult. What is eclectic?

/feels like a noob.

Yes, I have much to learn. rolleyes  

[Esiris]

Dianda Panda

Just in in simple words. Not too difficult. What is eclectic?

/feels like a noob.

Yes, I have much to learn. rolleyes

Eclectic means you draw from lots of different sources. This isn't a bad thing in itself- I'm eclectic. I'm also seeking under a Wiccan coven- since Wicca requires initiation to be part of the religion.

Seeking takes time and you can go through a lot of different groups before you find a coven that has the right chemistry for you- and even then, you may be called elsewhere on your path.

One can be an eclectic and a Wiccan, but you can't really have Eclectic Wicca because Wicca has set practices that have to be followed. Outside of Wiccan rituals- Wiccans can follow other religions or electic practices as long as they don't cause them to violate their oaths.

The trick to being Eclectic is doing it respectfully. Just because we can know something or have access to it, doesn't make it right- especially when what made it possible for us to have that "access" was stuff like racism and oppression of other cultures.  

[pompoennetje]

Esiris

Dianda Panda

Just in in simple words. Not too difficult. What is eclectic?

/feels like a noob.

Yes, I have much to learn. rolleyes

Eclectic means you draw from lots of different sources. This isn't a bad thing in itself- I'm eclectic. I'm also seeking under a Wiccan coven- since Wicca requires initiation to be part of the religion.

Seeking takes time and you can go through a lot of different groups before you find a coven that has the right chemistry for you- and even then, you may be called elsewhere on your path.

One can be an eclectic and a Wiccan, but you can't really have Eclectic Wicca because Wicca has set practices that have to be followed. Outside of Wiccan rituals- Wiccans can follow other religions or electic practices as long as they don't cause them to violate their oaths.

The trick to being Eclectic is doing it respectfully. Just because we can know something or have access to it, doesn't make it right- especially when what made it possible for us to have that "access" was stuff like racism and oppression of other cultures.

Aah, I see.
It sounds easier than I thought.