Welcome to Gaia! ::

Well an interesting question then. The "inner court" had to get started. How did the people of the "inner court get where they are with out having someone higher up to inciate (SP?) them. They had to get started somewhere. So who says they have power to tell me whether or not I can call myself wiccan

Gerald Gardner, creator of the religion, initiated those whom he saw fit. from there, and their attainment of a certain degree, they were able to initiate followers. etc.

Wicca is a religion of clergy. a Wiccan is a clergy to the generic pagan circle. to become clergy, one must be initiated to the mysteries by either an already initiated Wiccan (i believe 2nd degree might have the ability, 3rd degree is best), or by the Lord and Lady of Wicca.

the problem with the "well my beliefs are Wiccan, so therefore I'm a Wiccan" concept is that Wicca is an orthopraxic religion. it's unity is derived from common practice. you're not going to find out how they practice unless a Wiccan or the Lord and Lady of the Isles initiates and trains you.

all covens should given how it is a fertility religion, and the Great Rite is NC17.

here's the problem that comes up again and again. by calling yourself something you are not, you are confusing and deluding those who do want to learn about Wicca.

what if someone who hears everything out there on Wicca, but chooses to deny that initiation is key, and that they don't need to wait to turn 18 before they try to join a coven. let's say they hear someone saying they are Wiccan and know all there is to know about it, and are willing to share it. this person doesn't require in depth initiation and says this person can join. so they start hanging out with that person. let's say that person is a 28 year old female, who was not initiated by a Wiccan or the Lord and Lady. the person hearing her is a 14 year old male.

so, the 14 year old male starts hanging out and listening to the 28 year old female, who has amassed a coven of 4 other individuals, all of which are underage as well. somehow, she's able to convince them that having sex with her, a bastardization of the Great Rite she's created, saying that that is something regularly done in the religion. some of the people in her coven are not quite comfortable with the idea and resist. due to peer pressure and wanting to belong to the religion they think they know about, they consent.

in essence, we have a child ***** who used the children's misinformation, played upon the fact that the child(ren) didn't want to wait, and then raped the entire "coven".

Gerald Gardner created the religion. if you want your facts straight, go back to his works. yes, some areas will be hard to get a hold of them. in which case, there's Amazon.com. however, if one's parents have explicitly denied one the privilege of reading up and studying this religion, and others out there, please respect one's guardians until you are of an age to legally provide for yourself and move out.

and they created the religion, either by personal beliefs, or UPG. either way, they established rules, certain dogma and practices.

are you offering that Wicca is older than 60 years? or simply that certain practices of Wicca are?

only for the religion they created. Gerald Gardner created Wicca. he didn't change those rules. there is no idea or concept of a "savior" of sorts to come along at a later date to change those rules.

and yet Gardner, who created the religion, created it that only a Wiccan would know the mysteries, as only a Wiccan would be taught by another Wiccan or by the Lord and Lady of Wicca, because only they would know the mysteries to teach them to someone else.

you've yet to offer significant reasoning why your reasons of claiming a clergy title trump Gardner's rules to the religion he created.

you can call yourself pagan all you want. it's mostly an elective term. Wiccan requires a bit more training as it is a clergy title.

ah, you see, you have put that out, but you have yet to support that statement, as there is nothing in any text showing anything remotely like Wicca before Gardner publicized his works.

show me where it originated. that has been your claim apparently for some time. show me your proof.

he borrowed from other traditions.

wrong.

paganus, which probably was derived from pagus. yes, that was Latin. [cite]

wicca was an Anglo-Saxon/Old English term meaning a male witch. wicce was applied to female witches. possibly derived from the Indo-European word *wik- "to bend", or *weg- near to the words meaning "lively, watchful". [cite]

that is one of the worst cases of randomly assigning pieces of "evidence" to fit the conclusion i've ever seen.

so, just because Christian writers took the word paganus and used it liberally, that means that the pagan religions of today are the same as those the Christians were referring to? and given that wicca is actually an Old English term, which came about way after Christianity was in it's heyday, no.

Wicca is a recently created religion. one of its practices is witchcraft, which i will agree, is not a recent thing. however, that is a practice, not a religion.

prove all of his traditions, rules and practices came from them. as of yet, they've not been able to prove that the coven Gardner was initiated into even existed.

yes, he wrote books before those dates, and those were the dates they were published, after England repealed its anti-witchcraft laws. now, what are the titles and dates published of these other books you claim existed on Wicca before Gardner's?

prove Dorothy Clutterbuck's initiation of Gerald Gardner, without using Doreen Valiente's book.

not every coven is Wiccan. how can they be authorities if they aren't?

millions of people in China have rice as part of their main diet. fallacy, appeal to numbers.

given that Gerald Gardner created the religion [cite, cite, and cite], his rules dictate what happens.

wrong. Wicca is a British tradition of witchcraft that is a fertility cult. one of their major rituals is the Great Rite, where the High Priestess and High Priest copulate. there mysteries are oathbounded and they are an orthopraxic religion, meaning it matters how you practice.

i gave that exact source and it supports what i have been saying.

and your exact written word was - - bolded for your benefit.

does that mean you are retracting your previous statement?

1. Wicca is not a nature-based religion. it is a fertility religion.

2. what other features of this prior Egyptian religion make you think it was Wicca by another name? please offer proof of this other Egyptian religion, particularly when Gardner refers to the deities of Wicca as the Lord and Lady from the Isles.

1. prove Druidry and Wicca have practices and beliefs in common.

2. Druidry died off. there are no valid claims to having anything of it still preserved enough to lay claim to said intelligistan title. how then can Wicca have any connection to it?

read the source again. notice the word "claimed". notice how the article specifically avoids calling the New Forest Coven Wiccan. also, i recommend doing some research on the New Forest Coven as well as Dorothy Clutterbuck, who was an active Christian in her community.

Gardner specifically said the religion of Wicca was not for general public. he did not publish the oathbound material, as that was reserved for initiation.

prove it.

prove it.

confused

i don't make a secret of it and older than you by a few years.

apparently you don't seem to understand me. i'm a regular on ED:M&R. when someone makes a claim, like you have done, regarding something that is fairly extravagent, it's perfectly fine to request proof.

you made a claim that Egyptian faith was a precursor to Wicca. i asked you to show me which faith you were referencing as well as give me specific practices that are directly "borrowed".

i have. in fact i've read Celtic and Italian, enough to show me where the names of the Lord and Lady of the Isles come from. they are the God and Goddess, btw, of Wicca.

because what happens in one fertility religion happened in all? and that means that all fertility religions are the same?

regardless, you also had claimed earlier that Wicca was nature related. does this mean you are now retracting that statement?

please then demenstrate what aspects of this particular Egyptian faith were fertility based, as i thought they were primarily a death cult/deity based.

i have. would you kindly point me to the books that you read that said Gardner didn't create the religion?

kindly do the same as you are speaking of a religion that has specific rules, but choose to refuse to accept those rules. i've given you other resources that show my point. have you read those?

you have yet to show that you are. since you made the claim, the burden of proof rests on your shoulders.